Foxton, minimum flow? - Mountain Buzz
 



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 10-23-2003   #1
gh
 
pnw, Colorado
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,408
Foxton, minimum flow?

I have been down Foxton a few times and it seems like it was always around 330 cfs and it seems like it was pretty rocky at that level. What's the minimum flow that you can run this without knocking a hole in the bottom of your boat. I was planning on being sick today and going but it dropped to 280 and I wasn't sure it was worth it.

gh is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-23-2003   #2
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
above 300 is a fun level for foxton through waterton. i haven't seen it below 300 though.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2003   #3
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 24
No go.

Below 300 is just plain un-fun. The Boulder Garden way up top is entertaining, but not really worth the drive unless something else is flowing too. If waterton is up, go for it, otherwise save the sick day.
Txoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-23-2003   #4
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 173
I did foxton last week at about 300. It was fun, but mostly since I hadn't done it before. I only ran boulder garden. That is the only section worth much right now. You can shoulder your boat and easily hike boulder garden a couple times.

Technical III at this level. There were no real hazards when I was up there.
jeffro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2003   #5
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I'd say 250 is a minimum level.

You thought rocks were a problem at 300? Either you aren't good at avoiding them or you are really spoiled. Hey, it's October--be glad we have a good run.

At 250 you may scrape your boat occaisionally if you aren't careful, but you won't bash it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2003   #6
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 173
I don't know if it was directed at me, but no, I don't think the rocks were a problem at 300. I think it is technical class III due to the maneuvering.
jeffro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2003   #7
gh
 
pnw, Colorado
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,408
I guess I am spoiled as well. I was getting all pysched for the 450 that was running. I guess I waited too long to call in sick.
gh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2003   #8
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6
Below 300?

I have run the rock garden as low as 150cfs. The whole run is runnable at 200cfs. It is more fun with more water...like most rivers. I don't think you hit more rocks at 200 than you do at 300...it's boney either way and the lines are the same...150 was a different story.
Clinton W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2003   #9
 
rivermanryan's Avatar
 
Durango, Colorado
Paddling Since: 1999
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 580
Foxton Good to 160

I have run the entire run at 160. Better than you might expect, no holes in the boat if you know the low water lines!
rivermanryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Topic Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Minimum Bruneau flow? breeze Whitewater Kayaking 4 06-05-2006 02:32 PM
North Fork Poudre minimum flow? soylent green Whitewater Kayaking 3 04-28-2005 02:38 PM
elevenmile minimum? danger Whitewater Kayaking 1 06-21-2004 01:08 PM
OBJ minimum?? Bryan Houle Whitewater Kayaking 2 06-12-2004 06:26 PM
bailey/foxton flow greater than waterton? ... nevermind spthomson Whitewater Kayaking 1 10-21-2003 05:31 PM

» Classified Ads
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.