# Westwater record.



## cmike1 (Sep 10, 2006)

Westwater is now showing 45,000. So will a new record be set this year?
The record is 54,000 in 1957. What major dams/diversions have come on line since 1957? Dillon, Blue Mesa, and what else? What's the highest flow post dam era?


I'm not going to ask the question "WW at 45,000?" I assume it's got to be a vision of god kind of experience.


----------



## kerry edwards (Apr 24, 2009)

Probably not the kind of circumstances in which I'd want to become One with the Absolute.


----------



## BCJ (Mar 3, 2008)

I think the flows were higher than 54K in 83' or 84', but I would need to check data to be sure. 76K comes to mind, and I saw a graph of it once upon a time. At any rate, above 35K or so most of the rapids wash out, but don't take it lightly or let that fool you. There are huge boils, eddy lines and lateral surges coming out of nowhere and Skull still requires hard pull to the right to stay off that "Rock of Shock" wall at the bottom. The highest I've seen is 40K. There were big roller waves at Little D, not much else but roller waves, boils and laterals down to Skull (there is still sort of a depression/drop at Funnel and you can sort of recognize where you are, but the big breaking waves were gone), a big left side lateral at the top of Skull leading into a wave train of big laterals/surges coming from the right and leading down to the wall with about a 6-8 pillow coming off that. The boils and eddy lines are strong enough to grab and suck down a raft tube. We went from WW to Cisco in 3.5 hours. That's about all I can remember. Good question.


----------



## krashhadley (Mar 13, 2008)

Sounds like fun. Any body have a big boat?


----------



## hojo (Jun 26, 2008)

USGS Surface Water for USA: Peak Streamflow


----------



## earthNRG (Oct 24, 2003)

Highest flow near the CO/UT state line is:

May 27, 1984	16.12ft	69,800cfs

per the link hojo provided.


----------



## cmike1 (Sep 10, 2006)

Got it on the record flow. I think I was looking at the record flow for _yesterday_. 

In that case well sheeeit, this ain't nothin'


----------



## BCJ (Mar 3, 2008)

Yah, thanks for the info. Still think I saw a graph once that said 70K something but maybe another time another river . . . . still a damn lot of water through a narrow canyon!


----------



## hojo (Jun 26, 2008)

Well, I'm willing to bet that the Canyon was a touch higher since there are tributaries along the way which could have put 200 more cfs into the river. My guess is that someone simply rounded up.


----------



## peernisse (Jun 1, 2011)

buckcoff said:


> I think the flows were higher than 54K in 83' or 84', but I would need to check data to be sure. 76K comes to mind, and I saw a graph of it once upon a time. At any rate, above 35K or so most of the rapids wash out, but don't take it lightly or let that fool you. There are huge boils, eddy lines and lateral surges coming out of nowhere and Skull still requires hard pull to the right to stay off that "Rock of Shock" wall at the bottom. The highest I've seen is 40K. There were big roller waves at Little D, not much else but roller waves, boils and laterals down to Skull (there is still sort of a depression/drop at Funnel and you can sort of recognize where you are, but the big breaking waves were gone), a big left side lateral at the top of Skull leading into a wave train of big laterals/surges coming from the right and leading down to the wall with about a 6-8 pillow coming off that. The boils and eddy lines are strong enough to grab and suck down a raft tube. We went from WW to Cisco in 3.5 hours. That's about all I can remember. Good question.


I believe that's LEFT at Skull? Just in case anyone reading this for Beta! LOL!


----------



## WestSlopeWW (Jun 26, 2008)

peernisse said:


> I believe that's LEFT at Skull? Just in case anyone reading this for Beta! LOL!


Here is a picture I took from the rim last night (about 45,000 cfs). You could easily cheat left. The rest of the canyon looked as if there are no rapids at all.


----------



## peernisse (Jun 1, 2011)

WestSlopeWW said:


> Here is a picture I took from the rim last night (about 45,000 cfs). You could easily cheat left. The rest of the canyon looked as if there are no rapids at all.


Did you run the canyon? How was it? I am going on the 26th.


----------



## widewhale (May 28, 2007)

peernisse said:


> I believe that's LEFT at Skull? Just in case anyone reading this for Beta! LOL!


A hard pull to the right in skull and into the room of doom might _technically _keep you off the rock of shock.


----------



## WestSlopeWW (Jun 26, 2008)

Didnt run it, just hiked in to see what it looked like at these flows. It looked really easy. Everything I could see is just a flush down the middle, other than Skull.


----------



## kerry edwards (Apr 24, 2009)

Lots of rapids look easy from a 1000ft up


----------



## angrylion (May 11, 2009)

peernisse said:


> I believe that's LEFT at Skull? Just in case anyone reading this for Beta! LOL!


Yes, left. But who knows at those flows...


----------



## joecoolives (Jun 17, 2009)

When I was 13 we ran westwater at 56,000 cfs. We were through the canyon in 2 hours with a stop at the cabin,(we tied up on the ledge where the cabin is, instead of 20 ft lower). We were bailing for our lives. There were boilers and suckers that would suck a tube into the water. Whole cottonwood tree's shooting to the surface. All the sudden there would be 15 ft. waves out of no where. I have been hoked on whitewater ever sense.


----------



## saline (Jun 14, 2009)

A freind of mine ran WW two days ago. Most of the rapids were washed out but there were some good wave trains. He said Skull was the usual river right approach and pull hard left just before entering. He said if you made the pull too soon that the left lateral wave above Skull would push you into the hole. Otherwise he said it was a great fast run.


----------



## BCJ (Mar 3, 2008)

*Serious question . . . .*

JOECOOL, I loved hearing your rendition of the 1983 run at 56. Here is the question that came to me - - and I've been working on this a couple of days - - what did the water level ultimately get to in Westwater that year? Current statistics suggest that you were at the peak -- somewhere around 56/57K -- but I seem to recall seeing a graph some time ago (and I think this is at the Ranger Station, on the bulletin board) that suggest the peak that year was in the mid-70's, like around 76K or so?

My guess is they were reporting the flow at Cisco, not CO/UT state line, so the 76 number may have been both Dolores and Colordao combined. For WW flows I always look to the state line station which more accurately represents what it is in the canyon.

If you have any recollection similar to mine please let me know. I.e., if 56 was the actual peak - which USGS seems to claim - - then the sign at the Ranger Station is not based on WW flows only, but those combined with the Dolores.

Adios,

BCJ







joecoolives said:


> When I was 13 we ran westwater at 56,000 cfs. We were through the canyon in 2 hours with a stop at the cabin,(we tied up on the ledge where the cabin is, instead of 20 ft lower). We were bailing for our lives. There were boilers and suckers that would suck a tube into the water. Whole cottonwood tree's shooting to the surface. All the sudden there would be 15 ft. waves out of no where. I have been hoked on whitewater ever sense.


----------



## BCJ (Mar 3, 2008)

peernisse said:


> Did you run the canyon? How was it? I am going on the 26th.


Cool pics WW - - Gracias!


----------



## fullmer (Aug 23, 2006)

*And the answer is . . .*

63,200 cfs.

According to the USGS site, the high flow near Cisco, Utah was 63,200 in 1957.

The address for the information is:

USGS Real-Time Water Data for USGS 09180500 COLORADO RIVER NEAR CISCO, UT


----------



## earthNRG (Oct 24, 2003)

^^^ Interesting, since in '84 the state line gauge read 69,800. Look at the first page of this thread.


----------



## jonny water (Oct 28, 2003)

No peak flow was ~70,000 at Cisco near the beginning of June, 1984. The peak in 1957 was slightly lower at Cisco.


----------



## peernisse (Jun 1, 2011)

widewhale said:


> A hard pull to the right in skull and into the room of doom might _technically _keep you off the rock of shock.



Hahahaha!


----------

