Today I had the pleasure of contending with a submerged log on the lower portion of the Middle Sauk. The log was about 10 or 15 feet long and hard to see in the murky water as it was rising while we were out there.

The last named rapid is referred to Popeye or Lucifer's Hammer on the PP description. The log was about 1/2 mile downstream from there in the next unnamed rapid that has a very large log coming off river right just below a nice looking rock boof. The log was below this section on the left. The log was sitting quite low on some rocks so it was hard to see. I tried to boof over it, but it was too far out of the water and lucky I back ferried off it and flipped on the left end of the log and flushed.

The log may have moved with the rising levels, we were out there about 1:30 this afternoon and it was a definite hazard at these levels (I'm estimating 7000 or 8000 cfs, but I don't know for sure with the gauge issues).

Be safe out there!

Thanks George!! Like I said, still figuring out how to work the gauge. Do you think the level may have been more like 3 or 4000 cfs at 1330?

Yeah a super-bummer for sure. What I posted above came from a discussion about how to estimate Middle Sauk levels over at the WRRR Facebook page, it was a post dated Nov. 1 by Steve Laboff and David Elliot had some useful comments about how to estimate flows. Check it out.

As for the actual cfs reading in middle Sauk run, the Darrington gauge probably correlates best.  It's below the run a bit (if you take out at Clear Creek), but there are only a few minor tributaries between the run and the gauge.  The "above Whitechuck" gauge doesn't account tor the Whitechuck flow, and the Sauk at Sauk gauge is way down near the confluence with the Skagit and includes the Suiattle. 

However, I'm not sure the Sauk near Darrington gauge is working.  It's no longer showing on the USGS site, and if you click into the data via the AW site it shows nothing.  I'm trying to access it via the NWRFC, but that site is not loading today.