Laserfiche WebLink
Water Distric t State Reportwatright Repor t <br />4046514789 <br />4110391116 <br />42637676 <br />4329272992 <br />4426612756 <br />4520342040 <br />467282 <br />4714671536 <br />50575578 <br />5122372494 <br />52602609 <br />5312081322 <br />54601615 <br />55388401 <br />56769786 <br />57861884 <br />5827742864 <br />5928562972 <br />6020702167 <br />61237249 <br />6216961792 <br />63515538 <br />6817101769 <br />69100102 <br />70772776 <br />71555579 <br />7230973119 <br />73235240 <br />77292313 <br />78447490 <br />For every water district, it was determined that the number of records in the CRDSS database was <br />greater than the number of records provided in the current stream alpha report listing. It appeared <br />that the data files used to produce the current stream alpha listing were older than the data files used <br />to populate the water rights tables in the CRDSS database. This was investigated by parsing <br />substring values (wd,id,wrname,strno,hnumber) for each record from the two report listings, sorting <br />by strno,hnumber,wrname, and comparing to identify the additional records in the CRDSS database. <br />It was determined from this comparison that the majority of the additional records were either <br />additional transactions to existing water rights or new water rights (rights with the largest hnumber <br />for a given stream [see Attachment 2]). <br />A water district from each division was chosen for a more detailed comparison to determine if the <br />data values were ported correctly from the dBASE files to the CRDSS database tables. Report files <br />were produced for a water district using the watright utility and from the stream alpha listing <br />2 <br />a320/taskmems/ 2-07-0.doc 01/03/97 <br />