Open smnorris opened 3 years ago
Also - because they are not consistent enough to produce results equivalent to using fundamental watersheds, dropping the watershed codes from the watershed groups might be a good idea.
fixed for fwa_watersheds_upstream_area
with 6f03ce6
When watershed codes are removed from fwa_watershed_groups_poly
:
fwa_watershedatmeasure()
?
Watershed codes / watershed groups / assessment watersheds are not quite consistent enough to use for pre-aggregated upstream summaries.
For example, looking for area upstream of this fundamental watershed:
watershed_feature_id = 8924583
wscode=100.190442.244975
localcode=100.190442.244975.541514
If we look upstream using the fundamental watersheds, almost of the Nicola River /
NICL
watershed group is included. If we look upstream using assessment watersheds or watershed groups, theNICL
watershed group is excluded because the watershed group is coded with local code100.190442.244975.539934
- there is a tiny bit of river polygon with that code present in the group.Do not use watershed groups (or assessment watersheds, that are also based on group boundaries) for upstream/downstream queries.
FWA_WatershedAtMeasure
andfwa_watersheds_upstream_area.sql
will have to be fixed.