Just curious
Printed From: ProfessorPaddle.com
Category: General
Forum Name: Whitewater Forum
Forum Discription: Open Discussion Forum. Whitewater related subjects only
URL: http://www.professorpaddle.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8240
Printed Date: 07 May 2025 at 5:00pm
Topic: Just curious
Posted By: James
Subject: Just curious
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 12:29pm
|
I am wondering if a Local out in the Cashmere zone could confirm who is taking the water out of Icicle Creek, I want to make sure a greedy climber is not filling a private lake... If Plain is at 4030 cfs and Peshastin is at 5150 cfs that would mean 1120 is coming into the river in between the two points. If AW has the Icicle currently at 1891cfs, that would mean that at least 50% - 70% of the icicle's flow is being diverted somewhere else.... Thats like 1000 cfs of evaporation... Something is a miss at the circle K folks.   |
Replies:
Posted By: BRoss
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 12:57pm
|
Unless I'm mistaken, AW has to be wrong...I think it has been 1891cfs for ages... Actually, yes, now that i just looked, the last time the gauge updated was 2008-06-03 21:00:00
.  ------------- "That boated a lot better than it looked." "It always does until it doesn't." |
Posted By: BRoss
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 12:58pm
|
not sure if that smiley was appropriate for the topic, i just liked it! ------------- "That boated a lot better than it looked." "It always does until it doesn't." |
Posted By: H2Ohta
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 1:01pm
|
Icicle Irrigation Aquaduct right above Snowcreek ------------- H2Ohta |
Posted By: BRoss
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 1:01pm
wait....now i'm confused....AW states that it is a correlated gauge based on peshastin and the icicle creek gauge...but it IS the icicle creek gauge, so what is based on??  ------------- "That boated a lot better than it looked." "It always does until it doesn't." |
Posted By: James
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 1:07pm
|
Ooops ... outdated gauge... Your right there Ben... I figured that the irrigation canal can handle around 200 cfs tops. False alarm... leave the climbers alone!!! |
Posted By: H2Ohta
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 1:15pm
|
There is also a diversion above the hatchery accross from the Sleeping Lady ------------- H2Ohta |
Posted By: James
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 1:44pm
|
I believe the second diversion is put back into the Icicle right below the hatchery though... it only bypasses a tiny section of creek/river for fish passage purpose. The icicle canal actually hauls the water off up and around the mountain home road to irrigation fields, I doubt much if any of that water finds its way back to the river... |
Posted By: H2Ohta
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 2:14pm
|
Does it bypass the guage? I am going to try and find out more... ------------- H2Ohta |
Posted By: James
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 3:09pm
|
On a side note.... Google just updated the satelitte images for the Icicle Drainage... You can cruise up the road and easily see the all of the rapids. Check it out!!! http://professorpaddle.com/map/rivermap.asp?riverid=1034 - http://professorpaddle.com/map/rivermap.asp?riverid=1034 |
Posted By: JeffR
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 3:22pm
| Also keep in mind that even when the AW virtual Icicle gauge is working, it's still a correlation based on the Peshastin gauge alone. If someone could come up with a correlation that first subtracts Plain from Peshastin, the Icicle estimate would be more accurate. There's not much that comes in between Plain and Peshastin except for Icicle and Chiwaukum. Since you can get Chiwaukum from WA Ecology, a simplistic model would be: Icicle = Peshastin - Plain - Chiwaukum (I wonder if this would be more accurate than the virtual gauge?) |
Posted By: James
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 3:35pm
|
Jeff, Were actually doing that already here. I had a help from a few friends at the USGS and they extrapolated the percentage of water that is contributed to the icicle between plain and peshastin. That is where the 802 figure is coming from on PP. Oh and since I have asked this so many times ... why not again. Can we please start using the Plain gauge for Tumwater... it's just more accurate, Please???  |
Posted By: Yotes
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 3:37pm
| Actually, the Plain gauge is downstream of the Chiwaukum confluence. Icicle is the only major tributary. If I remember right the virtual gauge here is based on a percentage of the difference between the Plain and Peshastin gauges. It's definitely not perfect, especially if the Wenatchee is rising or falling quickly, and I think the percentage is based on a correlation of a single season's data. |
Posted By: James
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 3:39pm
|
The percentage is actually based on 2 seasons, the drainage basin between those two points and then comparision in range to the actual flows notated in 2000-2001. Its pretty accurate ... Were reading around 800 right now and in may of 2000-2001 the average flow was 700-900. |
Posted By: JeffR
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 3:41pm
| James, that's great! We should see if American Whitewater can use your model instead (and get their gauge to update more often). |
Posted By: jP
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 7:28pm
|
Jeff, you are talking to the Ici-flow correlating King! (James). Now if we could just figure out where that missing water is going-- Greedy Climber, James? You know D1 only needs a few drops for his powdered milk! That's not too much to ask, is it?  If you ask me, I'd say some of the experts I saw out on Ici the other week are to blame: I recall three paddlers in particular on one trip who appearred to have drank quite a bit, namely at "House Rapid", "Horseshoe", and "The Plunge". Don't look at me, though! My line at "Horseshoe" is FAR RIGHT--on that bench of rock where it is bone dry.------------- 🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋 |
Posted By: James
Date Posted: 13 May 2009 at 8:06pm
|
I don't know if I would say King.... that should be reserved for the chili master... But I could go with serf or peasant... Either way I don't think this weekend is going to have me out on thee ole Rico Shey. |