Laserfiche WebLink
Colorado Water Information Dashboards Project Summary Report April 13,2017 <br /> Page 5 of 8 <br /> etc.). These conversations were kept informal, with the primary goal being to raise <br /> awareness of the Dashboards project and find out how interested division staff were in <br /> learning more about the toots. We engaged water users throughout the state, similarly, but <br /> primarily in Divisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7. In addition, we developed the project website as a <br /> place where anyone could find more information about the project. We also provided project <br /> updates at Division 1 and Division 2 Roundtable meetings. <br /> Findings <br /> Three primary ideas came out of this task: <br /> 1 - Water users and Division staff in over-appropriated basins are ready for and interested in <br /> toots like those developed under the Dashboards project. <br /> 2 - Under-appropriated basins may not benefit at this time, given the tack of economic <br /> incentive to employ more technology in processes that are working fine as they are. <br /> 3 - Division 3 water users have some very unique needs for data sharing and data visualization <br /> related to the groundwater districts. <br /> For #1, the primary need we identified for improved technology and data management was <br /> the implementation of what most staff referred to as the "Stenzel Workbook." From what we <br /> could see these are early concepts or versions of the "DWR Sheets" used commonly now in <br /> Division 1; basically, a consistent way of providing diversion records to the Denver office for <br /> import into HydroBase. <br /> Two exceptions to #2 were found, in Division 7. <br /> • While administration of an over-appropriated river was not an issue, communication <br /> between division staff and water users seemed tenuous in many cases. We believe <br /> there may be a role for technology here, with the caveat that many of the water users <br /> are not tech savvy and an internet connection is not availabte in many places, so <br /> careful consideration would need to be made for the appropriate use of dashboard-like <br /> toots. <br /> • Division 7 would benefit by dashboard-technology focused on water quality. There are <br /> many smatt water providers that don't have the resources on their own to monitor <br /> water quality and strategically consider future needs. However, collectively, with <br /> toots that addressed their shared rivers as whole systems, these entities could get out <br /> in front of federally mandated standards, monitoring and regulations. <br /> As for #3: In Division 3, water users are struggling with the complex data sets that tie behind <br /> the groundwater subdistrict augmentation plans. In talking to several water users in the <br /> basin, in particular the Rio Grande Canat Company board, we concluded that some dashboard <br /> toots could be leveraged to help water users understand better how the models apply to them <br /> and facilitate cooperation between water users in the subdistricts in developing their aug <br /> plans. <br /> LeonardRice <br /> ENGINCERS,INC <br />