Closed AmberSJones closed 10 years ago
I think these need to go into the catalog as sites from a different agency. Just like you would see a USGS gage that was collocated with some other site, these should show up as sites collocated with the iUTAH sites. We need to make sure that we are accurately presenting the source of the data.
Resolution: present them with their associated GAMUT site on its site page. The variables/plots need to be presented in a separate block from the GAMUT variables.
The page for RB_ARBR_AA would have the standard block of variables, then a header saying 'Variables Measured by USGS (United States Geological Survey)'. The page for the PR sites would have a standard block of variables, then a header saying 'Variables Measured by CUWCD (Central Utah Water Conservancy District)'.
The GAMUT sites for which this is relevant are listed below with their associated USGS or CUWCD site. They are also found on the Google doc of sites. RB_ARBR_AA: RB_ARBR_USGS PR_BJ_AA: PR_BJ_CUWCD PR_CH_AA: PR_CH_CUWCD PR_LM_BA: PR_UM_CUWCD
This is fixed. Do you want the USGS and CUWCD sites removed from the tables in the Provo and Red Butte pages?
Yes, remove them from the tables. Also, the PR_UM_CUWCD data is missing from the PR_LM_BA page.
This is done.
Great. The USGS site still needs to be removed from the Red Butte sites table:
USGS site removed from Red Butte Creek table.
I don't think this got pushed? I still see it in the table.
The changes were not yet pushed. Sorry about that. They are showing now.
Great. Closing.
We need to add the discharge data from the USGS and CUWCD (RB_ARBR_USGS, PR_BJ_CUWCD, PR_CH_CUWCD, PR_UM_CUWCD). @horsburgh , how do you suggest we handle this? Options: