Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
ROCKY RIDGE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 6300557 · 1 · WEST CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:07 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 1933-05-01 — 237th most senior of the 533 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: BURTON POINT OF DIVERSION NO. 4 (1930-03-01). Immediately behind: FIELDS DITCH (1934-08-15).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30436.0 | 1933-05-01 | 1939-02-11 | 0.29 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 97 |
| 32547.0 | 1939-02-10 | 1939-02-11 | 0.58 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA4952, 75CW0332, 75CW0322.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA4952 | 4 | 1939-02-11 | S |
75CW0332 | 1 | 1939-02-11 | S |
75CW0322 | 1 | 1939-02-11 | 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 14 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 14 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st lowest of the 14 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1995 | 57 | 14th lowest of 14 · 407% of median | 16 | 2.0 |
| 1996 | 24 | 10th lowest of 14 · 171% of median | 13 | 2.0 |
| 1997 | 15 | 8th lowest of 14 · 107% of median | 9 | 2.0 |
| 1998 | 21 | 9th lowest of 14 · 150% of median | 12 | 1.5 |
| 1999 | 0 | 1st lowest of 14 · 0% of median | 4 | 0.0 |
| 2000 | 0 | 1st lowest of 14 · 0% of median | 5 | 0.0 |
| 2001 | 0 | 1st lowest of 14 · 0% of median | 7 | 0.0 |
| 2019 | 0 | 1st lowest of 14 · 0% of median | 4 | 0.0 |
| 2020 | 13 | 7th lowest of 14 · 93% of median | 19 | 0.6 |
| 2021 | 4 | 6th lowest of 14 · 29% of median | 8 | 0.5 |
| 2022 | 48 | 12th lowest of 14 · 343% of median | 30 | 1.0 |
| 2023 | 55 | 13th lowest of 14 · 393% of median | 33 | 1.1 |
| 2024 | 43 | 11th lowest of 14 · 307% of median | 9 | 3.1 |
| 2025 | 0 | 1st lowest of 14 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 14 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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | fragment | 171 measured day(s) on file (under 180 -- a season, not a history) |
| record continuity | unknown | record too short to assess continuity (needs 2+ years of span and 180+ 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.