Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
STAFFORD DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5800879 · 1 · YAMPA RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:53 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 1884-06-14 — 16th most senior of the 3097 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: GIBBS PHILLIPS DITCH ALT PT (1884-06-12). Immediately behind: LARAMORE DITCH (1885-04-30).
Decreed rights (7)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12584.0 | 1884-06-14 | 1892-09-22 | 3.33 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 10 |
| 19250.16011 | 1893-11-01 | 1902-09-16 | 1.75 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 125 |
| 21456.2133 | 1908-05-26 | 1908-10-05 | 0.267 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 178 |
| 33782.16011 | 1893-11-01 | 1946-09-14 | 8.28 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 275, 282 |
| 33782.2133 | 1908-05-26 | 1946-09-14 | 0.43 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 297 |
| 39254.37696 | 1953-03-17 | 1964-03-30 | 5.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRSTK | (30)29 |
| 48598.0 | 1983-01-21 | 1983-12-31 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
11 decreed actions on record across
9 court cases:
87CW0028, 83CW0005, CA3538, 83CW0243, 80CW0058, CA2475, CA0575, 09/16/1902, 09/22/1892.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
87CW0028 | 1 | 1983-12-31 | S |
83CW0005 | 1 | 1983-12-31 | S |
CA3538 | 1 | 1964-03-30 | S |
83CW0243 | 1 | 1964-03-30 | S |
80CW0058 | 1 | 1964-03-30 | S |
CA2475 | 3 | 1946-09-14 | S |
CA0575 | 1 | 1908-10-05 | S |
09/16/1902 | 1 | 1902-09-16 | S |
09/22/1892 | 1 | 1892-09-22 | 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 3,027 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 3,443 AF — 114% of that, and 9th 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 | 2,465 | 5th lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 49 | 29.5 |
| 2011 | 2,321 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 77% of median | 48 | 29.5 |
| 2012 | 3,497 | 11th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 105 | 28.3 |
| 2013 | 2,795 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 57 | 28.8 |
| 2014 | 2,178 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 47 | 27.0 |
| 2015 | 1,934 | 1st lowest of 15 · 64% of median | 54 | 20.0 |
| 2016 | 3,641 | 13th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 74 | 27.2 |
| 2018 | 2,503 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 83 | 22.9 |
| 2019 | 3,027 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 79 | 29.5 |
| 2020 | 3,796 | 15th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 93 | 25.2 |
| 2021 | 3,486 | 10th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 115 | 24.8 |
| 2022 | 3,716 | 14th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 90 | 25.3 |
| 2023 | 3,605 | 12th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 122 | 25.5 |
| 2024 | 2,332 | 4th lowest of 15 · 77% of median | 89 | 21.3 |
| 2025 | 3,443 | 9th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 110 | 26.6 |
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 | 7 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 7210 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 29% of the irrigation seasons in 1909-2025 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.