Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
ROCKWELL DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 7200854 · 1 · GROVE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 04:33 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 1883-07-01 — 3rd 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: DUNLAP NO 1 D (PLATEAU) (1883-03-01). Immediately behind: BERTHOLF FLEMING DITCH (1884-04-11).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12235.0 | 1883-07-01 | 1890-02-07 | 0.98 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUGOTH | 20 |
| 13939.0 | 1888-02-29 | 1890-02-07 | 3.24 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 52 |
| 18749.14154 | 1888-10-01 | 1905-10-14 | 1.72 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 30895.12249 | 1883-07-15 | 1941-07-25 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | DOM | |
| 34419.27538 | 1925-05-25 | 1959-07-21 | 1.87 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
10 decreed actions on record across
7 court cases:
CA8303, CA5812, CA1222, CA2635, CA0273, 92CW0271, 84CW0218.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA8303 | 1 | 1959-07-21 | S |
CA5812 | 1 | 1941-07-25 | S |
CA1222 | 1 | 1905-10-14 | S |
CA2635 | 1 | 1890-02-07 | O |
CA0273 | 3 | 1890-02-07 | O |
92CW0271 | 2 | 1890-02-07 | O |
84CW0218 | 1 | 1890-02-07 | 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 790 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 869 AF — 110% 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 | 837 | 11th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 304 | 3.4 |
| 2011 | 804 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 242 | 3.2 |
| 2012 | 1,358 | 15th lowest of 15 · 172% of median | 290 | 4.3 |
| 2013 | 790 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 158 | 5.1 |
| 2014 | 1,071 | 14th lowest of 15 · 136% of median | 167 | 5.6 |
| 2015 | 814 | 10th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 266 | 3.5 |
| 2016 | 743 | 7th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 300 | 4.1 |
| 2017 | 402 | 1st lowest of 15 · 51% of median | 300 | 2.7 |
| 2018 | 657 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 365 | 3.8 |
| 2019 | 573 | 5th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 355 | 4.7 |
| 2020 | 562 | 4th lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 311 | 2.7 |
| 2021 | 427 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 54% of median | 238 | 3.1 |
| 2022 | 497 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 63% of median | 327 | 2.7 |
| 2023 | 1,000 | 13th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 270 | 4.8 |
| 2024 | 869 | 12th lowest of 15 · 110% of median | 172 | 4.4 |
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 11440 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 97% of the irrigation seasons in 1969-2024 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.