Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WOOLEY DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5800945 · 1 · BEAR RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:50 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 1883-05-25 — 4th most senior of the 3097 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: MILL DITCH NO. 1 (1883-05-25). Immediately behind: PENNSYLVANIA DITCH (1883-06-06).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12198.0 | 1883-05-25 | 1892-09-22 | 0.71 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 1 |
| 12586.0 | 1884-06-16 | 1892-09-22 | 2.87 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 11 |
| 13977.0 | 1888-04-07 | 1892-09-22 | 3.16 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 43 |
| 33782.12586 | 1884-06-16 | 1946-09-14 | 4.92 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 276 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
81CW0340, 04/24/1951.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
81CW0340 | 1 | 1946-09-14 | S |
04/24/1951 | 3 | 1892-09-22 | 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 1,108 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 704 AF — 64% of that, and 3rd 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 | 1,028 | 5th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 64 | 12.4 |
| 2012 | 1,098 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 137 | 8.7 |
| 2013 | 1,231 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 103 | 11.8 |
| 2014 | 1,308 | 12th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 73 | 12.4 |
| 2015 | 510 | 1st lowest of 15 · 46% of median | 56 | 7.5 |
| 2016 | 610 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 55% of median | 51 | 9.1 |
| 2017 | 832 | 4th lowest of 15 · 75% of median | 71 | 9.1 |
| 2018 | 1,446 | 15th lowest of 15 · 130% of median | 148 | 11.6 |
| 2019 | 1,351 | 14th lowest of 15 · 122% of median | 126 | 11.6 |
| 2020 | 1,108 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 91 | 11.6 |
| 2021 | 1,338 | 13th lowest of 15 · 121% of median | 178 | 6.9 |
| 2022 | 1,267 | 11th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 161 | 11.6 |
| 2023 | 1,078 | 6th lowest of 15 · 97% of median | 69 | 11.6 |
| 2024 | 1,231 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 72 | 11.6 |
| 2025 | 704 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 64% of median | 58 | 6.9 |
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 (8/10 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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 7773 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 47% of the irrigation seasons in 1948-2025 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.