Methodology
Overview
WaterGapMap is a public, read-only screening and review-support map for Colorado surface-water records. It brings together multiple public source records so users can review structure activity, water-right context, related records, plans, transactions, and official source links in one place.
The map is designed to help users decide where to look next, not to determine what a record legally means.
Current coverage
The current live map focuses on Colorado surface-water structures. The reviewed structure types currently include ditches and reservoirs. Other structure types may appear later as the data review expands.
The map reflects the currently imported and reviewed dataset, not every possible record or interpretation.
Source context used
WaterGapMap combines and compares public source context from several record categories. These sources are used together because a single structure record may not tell the full story.
- administrative structure records
- diversion record history
- water-right and net amount records
- transaction and case context
- plans and plan-structure relationships
- associated WDIDs and related structure records
- comments, seasonal limits, listed contacts, and official source links when available
How the review layer is created
- Start with mapped structures. WaterGapMap begins with public structure records that can be mapped.
- Attach activity history. Where available, diversion, storage, or accounting history is attached to the structure.
- Attach source context. The system looks for water-right and net amount context, APEX amounts, case and transaction context, plans, associated WDIDs, comments, seasonal limits, and official source links.
- Compare direct records with related context. A structure may have a direct record that looks incomplete by itself, while related records provide important context. These cases are usually treated as review items rather than strongest-priority records.
- Assign a review priority. Each marker receives a review priority based on the activity signal and the amount of source context found in the current dataset.
How review priority works
Review Priority is a screening category, not a legal conclusion. It is intended to help users decide which records may be worth closer human review first. Priority is based on what WaterGapMap found in the current dataset and may change as records are reviewed or source data is updated.
High Priority
Recent diversion, storage, activity, or accounting signal appears in the current dataset, but matching source context was limited or not identified. These records are useful to review first.
Medium Priority
A screening signal exists, but related source context was also found. These records usually need human interpretation before the marker is interpreted by itself. Examples may include related structure records, historical CIU status, case or transaction context, plan context, older activity, or reservoir-specific context.
Low Priority
Source context was found and no stronger unresolved screening signal remains in the current dataset. Low Priority still means the record may be reviewed when relevant to a broader workflow.
Unknown / Not enough data
The current imported and reviewed dataset does not contain enough information to classify the record confidently.
Ditches and reservoirs are treated differently
Ditches are often evaluated around diversion activity and direct water-right or net amount context. Reservoirs are not treated as direct ditch analogs. Reservoir records can involve storage, releases, accounting, replacement supply, evaporation, plans, and associated structures. Because of that, reservoir records use reservoir-specific review logic and cautious wording.
What a marker means
A marker is a prompt for review, not a final finding. A High Priority marker does not mean a record is wrong. A Low Priority marker does not mean every related issue has been resolved. The priority only describes what WaterGapMap found in the current dataset.
Limitations
WaterGapMap does not determine:
- legal compliance
- ownership
- abandonment
- validity of a water right
- enforcement status
- whether a diversion or storage amount is legally allowed
Public records can be incomplete, updated, interpreted differently, or connected through related records that require professional review.
Recommended use
Treat WaterGapMap as a starting point. A marker should be followed by reviewing official DWR/CDSS source links, related structure records, plans, cases, transactions, and other public records. For formal decisions, users should rely on official records and qualified professional review.