Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
KERR DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4700710 · 1 · ROCK CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:47 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (a1c9146) — every figure regenerates from this named code version and data image.
Where it sits
Location as DWR records it. Faint dots are the neighbouring water; click any to open it.
Which of its rights are out of priority?
Not computable for this structure: this structure is not on the modelled flow network, so no reference gage can honestly stand in for it.
Where it sits in line
Priority 1882-05-14 — 4th most senior of the 1262 structures with decreed rights in this water districtDWR's administrative subdivision of a river basin; the unit calls are usually stated in..
Under prior appropriationColorado's rule for sharing water: first in time, first in right. Age decides, not proximity or need., everything ahead of it in this line is satisfied in full before it receives any water. Immediately ahead: LITTLE GRIZZLY DITCH (1881-05-07). Immediately behind: OLLIVER DITCH (1882-05-15).
Decreed rights (5)
| Admin noDWR's numeric encoding of a water right's seniority. Smaller is more senior; the integer part counts days from 1849-12-31 to the date that ranks the right. | AppropriatedWhen water was first put to beneficial use. It sets seniority unless a prior adjudication date is later. | AdjudicatedWhen the water court confirmed the right. A use decreed in 1975 was not a decreed use in 1955, however old the appropriation is. | AbsoluteA right actually put to use, as opposed to conditional -- a placeholder for a use not yet made. | ConditionalA right reserving a place in line for a use not yet made; it must be diligently pursued or it lapses. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11822.0 | 1882-05-14 | 1892-09-19 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 3 |
| 12908.0 | 1885-05-04 | 1892-09-19 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 28(27) |
| 13634.0 | 1887-04-30 | 1892-09-19 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 77(75) |
| 14730.0 | 1890-04-30 | 1892-09-19 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 214(193) |
| 30280.14762 | 1890-06-01 | 1939-06-20 | 2.8 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 667 |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
CA0286, 21CW3048, CA0922, 90CW0037.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0286 | 1 | 1939-06-20 | S |
21CW3048 | 1 | 1939-06-20 | S |
CA0922 | 2 | 1892-09-19 | O |
90CW0037 | 2 | 1892-09-19 | O |
DWR's own records for this structure: net amounts · transactions & adjudication history · scanned decrees (search a case number there for the imaged document). On this site: the district's full legal picture →
Recorded use (last 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 448 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 586 AF — 131% of that, and 13th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
| Year | Diverted (AFA volume: one acre covered a foot deep, about 326,000 gallons -- roughly a suburban household's outdoor use for a year.) | Compared with its own record | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 473 | 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 56 | 7.5 |
| 2008 | 232 | 1st lowest of 15 · 52% of median | 31 | 5.7 |
| 2009 | 541 | 12th lowest of 15 · 121% of median | 61 | 7.0 |
| 2010 | 517 | 10th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 58 | 7.8 |
| 2012 | 522 | 11th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 98 | 5.7 |
| 2013 | 337 | 5th lowest of 15 · 75% of median | 60 | 5.7 |
| 2014 | 749 | 15th lowest of 15 · 167% of median | 78 | 6.5 |
| 2015 | 274 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 61% of median | 56 | 4.3 |
| 2016 | 446 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 39 | 9.8 |
| 2017 | 438 | 6th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 63 | 3.6 |
| 2019 | 448 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 52 | 8.0 |
| 2021 | 320 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 59 | 4.9 |
| 2022 | 324 | 4th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 27 | 8.0 |
| 2023 | 653 | 14th lowest of 15 · 146% of median | 50 | 6.8 |
| 2024 | 586 | 13th lowest of 15 · 131% of median | 50 | 6.8 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 15 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (7/10 points) — the components below are the finding; the letter alone is not.
The rubric, component by component
| Check | State | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| identity | complete | name, type, and water source all on file |
| decreed rights | on file | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 2542 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 23% of the irrigation seasons in 1972-2024 carry measured days |
| published-record stability | stable | no upstream revisions recorded against this structure |
Advisory reading aid on public data — not an administrative or legal conclusion, not a title opinion, and not a substitute for DWR administration or an engineer's analysis. Methodology review status is disclosed at hydrohistorian's basin pages.