Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
RESERVOIR DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 7000580 · 1 · ROAN CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 05:25 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 1884-02-28 — 2nd most senior of the 519 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: NEWTON DITCH (1883-07-01). Immediately behind: BAKER AND BOWDISH DITCH (1884-04-13).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12477.0 | 1884-02-28 | 1889-05-11 | 6.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 21 |
| 12712.0 | 1884-10-20 | 1889-05-11 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 33 |
| 13223.0 | 1886-03-15 | 1889-05-11 | 3.3 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 60 |
| 13535.0 | 1887-01-21 | 1889-05-11 | 15.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 84 |
| 27132.27059 | 1924-02-01 | 1937-01-11 | 6.1 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 181SS |
| 43829.41943 | 1964-11-01 | 1970-12-31 | 6.0 | 0.0 | C | DOMSTK | |
| 57705.0 | 2007-12-28 | 2007-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | AUG |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
07CW0235, W0178, CA3102, CA0103.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
07CW0235 | 1 | 2007-12-31 | S |
W0178 | 1 | 1970-12-31 | S |
CA3102 | 3 | 1937-01-11 | O, S |
CA0103 | 2 | 1889-05-11 | 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 2,780 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 795 AF — 29% of that, and 2nd 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 6,437 | 15th lowest of 15 · 232% of median | 172 | 38.0 |
| 2012 | 2,077 | 5th lowest of 15 · 75% of median | 241 | 7.0 |
| 2013 | 2,392 | 6th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 288 | 10.1 |
| 2014 | 2,445 | 7th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 185 | 10.8 |
| 2015 | 2,780 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 226 | 13.8 |
| 2016 | 4,210 | 13th lowest of 15 · 151% of median | 194 | 16.6 |
| 2017 | 4,283 | 14th lowest of 15 · 154% of median | 185 | 22.3 |
| 2018 | 761 | 1st lowest of 15 · 27% of median | 213 | 4.1 |
| 2019 | 3,637 | 11th lowest of 15 · 131% of median | 232 | 14.0 |
| 2020 | 2,016 | 4th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 283 | 9.4 |
| 2021 | 1,164 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 42% of median | 252 | 6.4 |
| 2022 | 2,855 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 210 | 12.9 |
| 2023 | 3,675 | 12th lowest of 15 · 132% of median | 163 | 25.0 |
| 2024 | 3,380 | 10th lowest of 15 · 122% of median | 251 | 11.4 |
| 2025 | 795 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 29% of median | 238 | 3.8 |
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 A (9/10 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 | 13521 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1971-2025 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.