[nmccorkell1384]

Does anybody know what foxton to waterton looks like now?? I assume it is pretty sketchy at around 200 CFS...but was curious to see if anybody had been up there...also does anybody know when they may be releasing through Roberts Tunnel into there? Thanx!

 

[Eric]

Was there last night. It's way up. If you look at the Waterton gauge, it's 940. With 350 coming out of the south fork and 230 from Foxton, thats 360 cfs in runoff from feeder creeks not accounted for on the gauges for both forks. Cheesman res. is already at 100%, so this may be the only time Foxton will run this year.

To make a short story longer, it's over 300 and definitely worth the drive.

 

[cmsummit]

This is the best gage I have found for Foxton:

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/co/nwis/uv/?site_no=06706400&PARAmeter_cd=00065,00060

looks like it's @ 465cfs right now.

 

[Jay H]

Check out the Pine gage (same one from cmsummit above) for the foxton run:

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/co/nwis/uv?dd_cd=02&format=gif&period=7&site_no=06706400

It was up to 465 at 5:45 this morning. That's about when it peaks, then it drops thruout the day. This is all snowmelt, too—zilch-o coming out of the tunnel.

For the Roberts Tunnel:

http://www.dwr.state.co.us/Hydrology/flow_graph.asp?ID=ROBTUNCO&MTYPE=DISCHRG

I ran Foxton last Sat. w/ Cayo @ ~350 and it was not bad. No obstruction/wood/etc. I have run it last summer much lower (200-250, I can't remember exactly) and it was still ok for me.

Foxton is a great run IMO, so I you're interested in running it, just let me know.

 

[pbowman]

The above posts are accurate in that Foxton flow can be estimated by the Pine gage. However, I spoke to the actual operator of that gage (a guy in Lakewood office of USGS) about 2-3 years ago, and he admitted that they did not really have the gage dialed in yet. Note that there are only 4 years of record, so the bugs on the stage vs. flow correlation are still being worked out. He also indicated that the gage itself was at a less than desirable location, and subject to malfunction. Therefore, I would not recommend solely relying on this gage.

When I ran Foxton frequently, I would base my decision on examination of the Bailey/Grant gages, the Pine gage (not shown on the Phlows page), and the Waterton gage. If all three seem to point to the fact that there is water, I would go. My personal low was 150 which is enough to float all areas, but that would require leaving some plastic. I caught it once last summer at 600 when visiting the FR, and it was awesome then.

 

[Caspian]

I'm wondering - has Foxton ever gotten big in the last ten years? I mean meaningfully big, yee-haw, it's-actually-so-big-you-don't-hit-rocks and are sorta scared that the road might get eaten away at the curves kinda big. I really don't care much for Foxton, but 've always imagined that it would be be a real hoot with 1200 cfs or something like that.

 

[Livingston]

Caspian,
If you keep an eye on the right bank downstream of the "T", you'll notice some wood and logs wrapped around live trees. This stuff is way up bank, not sure what flow would be required to get that junk that high, but it had to be well into the 4 digit range.

-d

 

[pbowman]

I think rchristianson said he saw it once at 1000 +/- within the past 5-6 years due to rainfall, and it was up to the road in several spots but not covering it. The pic in CRC2 of Bailey at 1200 must have put Foxton in the 1500+ range that year, with Buffalo Creek dumping in downstream - that would be huge.

I think 600 or so is the highest I have boated it at, and that was a very fun level. The surf spots were great, and no plastic was left unless intentionally boofing something for fun. Later.

added run lore: what about the mythical "topless sunbathers" in the Foxton area? I paddled this run at least 30+ times from 01 to 03, and never once got a peek - what gives?? I have seen what appeared to be some late teenage or college age girls at the cabin on river right, but they were always with their parents - not the typical skin show setting. give up the beta on this one, please!

 

[Fuzzy]

I have paddled Foxton a bunch of times at and above 750cfs. I would consider this run at those flows to be one of the best play runs in the state!! It does take a big rain but with the fires it can happen quickly.

 

[cayo]

FOXTON=USGS GUAGE AT PINE ABOVE ELK CREEK+ELK AND BUFFALO CREEK+RINKY DINK STUFF
Jay might run it with you this weekend if I don't go down south
Jay

 

[anne_colorado]

Foxton in comparison to New England run

Hello,

To any New Englanders or those who have run New England runs:

How does Foxton at a more "normal" flow, perhaps between low and medium (let me know the cfs please!) compare to some run in New England. I've run Dryway numerous times at 900-1100 cfs? Does that compare? Or West Branch of the Westfield? Or Sandy Brook at low flow (I've run at 0)

Thanks and enjoy!
Annie

 

[cstork]

Normal flow of Foxton is 100 cfs, which is unrunnable.

If we are lucky with dam releases, Foxton gets to 300-350 cfs, which is easy and fun. There's one tight spot, but it's not hard if you are heads up.

If we have great snow, the run may get above 500 for a short period, which will probably make the play even better.

Do you mean the Dryway on the Deerfield River in northern Massachussets? Great run. Foxton is much easier. Both are pretty.

 

[anne_colorado]

Dryway

Thanks!

Yes! I met Dryway in northern MASS, dam released section of the Deerfield. Glad you like it! It is a great run!

Enjoy,
Annie