there's no way !!! i would love to see someone ride the pinch with 5 x the flow shown there... gotta see those pictures... or even better a video perhaps???
Cool, it looks fun. tubeneophyte, all kayaking is good kayaking, high or low. I would rather go to a low volume river than study videos with a stopwatch.
tubeneophyte, I call bullshit. Lets see the footage or pics with 5-9 x's the water? I'm not saying its was particularly high or anything when we were there... it was about average from what I've seen of people running this one. But 5-9 times the volume is BS unless you show the footy ;)
Personally I love high volume water (preferably big steep rivers in flood -- Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone for example). However, with regards to Big Timber Creek the risks at any level are too great for me these days. I ended up taking out shortly after put in (at upper bridge) and carrying my boat back down.
First you suggest that your all about high water high volume and high velocity, "Personally I like lots of water. Others who prefer more contact with rock and lower velocities may prefer the low volume shown here." Then you say that you took out right after putting in, so you didn't even run it. You say you like high volume and flood, but you say even the risk of B.T. is too great (!?) A lot of conflicting points... I don't doubt its been run higher, but even 5 times more volume is BS.
(USGS daily data for other rivers in the area do not support my statement - I don't have access to SNOTEL archival data [which may or may not support my statement]). But those of us familiar with Big Timber Creek know that its flow can not be linearly linked with any other drainage with regards to cfs. Keep in mind 2004 was a cool wet summer with high altitude snow pack (like that which feeds BTC) in abundance late into the season. Hopefully someone else who was present on both days chimes in
. I prefer to calculate flow by finding a uniform channel (consistent width and depth) with relatively uniform flows throughout and time wood debris through it - and even this method is subject to +-20% (or greater) errors under the best of circumstances. I performed no calculations for either of the days in question. My comment was based on 3 1/2 year old memory. There really was a lot more water; how much I can not corroborate
I've been comparing 4x6 300dpi prints shot 6/26/04 to your motion footage shot 6/9/07 and while it is obvious there is significantly more water on 6/26/04 the photos do not nor could they ever prove flows to be nine (I now agree unlikely) or even five times that of race day. Different camera angles are a factor, but more importantly in most cases it is difficult to impossible to compare flows from photo unless there is a know marker in them verified at certain levels.
May be a while (if ever) before I get around to it as I was not shooting digital then and I have no need of scanning those negatives for now. There was an MSU film student there that day with a high quality motion camera (I do not know him though). Big Timber Creek likely peaks 20 to 30 times (on a significant snow pack year) the volume present on the day you filmed. The fact that the masses prefer to paddle on a trickle does not dispel the fact that some get out in significant flows.
Haha, you've gone through a lot of effort. I appreciate it gets ran higher (of course it does!) It's just I've run a lot of creeks with a lot of top notch creek boaters and 5 times the water as the race would be full on to the point that no one I've met would run it.
Note to viewers: 1:54 thru 3:01 is footage of lower section of Big Timber Falls and was not part of the race course.
I was there.
The only time I put in on this creek flows were 5 to 9 times greater than what is shown in this footage. Personally I like lots of water. Others who prefer more contact with rock and lower velocities may prefer the low volume shown here.
My goodness don't some people like to sound off, can't you people just say nice vid ...well done
amcdanielzx9r 2 years ago
2:06-2:16 is great
muthaholy 3 years ago
yeh tht bits awersome
Ahacanoe 2 years ago
there's no way !!! i would love to see someone ride the pinch with 5 x the flow shown there... gotta see those pictures... or even better a video perhaps???
maxmatmax 3 years ago
Cool, it looks fun. tubeneophyte, all kayaking is good kayaking, high or low. I would rather go to a low volume river than study videos with a stopwatch.
jonnyhiam 4 years ago
tubeneophyte, I call bullshit. Lets see the footage or pics with 5-9 x's the water? I'm not saying its was particularly high or anything when we were there... it was about average from what I've seen of people running this one. But 5-9 times the volume is BS unless you show the footy ;)
kayakwest 4 years ago
Personally I love high volume water (preferably big steep rivers in flood -- Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone for example). However, with regards to Big Timber Creek the risks at any level are too great for me these days. I ended up taking out shortly after put in (at upper bridge) and carrying my boat back down.
tubeneophyte 4 years ago
First you suggest that your all about high water high volume and high velocity, "Personally I like lots of water. Others who prefer more contact with rock and lower velocities may prefer the low volume shown here." Then you say that you took out right after putting in, so you didn't even run it. You say you like high volume and flood, but you say even the risk of B.T. is too great (!?) A lot of conflicting points... I don't doubt its been run higher, but even 5 times more volume is BS.
kayakwest 4 years ago
(USGS daily data for other rivers in the area do not support my statement - I don't have access to SNOTEL archival data [which may or may not support my statement]). But those of us familiar with Big Timber Creek know that its flow can not be linearly linked with any other drainage with regards to cfs. Keep in mind 2004 was a cool wet summer with high altitude snow pack (like that which feeds BTC) in abundance late into the season. Hopefully someone else who was present on both days chimes in
tubeneophyte 4 years ago
. I prefer to calculate flow by finding a uniform channel (consistent width and depth) with relatively uniform flows throughout and time wood debris through it - and even this method is subject to +-20% (or greater) errors under the best of circumstances. I performed no calculations for either of the days in question. My comment was based on 3 1/2 year old memory. There really was a lot more water; how much I can not corroborate
tubeneophyte 4 years ago
I've been comparing 4x6 300dpi prints shot 6/26/04 to your motion footage shot 6/9/07 and while it is obvious there is significantly more water on 6/26/04 the photos do not nor could they ever prove flows to be nine (I now agree unlikely) or even five times that of race day. Different camera angles are a factor, but more importantly in most cases it is difficult to impossible to compare flows from photo unless there is a know marker in them verified at certain levels.
tubeneophyte 4 years ago
May be a while (if ever) before I get around to it as I was not shooting digital then and I have no need of scanning those negatives for now. There was an MSU film student there that day with a high quality motion camera (I do not know him though). Big Timber Creek likely peaks 20 to 30 times (on a significant snow pack year) the volume present on the day you filmed. The fact that the masses prefer to paddle on a trickle does not dispel the fact that some get out in significant flows.
tubeneophyte 4 years ago
Haha, you've gone through a lot of effort. I appreciate it gets ran higher (of course it does!) It's just I've run a lot of creeks with a lot of top notch creek boaters and 5 times the water as the race would be full on to the point that no one I've met would run it.
kayakwest 4 years ago
Note to viewers: 1:54 thru 3:01 is footage of lower section of Big Timber Falls and was not part of the race course.
I was there.
The only time I put in on this creek flows were 5 to 9 times greater than what is shown in this footage. Personally I like lots of water. Others who prefer more contact with rock and lower velocities may prefer the low volume shown here.
tubeneophyte 4 years ago
oops, replied above.
kayakwest 4 years ago
The Canadians really threw down. Just watching the rock line off the falls again is increcible. Great job on the video!
Pfin06 4 years ago
Sweet video - I can't wait to get out and hit the Big Timber!
tonebizone 4 years ago