Talk:Skookumchuck Narrows

	This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Canada: British Columbia / Geography Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia. This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.

Looking at Sechelt Inlet I see that a skookumchuk refers to a set of rapids. Some other sites seem to call these rapids Sechelt Rapids.

Another source of the current tables is here. Over a 4 year period it maxes out at 17.68 knots so the article seems to be correct in its current claims. This current predicter refers to the rapids as Sechelt Rapids.

KenWalker | Talk 04:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I jut happened to find Saltstraumen tonight and noted it has hydrographical information - volume, speed etc, and it also says it's the world's largest saltwater rapid. Do we have data on Skookumchuck Narrows for comparison?Skookum1 (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Canadian Hydrographic Service's Canadian Tide and Current Tables for 2008 includes Sechelt Rapids (Current), showing the (predicted?) daily speed in knots. The highest speed I see after a quick glance: 16.4 knots. Max daily speed appears to normally be closer to 13 knots or so. Seems rare to be above 15 knots. The page, Energy Dissipation in Extreme Tidal Environments, simply says, "The Skookumchuk tidal rapids (Sechelt Rapids)... current speed sometimes exceeds 15 knots...". The Saltstraumen says its speeds reach 20 knots, so it looks like it does outdo Sechelt Rapids. I'll add this data to the page. Pfly (talk) 04:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whoop, the page already says the current ranges from 1 to 17 knots. I'll just footnote it and use a convert template. Pfly (talk) 04:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok added data to the page, along with mention of Saltstraumen and how it has faster max speeds. I noted that the Saltstraumen page says the height difference "can be up to 1 meter", while Sechelt Rapid's height difference "can exceed 2 metres", according to BCParks. Perhaps Saltstraumen is faster but Sechelt has a larger "wave"? I wonder how the length and width of the two rapids compares. This page does not have that sort of info; the Saltstraumen page does. Pfly (talk) 05:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just happened to find this in BCGNIS and dropping it here for lack of a listing of IRs on the Sechelt First Nation page; seems like it should also be on the s-chuck disambig page; depends on how relevant a reserve it is; maybe just a chunk of land, but likely connected to the fishery in the Narrows/Rapids.Skookum1 (talk) 03:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been doing some research on the claims that the Saltstraumen maelstrom near Bodo, Norway is "the strongest tidal current" and has current speeds up to 20 or 22 knots (depending which website you read). The main Saltstraumen Wikipedia article has been edited to indicate that Saltstraumen is "amongst the world's strongest", based on a published interview with Bjorn Gjevik, a Norwegian physicist who specializes in the study of tidal flows.

I have not been able to find any reference for the claimed current speeds at Saltstraumen; in fact the published tidal current forecast at https://www.barentswatch.no/en/saltstraumen/ shows a peak velocity of 11.1 knots over the next few days (June 2-4 2016). For comparison, the current tables for Sechelt Rapids from http://www.tides.gc.ca/eng/data/table/2016/curr_ref/4200 shows a peak velocity of 14.4 knots over the same time period. I have not been able to locate an annual forecast for current speeds at Saltstraumen that we can compare with the annual maximum current velocity at Sechelt Rapids of 16.2 knots on May 8, 2016.

Without better references, the existing sentence describing Saltstraumen should be considered for modification or deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.16.248.212 (talk) 17:17, 3 June 2016 (UTC) Ddhawk (talk) 18:44, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have not been able to find any reference for the claim of Saltstraumen current speed, and have removed the current speed information on that page. See the talk page for the Saltstraumen article for more info. I have edited the Skookumchuck Narrows article accordingly. Ddhawk (talk) 18:51, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Skookumchuck Narrows. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041213185640/http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/explore/parkpgs/skook.htm to http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/explore/parkpgs/skook.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]