Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
RED TOP VALLEY DITCH - STILLWATER CREEK
Structure dossier · WDID 5101315 · 1 · STILLWATER CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:01 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (2deb1d7) — 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 1901-11-10 — 138th most senior of the 2208 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: RED TOP VALLEY DITCH (1901-11-10). Immediately behind: HARBISON RANCH WELL (1901-12-31).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18941.0 | 1901-11-10 | 1906-08-11 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 122 |
| 20676.14093 | 1888-08-01 | 1911-08-03 | 7.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 178 |
| 23817.14611 | 1890-01-01 | 1917-08-11 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 318 |
| 25737.0 | 1920-06-19 | 1922-08-05 | 2.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 366 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
90CW0337, CA0112.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
90CW0337 | 3 | 1922-08-05 | S |
CA0112 | 1 | 1906-08-11 | 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 2,260 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,632 AF — 72% of that, and 4th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 2,899 | 9th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 61 | 69.0 |
| 2011 | 7,742 | 15th lowest of 15 · 343% of median | 52 | 120.0 |
| 2012 | 1,882 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 89 | 56.0 |
| 2013 | 2,087 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 51 | 45.0 |
| 2014 | 3,979 | 10th lowest of 15 · 176% of median | 59 | 66.0 |
| 2015 | 935 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 41% of median | 39 | 30.0 |
| 2016 | 1,399 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 47 | 43.0 |
| 2017 | 5,680 | 11th lowest of 15 · 251% of median | 52 | 75.0 |
| 2018 | 7,276 | 13th lowest of 15 · 322% of median | 71 | 82.3 |
| 2019 | 6,963 | 12th lowest of 15 · 308% of median | 53 | 97.5 |
| 2020 | 7,459 | 14th lowest of 15 · 330% of median | 64 | 120.0 |
| 2021 | 1,838 | 5th lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 64 | 100.0 |
| 2022 | 877 | 1st lowest of 15 · 39% of median | 67 | 25.0 |
| 2023 | 2,260 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 53 | 58.8 |
| 2024 | 1,632 | 4th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 48 | 23.0 |
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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1633 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 25% of the irrigation seasons in 1994-2024 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.