Just curious to see if anyone actually reads the guidebook descriptions in our database. How important is a traditional written description to you when considering a run you've never done?

Do you feel that the accessibility of photos and videos replaces a written description as far as your need for beta is concerned?

Feel free to elaborate in general on how you use the database, how often, under what circumstances, ect.

Your Rio Banditos want to know. They work hard night and day robbing the Beta Train to make this info available to you (not really, but it sounds like a cool metaphor).

As someone who is fairly new to the sport, and therefore at the mercy of those who are gracious enough to let me tag along, written beta is pretty important to me.  While a picture more efficiently conveys what a rapid may look like, there is little to be gained as far as identifying the best line when you do not possess solid water reading skills.  If nothing else the written descriptions make me feel slightly more at ease when tackling a new river because I have an idea of what areas are going to be tough for me which for me takes some of the butterflies out of rounding a bend.  That being said I find that some descriptions are significantly more helpful than others.  Generally the ones that actually describe the lines and potential hazards are the ones I prefer.  In the end you still have to rely on your own skills and be able to trust the people you paddle with, but knowing what you are getting yourself into does not hurt.

I find that a written description leaves a lasting impression on my brain. Something I can recall when needed. I very much appreciate everyone who takes the time to make this happen.

I appreciate all the work you guys have done to keep the website and river data up-to-date. Yeah, video's nice, but 1) it's only at one specific water level, and 2) I find the helmet-cam footage tends to underrate the steepness of the river. Put-ins, take-outs and hazards are REALLY helpful.

Love it. Want more of it. As much as i love a good adventure, For new to Washington boaters like me, it is invaluable.

Glad you're doin it too, jp. Now take me down pilchuk creek next time. When it's not at flood though. ;)


Edited by flowtorch - 09 Feb 2012 at 9:14pm

Cool. Great feedback, everyone! Hopefully more PPeeps will keep weighing in.

Yeah, Flowtorch! Queue up a list of runs you want to do. Pilchuck is hard to catch- so flashy. But you never know.
PM me to get my # or get it from someone who knows me. I tend to not throw it out onto the forum too often. I'm down to boat all kinds of stuff (II-V) though. Just contact me.

General descriptions of rapids, lines, river character, and hazards is invaluable, especially when it's on the upper end of my newb skill set. Videos are nice, but as I've noticed even when I edited mine, all the rapids are not included, and the lead in to the rapids are not included half the time. Only the meat of the rapids, but having a video also helps. The video you can actually see what they are writing about and get a better mental image of what's really going on after reading the description. Depending on who writes the river beta can greatly inflate or deflate the difficulty... If I'm on a river with a group that hasn't been on that river, I take the river beta with a grain of salt, video for some visual reference, and put the rest of the puzzle together from there.

I also find the levels information most important.

Often "locals" tend to run things on the high side, and sometimes the recommended levels reflect this relative sandbagging of familiarity in the recommended levels. I like to also see what are considered ELF levels stated also and whether or not these levels actually make the river easier or harder.

Also, I'd like to see info about seasonal variations on levels for whether it's on snowmelt or rain. Many rivers read differently given the snow level. Often this is hard to figure out until being in the area for a couple of years.

I'd like to see a synopsis of general seasonal variations of what is normally paddled at what times of year in the Seattle area.

Well, the simple message is that yes, I use the written descriptions and miss them when there isn't one for a run.

Here's another vote for written beta. I think it's doubly important in a place like the PNW, where dam release runs and the culture that forms around them are nonexistent.

In places where most of the bread and butter runs are dam release, two things happen. The first is that the levels and the difficulty of the rapids generally stay the same. The second is that when everyone gathers in the same place, it's easy to get first hand beta and calibrate it based on your impressions of the person giving you the information, and their skill level. Paddle a few drops with a guy and you're in a much better position to calibrate the information they give you based on how they handle themselves on the river.

In the PNW - the nature of the runs is more dynamic, they're more abundant, and the culture is more about crews than networks, and it's been way tougher to calibrate how serious a run really is.

We've also got the "it's all good" going on out here, which is generally a huge plus and it's a big part of why I like it here, but it's one more thing that can make accurate, sensible written beta important. For better or worse, people on the EC were more inclined to pepper folks that weren't part of the network with a question or two before putting on runs that weren't part of the bread and butter circuit as a small, self sufficient group. Not everyone's cup of tea, but it worked as an information transmission mechanism and did more good than harm.*


*I still chuckle every time I remember one particular episode, when folks were shouldering their boats and starting the hike into a sievy looking class V drop above the normal put in. A guy no one knew made the motions like he was going to follow along, and a Russian emigre asked him if he knew what he was getting into and was 100% confident he could run the drop safely.

When he saw the guy give a shrug and answer with, "I guess I'll know when I'm in there, man..." he stopped dead in his tracks, looked him dead in the eye (no one does the penetrating stare like the eastern block folks) and something like. "Zere moost be no gezzing. Zees ess no plaze for gezzing. Zhu moost see zee line and zhu moost know. Zhu geet een zere, an zhu dunt know - zhu...gonna...geet...F*CKED. And I'm noot talking leetle beet - I'm talking BEEG TIME..." Somehow he managed to do so without coming off as paternal, hostile, or condescending and the guy thanked him for the heads up, watched them fire it up, and elected not to run the drop himself on that particular day.

That's an awesome portrait- Jay!

Regarding the suggestions you enumerated- I think #2 is a good idea and very doable.

Keep in mind though that #1 is a whole other can of worms. Rating rapids and rivers, while a related topic, is beyond the scope of this thread, and deserving of a thread unto itself. Every so often I like to trigger the debate about WW ratings. For some reason the rating system seems permanently fubar'd. People have tried to patch it together and modify, modernize it, add decimals (V.2,ect.), add letters (Corrin Addison), ect. I ain't even gonna spew my opinion, which should shock those of you who've been around for a while and know me on this forum.

**Be warned that at the first sign of a "Ratings Discussion" Ima create an appropriate thread and start yankin posts out of this one and placing them where they belong.**

Meanwhile I dig the discussion. Its good to get others' points of view, and I think its a great benefit to the novices who are just getting stoked about the sport so they can tap into the intellectual side of it.

As far as the poll goes, so far there's only one Cave Man Boater who voted. Curious if he or she wants to come out and say who they are. Maybe more Cave Man boaters aren't boating because they "can't read". Or maybe it was a trick question. You ever think of that? If you can't read how can you vote?




Edited by jP - 10 Feb 2012 at 2:54pm

Awesome Fenix! See, that's really good feedback to hear. And by all the people sharing in their impressions like that is how we can fine tune the datebase in a way that loosely reflects people's general impressions of these runs at various flows.

I agree, though. I don't think 4,000 is a good place to mark the upper recommended range for the Middle Middle. I've taken early first season-fresh Novices (it's a more dignified term for "Newbs", more dignified and more classic) with rolls (like, they didn't swim) down the middle middle at 4,000cfs (my Ex Girlfriend- James will tell you, he was there). Their eyes are usually huge, but they manage fine. I ran it solo at 6k this fall and it is straight forward. I am re setting the upper recommended flow at 6,000 right away. End of discussion. Not open for debate. No doubt 6k is starting to require some confident, experienced boating skills with some prior knowledge of the run by someone on the trip, and a readiness for a rescue executed by the group leaders if necessary.

After running hundereds of rivers and creeks in multiple regions of continental North America for a few decades, I think a loose standard for recommended flows should be expressed as follows: (and my opinion on this matter is very firm)

Lower Recommended Flows SHOULD NOT be set at the extreme end of a run's lowest commonly boated flow. For example (and you can disagree all you want but...) The Sky's lower recommended flow should probably be 1000, or 900. Below this of course we've all boated it (I have no need to run it below 500). But it starts to become dangerous in new ways: piton and pin hazards, head trauma after flipping above The Ledge, ect. YOU and YOUR crew may dig the elf. But, just like higher water, there's a point where its no longer "recommended". Below 2.25' on the Truss is approaching this turning point where low water begins to have increased hazard and danger.

Likewise,the Higher Recommended flow should be set at some basic point where the Stout paddlers are enjoying a fat, high water experience, but not ridiculously overwhelmed by floodstage conditions.

In other words, just as boaters who prefer more stompy, highwater conditions should be dipping into the blue bar on a frequent basis and pushing the digits as far up as they feel comfortable, I do this in a controlled manor w/ Robe for example. 6' feet tends to be a natural divider between the Wheat an the Chaff. I teeter on that line between the Green and the Blue. The deeper I feel like pushing up into the blue (6.4') starts to depend on me being hydrated, stretched, good functioning outfitting, and an assertive posture throughout the day. But, that's just me. Darren, Rob, Ben, folks like that have their threshold set about 1/2 a foot or even a foot above my threshold, to continue with the Robe example. I've always been the paddler who stradles that tipping point above which the number of paddlers frequenting a high water class V flow is dwindling substantialy, as in 10-15%. That's like, lower blue levels to upper blue.

So when I want beta during dry cycles, and those yellow bars prevail, I want to know I can dip down into the yellow without a ridiculous amount of rock contact. I want to know I can make an exception and run the Green at 900 and know I can still enjoy paddling on water, even if its a little scrapey and butt bumpy. The Sky at 500 still is a justifiable way to spend a day on the water for those who know it orvare experienced paddlers. But 900 is closer to a reasonable flow, and maybe getting too low for novice first timers if they are hoping to run Boukder Drop. The rest of the run may be tricky for them at 900, but they'll probably manage with the helpful direction of a good trip leader.Robe gets yellow at about 4.8' which is set WAY too low. It used to be the low end of ELF like flows (4.85'). But 5.0' is more of a 4.85' these days. At 5.2' these days you are starting to bump bones. That's not an opinion that's GEOMORPHOLOGY at work.

Green bars should be a great medium sweet spot, with a broad range of preferable flows, all good. And anyone who really wants to approach a run that may smell like a STEP UP for them with calculated caution should be able to rely on targeting a run when it is in the lower half of its "green" range on the flow pages. Again, on Robe this would be 5.2'-5.4'. If you belong on the run at all, you be able to handle 5.4'. If the LW had an online guage, this equivilent range would be 3.2'-3.4' on the stick at the Put In. Truss? Probably 2.75'-3.25' or so.

Or maybe you want to phatten things up a bit confidently without feeling like you are "Crossing The Rubicon": target a flow that is in the upper half of the "Green Zone". You still want medium flows but want it spicy. You probably are already aqquainted with the run, or you're from out of town but solid on the run you target. Robe: 5.6',5.8' is gonna get juicy. Tilton: 2000-2800. Green: 2000-3000. White Salmon BZ stretch: 3.5'-4' or even 4.5'. Ect. Little White fattens up above 3.8'.

And then, the rest of the paddling populace should know how they personally relate to that spectrum the way I outlined it above. For example I've fequently heard paddlers say they "round up" many flow ranges in the bennett book. Modern gear, modern skills and sensibilities, but an average standard is loosely present. But other boaters ELF down most of Washington's Bennett Book Class V Classics. To each their own. Yall know where I stand.

And, this does often tend to correlate to nature's own perspective about what "Low, Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, High Floodstage, ect. Is. You can tell by the way a river cuts its banks, as in the reference point "Bank Full", which is basicly somewhere in the neighborhood of "High" but maybe not "Flood", which is starting to jump out of its bed. This relates to the shape of the river bed, the width, the gradient, the geology, the continuous nature or spacing of eddies and pools for controlled stopping, controlled rescues... and finally the presence of woody debris. Mostly in that order, if you were to describe in in biological terms:

In the Hydrological KINGDOM of the river, whitewater regions have Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus and Species.

Once a boater makes the rounds and gets to understand these very rigid variables crafted and shaped by the global nature of hydrology and geomorphology, the ranges of flows we see represented as yellow, green, or blue begin to reflect a universal order. Begin to make sense.


The key is for us human whitewater vistors to yoke our own perceptions to these natural rhythms and patterns so that when we relate to each other's widely diverse sensibilities, skil levels, experiential levels, fitness and psycology, ect., we are still grounded to the River itself. Its extremes and its moderate predictable norms.

With a tool so powerful and "open source" as PP's River PPages, our communications with each other should consider this "big picture" of rivers and their patterns. As if all of us were gathered around a weathered magic dirtbag tarp. All PP members who truly run Washington's rivers from weekend to weekend as a passionate quest... Those who post Trip Reports, River Descriptions, Photos, Video, All gathered around the outer edge of this digital tarp suspended over a GRAND PIANO with rivers and creeks gushing through its inards, flowing through the wires and out over the black and white keys. We each pull this tarp in the direction our experience informs us of, and the average "coverage" of this symphonic energy, this "piano" of knowledge playing forth like a composition of music that the river provides on its own, is illuminated and framed within this LCD flexible, dynamic Tarp, projecting a vision, shedding light upon, our geography our meteorology, projecting a beacon that allows us to custom tailor our own inner "mental maps" of this hydroscape spread throughout this PNW. In the end it is about sharing this mental "infrastructure" and experience with each other for a safer, more satisfying, more sophisticated Adventure of an Experience. We tune this piano, this database, with our beta contributions: text, take out directions, trip reports, photos, videos, outlines of flow ranges, ect. As we play for a few seasons the piano gets out of tune and needs to be tuned again. Fresh blood, fresh intellects, fresh passions revisit this body of knowledge collectively and maintain it as a living, breathing resource.
... So that when we each turn on the metaphoric radio that PP' s database provides we hear a coherent symphony of all the PPeeps' general experiences, rather that something more akin to dicord or cocopheny.

Edited by jP - 11 Feb 2012 at 10:26pm

Oh, and while I somewhat agree with the usefulness of detailed put in/take out details, I have to share sentiments from the surf culture.

Some places aren't meant for all. Ease of use isn't always what is legitimate for some spots. Guarding some places has merit, in that it is not only ones self that they are putting at risk, but the others on the water at that time (in case of heavy breaks, or drops in WW world). If you are really up for the task, you'll know people who know.

Of course, anyone with enough cash can fly to Oahu tomorrow and paddle out at Pipeline (though the guys there will keep you at bay if they don't trust you). Still, the logistics of getting to Pipeline are easily found. Being given a wave, much less not having the wave kick your ass are a whole 'nother issue.

I have found, however, the WW crowd to be much more friendly than the surf crowd, on any day. Definitely has to do with the limited resource (waves) quotient.