Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
RAMSEY DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 6400514 · 1 · SOUTH PLATTE RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:08 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 1894-08-23 — 77th most senior of the 2052 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: BRAVO DITCH (1893-02-21). Immediately behind: LONE TREE DITCH (1894-09-17).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16306.0 | 1894-08-23 | 1898-11-10 | 12.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 55995.0 | 2003-04-23 | 2003-12-31 | 12.15 | 21.85 | C | IRRCOMFIRSTKAUGRCHWLD |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
12CW0085, 03CW0211, CA0605.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
12CW0085 | 1 | 2003-12-31 | S |
03CW0211 | 1 | 2003-12-31 | S |
CA0605 | 1 | 1898-11-10 | 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 1,519 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,887 AF — 124% of that, and 12th 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 | 339 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 22% of median | 36 | 10.3 |
| 2011 | 1,519 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 73 | 54.7 |
| 2012 | 920 | 4th lowest of 15 · 61% of median | 98 | 10.2 |
| 2013 | 1,111 | 6th lowest of 15 · 73% of median | 105 | 10.5 |
| 2014 | 739 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 49% of median | 46 | 31.4 |
| 2015 | 133 | 1st lowest of 15 · 9% of median | 9 | 8.4 |
| 2016 | 2,017 | 14th lowest of 15 · 133% of median | 158 | 12.9 |
| 2017 | 1,813 | 11th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 130 | 10.5 |
| 2018 | 1,619 | 10th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 134 | 13.0 |
| 2019 | 1,562 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 139 | 17.7 |
| 2020 | 2,001 | 13th lowest of 15 · 132% of median | 128 | 13.1 |
| 2021 | 1,499 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 133 | 11.0 |
| 2022 | 2,484 | 15th lowest of 15 · 164% of median | 200 | 12.0 |
| 2023 | 1,031 | 5th lowest of 15 · 68% of median | 134 | 11.1 |
| 2024 | 1,887 | 12th lowest of 15 · 124% of median | 157 | 11.5 |
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 6241 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 39% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2024 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.