| |
Tomcat
Member
|
Posted: Mar 6, 2026 Post Subject: "Rough" flow estimates "may" be too low?
|
|
| Subject: Sierra City (Rough) flows
>
> Hi Chris, been a long time, but I thought it important to inform/contest the flows for Sierra City or "Wild Plum" last weekend. I think your reporting is considerably lower than actual. Our group, which has been running all reaches of the Yuba River for over 30 years, (heck even my dogs name is Yuba) we believe the flows were appx 800cfs or higher at 10a Sunday (3-1-26) at the Wild Plumb bridge/put-in definitely higher than the Rough estimate of 540-700cfs! Ladies Canyon looked to be appx 1500cfs, very challenging medium/high flows. We ended up not running it because of high levels some of the group voted to do Goodyears (2600cfs/7.15' instead.
> I've run Wild Plumb at higher levels and even at this level Ladies looked pretty stompy! What really prompted this letter was the "Rough" estimate flow (highlighted yellow (low)) on Monday 10am @ 470cfs and the "low" designation today (Tuesday 3-3-26) could put the inexperienced paddler/rower in a very dangerous situation thinking they are boating it at a less challenging/safer low level! Or someone planning a trip, driving up there say from the Bay Area to find it at a very challenging higher level when they get there and/or do some scouting of Ladies Canyon etc. Just our 10cents worth of opinions and I still praise you whenever I can because your site and hard work has, over the years, changed the boating community undeniably for the better! Along with Polypro, self-bailing boats and plastic kayaks.
> Sincerely Tom Hoeck "Tomcat"
|
Tomcat
Member
|
| Posted: Mar 6, 2026Post Subject: Re: "Rough" flow estimates "may" be too low?
|
|
| | Tomcat wrote: | Subject: Sierra City (Rough) flows
>
> Hi Chris, been a long time, but I thought it important to inform/contest the flows for Sierra City or "Wild Plum" last weekend. I think your reporting is considerably lower than actual. Our group, which has been running all reaches of the Yuba River for over 30 years, (heck even my dogs name is Yuba) we believe the flows were appx 800cfs or higher at 10a Sunday (3-1-26) at the Wild Plumb bridge/put-in definitely higher than the Rough estimate of 540-700cfs! Ladies Canyon looked to be appx 1500cfs, very challenging medium/high flows. We ended up not running it because of high levels some of the group voted to do Goodyears (2600cfs/7.15' instead.
> I've run Wild Plumb at higher levels and even at this level Ladies looked pretty stompy! What really prompted this letter was the "Rough" estimate flow (highlighted yellow (low)) on Monday 10am @ 470cfs and the "low" designation today (Tuesday 3-3-26) could put the inexperienced paddler/rower in a very dangerous situation thinking they are boating it at a less challenging/safer low level! Or someone planning a trip, driving up there say from the Bay Area to find it at a very challenging higher level when they get there and/or do some scouting of Ladies Canyon etc. Just our 10cents worth of opinions and I still praise you whenever I can because your site and hard work has, over the years, changed the boating community undeniably for the better! Along with Polypro, self-bailing boats and plastic kayaks.
> Sincerely Tom Hoeck "Tomcat" |
| | | |
