Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
JOLLY HOMESTEAD NO 1 D
Structure dossier · WDID 5300649 · 1 · ROCK CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 03:45 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 1902-06-25 — 155th most senior of the 1231 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: HENRY NO 1 DITCH (1902-06-15). Immediately behind: WILSON AND DOLL DITCH (1902-07-26).
Decreed rights (1)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20427.19168 | 1902-06-25 | 1907-12-09 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 180 |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA0447, 87CW0186.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0447 | 1 | 1907-12-09 | S |
87CW0186 | 2 | 1907-12-09 | S |
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 70 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2019, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1989 | 82 | 9th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | — | 70 | 0.6 |
| 1990 | 67 | 7th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | — | 66 | 0.9 |
| 1991 | 132 | 12th lowest of 15 · 189% of median | — | 106 | 1.4 |
| 1993 | 155 | 13th lowest of 15 · 221% of median | — | 85 | 1.5 |
| 2003 | 60 | 5th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | — | 62 | 0.5 |
| 2004 | 47 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 67% of median | — | 48 | 0.5 |
| 2005 | 82 | 9th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | — | 83 | 0.6 |
| 2006 | 63 | 6th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | — | 35 | 1.2 |
| 2007 | 50 | 4th lowest of 15 · 71% of median | — | 62 | 0.6 |
| 2008 | 170 | 14th lowest of 15 · 243% of median | — | 44 | 3.1 |
| 2009 | 193 | 15th lowest of 15 · 276% of median | 9 | 115 | 1.5 |
| 2010 | 70 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 42 | 1.0 |
| 2011 | 90 | 11th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | — | 73 | 1.3 |
| 2012 | 21 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 30% of median | — | 42 | 0.6 |
| 2019 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | — | 1 | 0.0 |
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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1060 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 12% of the irrigation seasons in 1977-2019 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.