Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ODOJ8-'t <br /> <br />This activity involves the preparation of user interfaces and data management interfaces. <br />The feasibility study requested consideration of the Alert software. The budgeted cost for <br />this activity in year 3 is about $ 160,000. <br /> <br />DWR Quality Control/Quality Assurance of Diversion Records <br />Approximately $ 75,000 has been aJJocated in the year three budget to enable the staff of <br />the Division of Water Resources to continue quality control and quality assurance <br />checking of diversion records. <br /> <br />Today's Reflection on CRDSS Feasibility Study <br />Much has been learned in the past one and one half years of CRDSS development. <br />Communications between computer systems have improved thus causing are-evaluation <br />of the distributed database architecture recommended in the CRDSS feasibility study. <br />The South Platte Water Management System has continued to evolve and may serve as an <br />effective base for a water rights administration tool. A point flow module has been <br />developed by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District and might be appropiate <br />for CRDSS. Other needs have arisen out of concerns in other river basins. <br /> <br />Given what we have learned and what we know today, it is time to design a solid <br />direction for the 3rd year of CRDSS development. It is important that we identify our <br />current and future needs carefuJJy and be prepared to discuss how those needs compete <br />for the available CRDSS resources. During the last one and a half years a number of <br />individuals have suggested that certain functionality be added to CRDSS. The next <br />section provides some food for thought for potential activities for the third development <br />year of CRDSS. <br /> <br />Potential Activities for the Third Year of CRDSS Development <br /> <br />Data Collection <br />Informed decisions require an adequate database. Are there important voids in data <br />needed for water resource decisions? Are additional climate stations needed for better <br />estimation of consumptive use or weather patterns? Are additional streamgages needed <br />(i.e. for compact index stations)? Would crop lysimeters improve decisions? At what <br />frequency do we need to update the irrigated acreage database? What about additional <br />satellite monitoring of streamflows, diversions or reservoir contents? What are the <br />pressing needs for data collection on the western slope? <br /> <br />Data Incorporation <br />Are there certain maps or relational data that exists that should be placed into the CRDSS <br />system? Would an aerial photo map help orient users in a basin? Would riparian zone <br />mapping be of value? Would the identification of river mile locations for diversion <br />headgates be of value? <br /> <br />May 31, 1995 <br /> <br />5 <br />