← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

WINTERS OR WOLFE DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 7200945 · 1 · COTTONWOOD CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:44 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 1889-05-05190th 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: JAMES F DUFFY IRR DITCH (1889-05-05). Immediately behind: GOLDEN AGE DITCH (1890-05-01).

Decreed rights (1)

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
22995.14371889-05-051916-06-01 0.4320.0 CIRR

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 223 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 267 AF — 120% of that, and 12th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
2010 608 15th lowest of 15 · 273% of median 271 4.2
2011 509 14th lowest of 15 · 228% of median 211 3.0
2012 260 11th lowest of 15 · 117% of median 129 1.8
2013 164 6th lowest of 15 · 74% of median 66 2.2
2014 245 9th lowest of 15 · 110% of median 150 2.0
2015 223 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 146 1.0
2016 248 10th lowest of 15 · 111% of median 123 2.7
2017 200 7th lowest of 15 · 90% of median 113 1.9
2018 72 2nd lowest of 15 · 32% of median 69 1.1
2019 139 5th lowest of 15 · 62% of median 80 2.5
2020 68 1st lowest of 15 · 30% of median 47 1.1
2021 77 4th lowest of 15 · 34% of median 102 0.9
2022 76 3rd lowest of 15 · 34% of median 53 1.8
2023 269 13th lowest of 15 · 121% of median 142 3.2
2024 267 12th lowest of 15 · 120% of median 116 2.2

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 6712 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 58% 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.