Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
GOLDEN AGE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 7200643 · 1 · BIG CREEK · 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 (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 1890-05-01 — 191st most senior of the 2166 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: WINTERS OR WOLFE DITCH (1889-05-05). Immediately behind: C D LUDE DITCH (1890-12-10).
Decreed rights (6)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22995.14731 | 1890-05-01 | 1916-06-01 | 3.69 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 22995.17384 | 1897-08-05 | 1916-06-01 | 2.16 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 30895.14745 | 1890-05-15 | 1941-07-25 | 0.912 | 0.0 | C | DOM | |
| 30895.23861 | 1915-05-01 | 1941-07-25 | 1.17 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 32811.0 | 1939-11-01 | 1941-07-25 | 3.14 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 34803.0 | 1945-04-15 | 1959-07-21 | 1.2 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
8 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA8303, CA5812, CA2635.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA8303 | 1 | 1959-07-21 | S |
CA5812 | 4 | 1941-07-25 | S |
CA2635 | 3 | 1916-06-01 | 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 1,070 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,101 AF — 103% of that, and 10th 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 | 1,440 | 15th lowest of 15 · 135% of median | 272 | 12.8 |
| 2011 | 1,356 | 14th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 220 | 15.1 |
| 2012 | 1,239 | 12th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 285 | 7.0 |
| 2013 | 786 | 4th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 137 | 11.3 |
| 2014 | 1,070 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 217 | 11.1 |
| 2015 | 1,129 | 11th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 232 | 11.6 |
| 2016 | 863 | 5th lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 146 | 7.8 |
| 2017 | 1,070 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 191 | 12.4 |
| 2018 | 607 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 57% of median | 131 | 5.8 |
| 2019 | 1,070 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 198 | 7.8 |
| 2020 | 678 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 63% of median | 211 | 4.7 |
| 2021 | 587 | 1st lowest of 15 · 55% of median | 232 | 8.5 |
| 2022 | 970 | 6th lowest of 15 · 91% of median | 360 | 7.7 |
| 2023 | 1,321 | 13th lowest of 15 · 124% of median | 365 | 7.8 |
| 2024 | 1,101 | 10th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 299 | 11.0 |
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 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 | 6 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 9189 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 79% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2024 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.