These data are derived from a point shapefile created nightly from data in the Utah Division of Water Rights Database. The source data were acquired on October 26, 2005.

The dataset contains an assortment of Excel analysis files and a Access database of fish information and trapping data from the fish ladder trap for years 1977 to 2008. Data was used to generate escapement counts for all runs of salmon and steelhead and has data on other species passing the Dam. This data and metadata were submitted by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Staff though the Data Management Plan (DMP) framework with the id: DMP000193. For more information, please visit https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/Sci-Data.

A. SUMMARY This dataset includes hospital diversion events declared by San Francisco hospitals. B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED San Francisco hospitals can declare ambulance diversion status, which diverts all ambulance transports away from the hospital of interest except certain specialty calls. This dataset contains number of diversion hours for each hospital. Each record includes the hospital name, the date and time diversion status started, the date and time diversion status ended, and duration of diversion status. C. UPDATE PROCESS The data is updated monthly by San Francisco Emergency Medical Services Agency. D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET Hospitals are allowed to go on diversion for a maximum of 2 hours before they must re-declare diversion. If 4 or more hospitals go on diversion at the same time, diversion is suspended across all hospitals which means that no hospitals can go on diversion for the next 4 hours. The exception is San Francisco General (SFG) hospital. SFG can declare Trauma Override (functionally identical to hospital diversion) while diversion is suspended since it is San Francisco’s only trauma center. Please refer to the Hospital Suspensions dataset for more information on diversion suspension.

Groundwater wells are critical infrastructure that enable the monitoring, extraction, and use of groundwater, which has important implications for the environment, water security, and economic development. Despite the importance of wells, a unified database collecting and standardizing information on the characteristics and locations of these wells across the United States has been lacking. To bridge this gap, we have created a comprehensive database of groundwater well records collected from state and federal agencies, which we call the United States Groundwater Well Database (USGWD). Presented in both tabular form and as vector points, the USGWD comprises over 14.2 million well records with attributes such as well purpose, location, depth, and capacity for wells constructed as far back as 1763 to 2023. Rigorous cross-verification steps have been applied to ensure the accuracy of the data. The USGWD stands as a valuable tool for improving our understanding of how groundwater is accessed and managed across various regions and sectors within the United States.

This digital dataset contains the monthly diversions from the surface water network in the updated Central Valley Hydrologic Model (CVHM2) for water years 1922-2019. The volume of water transported by surface-water diversions were updated in the CVHM2 from several sources, including: • The C2VSIM developed by DWR, • The WestSIM model, • Delta Mendota Canal turnout delivery data obtained from SLDMWA, • Delta delivery data obtained from Montgomery Watson. The surface water diversions are simulated through the Streamflow Routing Package (SFR2) using 571 diversion locations providing 564 semi-routed and 7 non-routed diversions. Linkages between SFR2 and the Farm-Process (FMP4) simulate the semi-routed and non-routed deliveries through the stream network from a specified diversion location. The semi-routed deliveries (SRD) are regulated by a diversion limit at each location so that FMP4 can only divert from the stream network up a certain amount, specified in the file, SRD_Diversion_Li ...

A Note from the State's Attorney's Office as of 12/30/2024:

The Cook County State's Attorney's Office believes data transparency is an important accountability and public safety tool and is committed to providing Cook County residents with this critical information. Currently, we are working to make sure that the data we share is valid, accurate, and presented in a format that is useful to the public. Our goal is to have resumed updating the Cook County open data site within the first 100 days of the new administration.

Dataset Description:

The Diversion dataset contains information on defendants who receive a referral to a diversion program, including the type of program and date of referral; each row is a program to which a defendant has been referred. Please use this link for more instructions and data glossary: https://www.cookcountystatesattorney.org/resources/how-read-data

This feature class is updated every business day using Python scripts and the Permit database. Please disregard the "Date Updated" field as it does not keep in sync with DWR's internal enterprise geodatabase updates. This dataset contains the points of diversion (POD) for water rights based on the coordinate location (XY) provided in the NDWR’s Permit Database. Since there can be multiple permits on the same POD site, this dataset contains duplicate point features where several permits may be stacked on top of each other spatially. The advantage to using this dataset is that all permits in NDWR’s Permit database are available. Use a filter or definition query to restrict the permits needed.Background:NDWR’s Permit Database was created in 1992. Water Right applications are entered into the database with the Township Range and Section (TRS) of the proposed place of use). The Permit Database was designed to automatically create the point of diversion (POD) based on the centroid of the TRS provided.Starting in 2007, the Hydrology section began mapping PODs by the permit application description. Water rights points of diversion are mapped that contain one of the following: coordinate location (XY), bearing/distance based on a monument tie, application map that can be georeferenced, parcel number, or location description that can be identified on a topo map. The workflow for mapping PODs includes updating the auto-generated POD in the Permit Database to the location coordinates derived from mapping the application description. Some older water rights including Vested or Decreed Water Rights may not be mapped due to lack of sufficient location information.The Water Rights Section of NDWR is responsible for reviewing and approving water rights applications, for new appropriations and for changes to existing water rights, as well as evaluating and responding to protests of applications, approving subdivision dedications for water quantity, evaluating domestic well credits and relinquishments, issuing certificates for permitted water rights, conducting field investigations, and processing requests for extensions of time for filing proofs of completion and proofs of beneficial use.Please note that this POD feature class may not contain all water right information on a site or permit. The GIS datasets do not replace the need to review the Permit database and hard copy permit files and are intended for convenience in sharing information on a map, finding a location, seeing spatial patterns, and planning.Code Descriptions:app_status app_status_nameABN ABANDONED (inactive)ABR ABROGATED (inactive)APP APPLICATION (pending)CAN CANCELLED (inactive)CER CERTIFICATE (active)CUR CURTAILED (inactive)DEC DECREED (active)DEN DENIED (inactive)EXP EXPIRED (inactive)FOR FORFEITED (inactive)PER PERMIT (active)REJ REJECTED (inactive)REL RELINQUISHED (inactive)RES RESERVED (pending)RFA READY FOR ACTION (pending)RFP READY FOR ACTION PROTESTED (pending)RLP RELINQUISH A PORTION (active)RSC RESCINDED (inactive)RVK REVOKED (inactive)RVP REVOCABLE PERMIT (active)SUP SUPERSEDED (inactive)SUS SUSPENDED (inactive)VST VESTED RIGHT (pending)WDR WITHDRAWN (inactive)manner of use (mou) use_nameCOM COMMERCIALCON CONSTRUCTIONDEC AS DECREEDDOM DOMESTICDWR DEWATERINGENV ENVIRONMENTALIND INDUSTRIALIRC IRRIGATION-CAREY ACTIRD IRRIGATION-DLEIRR IRRIGATIONMM MINING AND MILLINGMUN MUNICIPALOTH OTHERPWR POWERQM QUASI-MUNICIPALREC RECREATIONALSTK STOCKWATERINGSTO STORAGEUKN UNKNOWNWLD WILDLIFEMMD MINING, MILLING AND DEWATERINGEVP EVAPORATIONsource source_nameEFF EFFLUENTGEO GEOTHERMALLAK LAKEOGW OTHER GROUND WATEROSW OTHER SURFACE WATERRES RESERVOIRSPR SPRINGSTO STORAGESTR STREAMUG UNDERGROUNDDate Field Descriptions:Permit Date—Date the permit was issued.File Date—Date application was filed at the Division.Sent for Publication—Date the notice that the application was filed was sent to the newspaper of record for publication.Last Publication—The last date of publication of said notice in the paper; 30 days from this date is the last day for filing a protest to an application.POC Filed Date—When a Proof of Completion of Work is accepted by this office, it becomes “filed” rather than just received. The filed date is the same as the received date.

Geospatial data about Idaho Water Diversion Data Sites. Export to CAD, GIS, PDF, CSV and access via API.

This list includes detail information about every Point of Diversion water rights record in the State Water Resources Control Board's "Electronic Water Rights Information Management System" (EWRIMS) database. A Point of Diversion is the geographic area from which water is diverted using infrastructure (works) and put to beneficial use. Examples of works include water storage dams, diversion dams, dugouts, and pump sites along a surface water source. Each row correspond with a unique Point of Diversion ID and its associated data. The list include basic summary information about the Water Right record, such as the type and status, the location of the Points of Diversion, the amount of water allowed (Face Value), and summary data associated with the electronic Water Right record. This file is in flat file format and may not include all information associated to a water right such all uses and seasons or the amounts reported used for every month. That information may be available in the associated flat files for each category.

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. In order to hold a water right in the western United States, an entity, (e.g., an individual, corporation, municipality, sovereign government, or non-profit) must register a physical document with the state's water regulatory agency. State water agencies each maintain their own database containing all registered water right documents within the state, along with relevant metadata such as the point of diversion and place of use of the water. All western U.S. states have digitized their individual water rights databases, along with the geospatial data describing the spatial units where water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. We collected water rights databases from 11 western United States states either by downloading them from publicly accessible web portals, or by contacting state water management representatives; detailed descriptions of where and when the data was collected is provided in the README.txt, as well as Lisk et al.(in review). This collection of data are those raw water rights. Each state formats their data differently, meaning that file types, field availability, and names vary from state to state. Note, the data provided here reflects the state of the water rights databases at the time we collected the data; updates have likely occurred in many states. Some pieces of information are common among all states. These are: priority date, volume or flow of water allowed by the right, stated water use of the right, and some means of identifying the geography and source of the water pertaining to the right - typically the coordinates of the Point of Diversion (PoD) of a waterbody or well. Arizona regulates water in a different way than the other 10 states. Outside of some relatively small critical agricultural areas called Active Management Areas (AMAs), Arizona does not maintain any water rights. However, the state does require registration of surface and groundwater pumping devices, which includes disclosing the mechanical specifics of the devices. We used these records as a proxy for water rights. Each state, and their respective water right authorities, have made their water right records available for non-commercial reference uses. In addition, the states make no guarantees as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of their respective databases, let alone the modifications which we, the authors of this paper, have made to the collected records. None of the states should be held liable for using this data outside of its intended use. In addition, the following states have requested specifically worded disclaimers to be included with their data. Colorado: "The data made available here has been modified for use from its original source, which is the State of Colorado. THE STATE OF COLORADO MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTY AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY DATA MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE. THE STATE OF COLORADO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The data is subject to change as modifications and updates are complete. It is understood that the information contained in the Web feed is being used at one's own risk." Montana: "The Montana State Library provides this product/service for informational purposes only. The Library did not produce it for, nor is it suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Consumers of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the viability of the information for their purposes. The Library provides these data in good faith but does not represent or warrant its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness. In no event shall the Library be liable for any incorrect results or analysis; any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages to any party; or any lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use or the inability to use the data or the services provided. The Library makes these data and services available as a convenience to the public, and for no other purpose. The Library reserves the right to change or revise published data and/or services at any time." Oregon: "This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information." The available data is provided as a series of compressed files, which each containing the full data collected from each state. Some of the files have been renamed, to more easily know which state the data belongs to. The file renaming was also required as some files from different states had the same name. In other cases, the data for a state has been placed in a folder indicating which state it belongs to - as the state organized its data by selected subregions. Below is a brief description of the format of the collected data from each state. ArizonaRights_StatementOfClaimants: A folder containing a database of interconnected CSV files. The soc_erd.pdf file contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with SOC_MAIN.csv in the center of the page. ArizonaRights_SurfaceWaterRightsData: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 10 associated CSVs. SurfaceWater.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with ADWR_SW_APPL_REGRY.csv. ArizonaRights_Well55Registry: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 59 associated CSVs. Wells55.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with WellRegistry.shp. CaliforniaRights_eWRIMS_directDatabase: A folder containing a collection of four "series" Microsoft Excel files, as either XLS or XLSX. The four "series": byCounty, byEntity (what type of legal entity holds the right), byUse (stated water use), and byWatershed, are various methods by which the California water rights are organized within the state's database. However, it was observed that by only collecting a single series, not all water rights were being provided. So, essentially, the majority of records within each "series" are copies of each other, with each "series" containing some unique records. ColoradoRights_NetAmounts: A folder containing 78 CSV files, with one file per Colorado Water District. IdahoRights_PointOfDiversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Idaho. IdahoRights_PlaceOfUse: A Shapefile containing the Place of Use polygons for the entire state of Idaho. MontanaRights_WaterRights: A Geodatabase file containing the Points of Diversion and Places of Use for the entire state of Montana. The name of the Points of Diversion Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WRDIV", and the name of the Places of Use Feature Layer is "WRPOU". NevadaRights_POD_Sites: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Nevada. NewMexicoRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of New Mexico. OregonRights_state_shp: A folder containing 36 Shapefiles and are split between "pod" (Point of Diversion) and "pou" (Place of Use) for each water management basin within Oregon. In other words, each basin has one "pod" file and one "pou" file. The "pod" files are point shapes, and the "pou" files are polygons. UtahRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Utah. WashingtonRights_WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD: A Geodatabase file containing both the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Washington. The name of the Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD". WyomingRights: A folder containing four subdirectories, one for each Wyoming Water Division. Each Division directory includes a varying number of subdirectories for each Wyoming Water District. Each District folder contains two copies of the Point of Diversion records for that area, with one copying being in CSV and one copy in Microsoft Excel XLS format.

The NM Office of the State Engineer (OSE) "Point of Diversions" (POD) layer includes well locations, surface declarations, or surface permits updated on a monthly basis. These data were extracted from the OSE W.A.T.E.R.S. (Water Administration Technical Engineering Resource System) database and geo-located (mapped). These data have varying degrees of accuracy and have not been validated. Data included in this dataset only includes PODs that have coordinates located within the State of New Mexico. This message is to alert users of this data to various changes regarding how this POD data is generated and maintained by the NM Office of the State Engineer. In addition, all attribute fields are fully described in the metadata, including descriptions of field codes. Please read the metadata accompanying this GIS data layer for further information. Any questions regarding this GIS data should be directed NM OSE Information Technology Systems Bureau GIS at the contact information given below.

Points of Diversion (POD): Depicts the _location of each water right diversion point (POD) and provides basic information about the associated water right. All current and individually held water rights are shown in this data set except for those held by irrigation districts, applications, temporary transfers, instream leases, and limited licenses.Current code definitions at: https://www.oregon.gov/owrd/WRDFormsPDF/wris_code_key.pdf.Compilation procedures document at: https://arcgis.wrd.state.or.us/data/OWRD_WR_GIS_procedures.pdf. ----- Places of Use (POU): Depicts the _location of each water right place of use (POU) polygon and provides basic information about the associated water right. All current and individually held water rights are shown in this data set except for those held by irrigation districts, applications, temporary transfers, instream leases, and limited licenses.Current code definitions at: https://www.oregon.gov/owrd/WRDFormsPDF/wris_code_key.pdf.Compilation procedures document at: https://arcgis.wrd.state.or.us/data/OWRD_WR_GIS_procedures.pdf.

ARCOS Database provided by the Washington Post. We use the data for the empirical analysis in our article`` Retail Pharmacies and Drug Diversion during the Opioid Epidemic’’.

2006--2012 data from the Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System (ARCOS), maintained by the Diversion Control Division of the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

The data can be downloaded from https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/2019/07/18/how- download-use-dea-pain-pills-database/ in raw format and until 2021 through an R package (API) on https://github.com/wpinvestigative/arcos. Please follow the requirement of the Washington Post: ‘If you publish an online story, graphic, map or other piece of journalism based on this data set,
please credit The Washington Post, link to the original source, and send us an email when you’ve hit publish. We want to learn what you discover and will attempt to link to your work as part of cataloguing the impact of this project.” (The Washington Post, 2019)

The Washington Post. How to download and use the DEA pain pills database, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/2019/07/18/how-download-use-dea-pain-pills-database/

Points of Diversion (POD): Depicts the _location of each water right diversion point (POD) and provides basic information about the associated water right. All current and individually held water rights are shown in this data set except for those held by irrigation districts, applications, temporary transfers, instream leases, and limited licenses.Current code definitions at: https://www.oregon.gov/owrd/WRDFormsPDF/wris_code_key.pdf.Compilation procedures document at: https://arcgis.wrd.state.or.us/data/OWRD_WR_GIS_procedures.pdf. ----- Places of Use (POU): Depicts the _location of each water right place of use (POU) polygon and provides basic information about the associated water right. All current and individually held water rights are shown in this data set except for those held by irrigation districts, applications, temporary transfers, instream leases, and limited licenses.Current code definitions at: https://www.oregon.gov/owrd/WRDFormsPDF/wris_code_key.pdf.Compilation procedures document at: https://arcgis.wrd.state.or.us/data/OWRD_WR_GIS_procedures.pdf.

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has conducted direct monitoring of juvenile Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha passage at the Red Bluff Diversion Dam (RBDD), river kilometer (RKM) 391 on the Sacramento River, in Northern California since 1994 (Johnson and Martin 1997). Martin et al. (2001) developed quantitative methodologies for indexing juvenile Chinook passage using rotary-screw traps (RST) to assess the impacts of the United States Bureau of Reclamation’s (USBR) RBDD Research Pumping Plant. Absolute abundance (passage and production) estimates were needed to determine the level of impact from the entrainment of salmonids and other fish community populations through RBDD’s experimental ‘fish friendly’ Archimedes and internal helical pumps (Borthwick and Corwin 2001). The original project objectives were met by 2000 and funding of the project was discontinued. From 2001 to 2008, funding was secured through a CALFED Bay-Delta Program grant for annual monitoring operations to determine the effects of restoration activities in the upper Sacramento River aimed primarily at winter Chinook Salmon*. The USBR, the primary proponent of the Central Valley Project (CVP), has funded this project since 2010 due to regulatory requirements contained within the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (NMFS) Biological Opinion for the Long-term Operations of the CVP and State Water Project (NMFS 2009 and 2019). The project began sampling in 1994 with (4) 2.4-m diameter RST’s which sampled through March of 2020. From March 25, 2020 through June 25, 2020, in order to protect employee health and safety during the Coronavirus global pandemic (COVID-19), sampling ceased. Just prior to resuming sampling operations in July of 2020, (4) 1.5-m diameter and one 2.4-m diameter RSTs were re-installed across the transect at the RBDD site. This new five-trap configuration provides a solution to sampling a location that has become shallower since the RBDD gates were permanently placed in the raised position since August of 2011. The non-sampled period in 2020 impacted brood year (BY) 2020 late-fall Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha passage estimates and abundance indices for steelhead/Rainbow Trout O. mykiss and Green Sturgeon Acipenser medirostris. No interpolation for missed samples was performed during this extended break in sampling; therefore, these data should be viewed cautiously and not used for inter-annual comparisons. The project estimates daily juvenile salmonid fish passage as total passage along with fry (less than 46 mm FL) and pre-smolt/smolt passage (greater than 45 mm TL) for all four runs of Chinook salmon and O. mykiss. Production estimates are based on a calculated fry-equivalent fish passage estimate that attempts to standardize the passage of fry and pre-smolts alike for between year comparisons of juvenile fish production (see methods doc for details). The project relies upon a lest-squares regression equation to model daily trap efficiency to estimate fish passage from daily trap catch. A significant statistical correlation has been found between trap efficiency and the amount of water sampled relative to total volume passing the transect each day. Mark-recapture trials have been conducted since 1996 and models have fluctuated in response to changing river conditions and other factors. For instance, it was decided to eliminate RBDD dam operation year trials from the 99-trial additive model after the dam was decommissioned as those data were no longer relevant for future estimates of trap efficiency. Model inputs continue to be evaluated and validated annually with model updating occurring in July of each year, coincident with winter Chinook juvenile passage initiation. Since 2017, winter Chinook catch and resultant passage estimates were revised following genetic analyses of fin clips taken from juvenile length-at-date spring Chinook each fall. Relative abundance indices are calculated each year for Green Sturgeon and various lamprey species including Pacific Lamprey Entosphenus tridentata, Kern Brook Lamprey Lampetra hubbsi and River Lamprey Lampetra ayresi. In most years, the majority of lamprey caught are juveniles or ammocoetes and described as lamprey fry. Relative abundance methods are detailed in a separate methods document, but relative abundance is basically calculated as catch per unit volume of water sampled (CPUV) and can be done for all species encountered per trap, summed daily and then annually for an index of production (see Martin et al. 2001). *The National Marine Fisheries Service first listed winter Chinook Salmon as threatened under the emergency listing procedures for the ESA (16 U.S.C.R. 1531-1543) on August 4, 1989 (54 FR 32085). A proposed rule to add winter Chinook Salmon to the list of threatened species beyond expiration of the emergency rule was published by the NMFS on March 20, 1990 (55 FR 102

Points of Diversion (POD): Depicts the location of each water right diversion point (POD) and provides basic information about the associated water right. All current and individually held water rights are shown in this data set except for those held by irrigation districts, applications, temporary transfers, instream leases, and limited licenses.Current code definitions at: https://www.oregon.gov/owrd/WRDFormsPDF/wris_code_key.pdf.Compilation procedures document at: https://arcgis.wrd.state.or.us/data/OWRD_WR_GIS_procedures.pdf. ----- Places of Use (POU): Depicts the location of each water right place of use (POU) polygon and provides basic information about the associated water right. All current and individually held water rights are shown in this data set except for those held by irrigation districts, applications, temporary transfers, instream leases, and limited licenses.Current code definitions at: https://www.oregon.gov/owrd/WRDFormsPDF/wris_code_key.pdf.Compilation procedures document at: https://arcgis.wrd.state.or.us/data/OWRD_WR_GIS_procedures.pdf.

Project Overview The purpose of the study was to learn more about the perspectives of criminal justice stakeholders and graduates in prostitution diversion programs over a decade after its implementation and as a follow up to an ethnographic study conducted from 2011-2014, the data of which is also housed in the QDR database. The objective is to identify lessons learned and to develop knowledge about the evolution in graduates and other stakeholders' thinking about prostitution diversion programs and their continued efficacy and ethical legitimacy within an evolving social and legal context. This longitudinal qualitative study consists of semi-structured interviews with a convenience sample of 24 professional stakeholders and 3 graduates from two prostitution diversion programs. Interviews were conducted virtually via zoom for approximately 45-90 minutes, recorded, and transcribed. Content analysis involved open-coding and consensus by two coders. Data and Data Collection Overview This qualitative study included a sample of 27, comprised of 24 professional stakeholders and 3 former participants (two who successfully graduated and one who did not) from Project Dawn Court and two professional stakeholders from Baltimore’s Specialized Prostitution Diversion Program (formerly the Specialization Prostitution Diversion program). In order to yield a relatively comprehensive variety of perspectives from different time periods, we identified participants from the initial study through publicly available information and snowball sampling to connect with any current or former program stakeholders and program graduates. We contacted respondents via email to determine if they are interested in and willing to participate in the study and, in the case of snowball sampling, followed up in the manner indicated by anyone who agreed to allow the person who referred them to us. We conducted confidential virtual interviews using a semi-structured interview guide, largely tailoring the interviews to the individual respondents. Interviews conducted using the Zoom platform lasted between 45-90 minutes. All but two interviews were recorded, one due to researcher error the other at the request of the respondent. The research team reviewed and corrected all of the automated transcriptions. We requested permission to follow up for purposes of clarification or with follow up questions, which we did as needed. Two of the interviews included multiple participants at the suggestion of the respondents; all other interviews were of individuals. The PI conducted all but one of the interviews which was conducted by research team member and doctoral graduate research assistant Nancy Franke. Some were conducted only by the PI, others included Nancy Franke and, on several occasions, post-doctoral fellow Inbar Cohen, who also asked questions, generally toward the end of the interview. We used open, selective, and axial coding, reaching consensus on coding and later, emerging themes by at least two coders in order to analyze the data. Data were analyzed to build and generate both descriptive analysis (Sandelowski, 2000) and build theory (Charmaz, 2006), rather than beginning with a specific testable hypothesis (Padgett, 2008). We also used a constant comparative method of data analysis to allow us to revise the interview guide, as needed and to test our emerging conceptual frameworks to be examined in interviews with subsequent participants. We used NVIVO qualitative data software to code, analyze, and store the data. In order to protect confidentiality and maximize respondents’ comfort level in sharing candidly, we refer to respondents by their chosen pseudonym; those who had participated in the prior study are referred to by their original pseudonyms. We also did not share with others who consented or declined to participate, even when potential respondents were referred through snowball sampling. We told respondents from the outset that they could review their transcript for confirmation or if they wished to amend or delete anything. Two respondents requested deletion of small portions of their transcript, and another respondent offered a correction. Participation in all cases was voluntary; we reminded respondents of this from the outset and explained that this also related to any question that they chose not to answer and that could discontinue the interview at any time for any reason (or no reason). We also asked respondents to select a private and confidential location for the interview. Diversion program participants received a $25 electronic gift certificate to a vendor of their choice as compensation for their time and effort; legal system and affiliate professional stakeholders received no compensation for participating. Upon agreement to participate in the study, we shared a copy of a letter of explanation which contained all the elements of consent so that respondents could review it prior to the interview. Before the...

Points of Diversion (POD): Depicts the _location of each water right diversion point (POD) and provides basic information about the associated water right. All current and individually held water rights are shown in this data set except for those held by irrigation districts, applications, temporary transfers, instream leases, and limited licenses.Current code definitions at: https://www.oregon.gov/owrd/WRDFormsPDF/wris_code_key.pdf.Compilation procedures document at: https://arcgis.wrd.state.or.us/data/OWRD_WR_GIS_procedures.pdf. ----- Places of Use (POU): Depicts the _location of each water right place of use (POU) polygon and provides basic information about the associated water right. All current and individually held water rights are shown in this data set except for those held by irrigation districts, applications, temporary transfers, instream leases, and limited licenses.Current code definitions at: https://www.oregon.gov/owrd/WRDFormsPDF/wris_code_key.pdf.Compilation procedures document at: https://arcgis.wrd.state.or.us/data/OWRD_WR_GIS_procedures.pdf.

A human-made entrance to a side channel separated from the river by a longitudinal training dam can be considered a new, emergent type of river bifurcation. To understand the processes controlling the diversion of flow and sediment towards the side channel at such bifurcations, a comprehensive field-monitoring programme was performed in the Waal River, which is the main branch of the Rhine River in the Netherlands. Local processes govern the flow field in the bifurcation region. The angle between the main river flow and the flow into the side channel increases with decreasing lateral and longitudinal distance to the bifurcation point, which corresponds to the head of the training dam. The general flow pattern can be well reproduced with a uniform depth, potential flow model consisting of a superposition of main channel flow and lateral outflow. For submerged flow conditions over the sill, the side channel hydraulic conditions influence the exchange processes, yet free flow side weir theory describes the flow field at this bifurcation type qualitatively well. The vertical flow structure in the side channel, which governs the sediment exchange between the main channel and the side channel, is steered by the geometrical details of the sill. The presence of the sill structure is key to controlling the morphological stability of this type of bifurcation given its primary influence on bed load sediment import and exerts an indirect impact on suspended sediment exchange.