Re: Yosemite Falls Cam

Yeah, I have always wondered why they did not have one pointed that way. Now we can monitor the falls. I love webcams.

They ought to retitle it Upper Yosemite Fall webcam (the Lower Fall is completely hidden from the view).
.

From the picture it looks like the cam is on one of the Yosemite Lodge buildings. To get all of the falls, I am not sure that there was a location where they could access the internet and electricity to run the cam.

Quote
parklover
From the picture it looks like the cam is on one of the Yosemite Lodge buildings. To get all of the falls, I am not sure that there was a location where they could access the internet and electricity to run the cam.

Possibly on the roof of the Yosemite Falls comfort station. I just saw a photo online the other day taken near the comfort station what clearly showed both the upper and lower falls. I'm trying to locate that photo again. If I do, I'll provide a link to it on this thread.

.

The comfort station near the falls is at the wrong angle to put a cam and see all of the falls. To see all of the falls you have to stand closer to where the two benches that are near the fence that is in front of the restored parking lot. Those benches allow you to see directly down the path to the falls. On our spring break trip I sat on one of those benches for almost an hour looking at the falls in the moonlight.

One nice thing is in the cam shot there is a Dogwood tree at the bottom so you can monitor when the Dogwoods are blooming.

Found a picture of the spot I was talking about.

http://www.yosemitehikes.com/yosemite-valley/lower-yosemite-falls/gallery-trailhead.htm

I know about that spot, but I was surprised to see this photo somewhere (I wish I knew from which site I saw it) that had a view of the two falls more in an angle (like the Hutchings cut view) with the grassy area (where former parking lot was) in the foreground and the comfort station of just to the right. Again, the angle of the two falls were more similar to a photo taken of the falls thru the Hutchings cut. I even wondered if it was maybe photoshopped. Next time I'm in the park, I'm going walk to the area near the comfort station to see for it myself.

.

My guess is that it is right near the Mountain Room Restaurant.
Probably on the roof of there or where the bar is zoomed in some.

---

The camera is on the Alder building, across the street from the Yosemite Lodge front desk. I give it five years before some cedar trees grow up in front of the view.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/11/2012 02:05PM by YosemiteSteve.

I will look for it the next time we go. Which corner of Alder is it on?

Watch out, you may find Chick On there waiting for the refresh to post online so he can get another infamous snapshot.

UYF Webcam

Rights belong to S.F. Chronicle

Quote
parklover
From the picture it looks like the cam is on one of the Yosemite Lodge buildings. To get all of the falls, I am not sure that there was a location where they could access the internet and electricity to run the cam.

I'll be passing by that area several times tomorrow. I'll try to look for the camera.

Very nice. Maybe they read my request/idea from awhile back...

Thanks for your efforts, Conservancy!

Very cool. Now they just need to add it to the main webcam page.

For the time being, it's a sneak peak link for donors. Donors get first dibs.

They should put the Tioga pass cam back up

Is it just me, or is that just an image and not a live webcam?

The update frequency appears to be 30 seconds.

Ha, thanks. I was staring at the screen for a bit and wondering if it was moving very slowly.

Its just an image, they update it ever minute - 5 minutes...im not sure which one

Take in Yosemite views by webcam

New webcam at Yosemite National Park in California shows the soaring 2,425-foot Yosemite Falls

FRESNO, Calif. — Just in time for spring snowmelt: a webcam pointed at one of Yosemite National Park's main attractions, the soaring 2,425-foot Yosemite Falls.

The HD camera went live on North America's tallest fall Monday, allowing anyone with Internet access to watch in stunning detail as shadows race across the towering granite monolith over which Yosemite Creek crashes in a series of plunges and cascades. It's updated every 30 seconds through a high-speed DSL connection; www.yosemiteconservancy.org/webcams.

... The new camera and one in the Ahwahnee Meadow pointed at Half Dome are HD optimized for computer viewing at 1280x720 pixels resolution, or 720p. The falls camera is capable of 1280x1024 pixels. Eventually the conservancy would like to place webcams in the old growth redwood forest at Mariposa Grove, and in the sub-alpine Tuloumne Meadows at 8,600 feet.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/travel/2018208801_webyosemitewebcam14.html

Wohoo, we are getting HD quality webcams! I like it when our parks get more technically advanced.

Nice!

Yosemite Conservancy Yosemite Falls WebCam Time-lapse Wed May 15, 2012

Looks like it must get really windy on the cliff face during the day! It's pretty amazing how much the falling water deflects to the west/towards the gully. No wonder that part of the trail is so wet.

Yosemite Falls looks like it is getting smaller every day.

This year, dry by 4th of July?

Hmm, I wouldn't rule out that possibility.

Here's a picture taken 4th of July, 2011. It had more water then than it has today. So give it a few more weeks and all there's left might be a small trickle.


Yosemite Falls - 4th Of July, 2011



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2012 01:42AM by Half Dome Hiker.

Wow it is small for late May! How sad.

I hadn't looked at it for awhile and it's really diminished! Bad news for valley visitors this summer but good news for people like me who want to get up to higher elevations without snow.

Looks as if late April was near-perfect timing for Sierra Point.

Ribbon and Sentinel are probably near-extinct for this year. Although this weekend's weather might spring all of them back to life short-term.

Looks completely dry, currently.

It really is amazing that such a tremendous falls dries up in summer.

But not that amazing once you consider how relatively small and rocky its watershed is. It amazes me that so much water flows over it during spring and early summer.

Compared to the watershed for Vernal and Nevada Falls, the watershed for Yosemite Falls in minuscule.

.

Quote
plawrence
But not that amazing once you consider how relatively small and rocky its watershed is. It amazes me that so much water flows over it during spring and early summer.

Compared to the watershed for Vernal and Nevada Falls, the watershed for Yosemite Falls in minuscule.

.

Yosemite Creek Drainage ~ 27,000 acres
Merced River, above Nevada Falls, Drainage ~ 76,000 acres

So it is obviously much smaller, a little more than a third of the size, but not tiny at all. For comparsion the Bridalveil Creek drainage is about 17,800 acres.

As you pointed out, the hydrology of the drainage is a huge factor effecting water flow.

I read in several references that the drainage is only 4 square miles. Is that 27,000 acres? If it really is larger than Bridalveil, the volume and length of time it lasts must be influenced greatly by the landscape. More rocks and less dirt (where water will soak in and slowly trickle out)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/13/2012 12:33PM by hotrod4x5.

Quote
hotrod4x5
I read in several references that the drainage is only 4 square miles. Is that 27,000 acres? If it really is larger than Bridalveil, the volume and length of time it lasts must be influenced greatly by the landscape. More rocks and less dirt (where water will soak in and slowly trickle out)

I think you must mean 40 square miles. 40 square miles is 25,600 acres so that would be a somewhat close approximation.

Plus, if you think about it for a second, Yosemite Creek is much longer than 4 miles long and at least a mile wide for long stretches, so 4 square miles doesn't make sense.

I don't know where I got that number. I did find that Ribbon drains 4 square miles, maybe that is where I got confused. http://www.waterfallsnorthwest.com/nws/falls.php?num=38

Quote
buster

Quote
hotrod4x5

I read in several references that the drainage is only 4 square miles. Is that 27,000 acres? If it really is larger than Bridalveil, the volume and length of time it lasts must be influenced greatly by the landscape. More rocks and less dirt (where water will soak in and slowly trickle out)

I think you must mean 40 square miles. 40 square miles is 25,600 acres so that would be a somewhat close approximation.

And what's also important isn't just the size in acres (or square miles) of the drainage, and the hydrology of its soils, but also the amount of the annual snowpack. The Yosemite Creek watershed is overall at a lower elevation, with corresponding less snowpack, compared to the Merced River watershed above Nevada Fall.

.

Quote
plawrence

Quote
buster

Quote
hotrod4x5

I read in several references that the drainage is only 4 square miles. Is that 27,000 acres? If it really is larger than Bridalveil, the volume and length of time it lasts must be influenced greatly by the landscape. More rocks and less dirt (where water will soak in and slowly trickle out)

I think you must mean 40 square miles. 40 square miles is 25,600 acres so that would be a somewhat close approximation.

And what's also important isn't just the size in acres (or square miles) of the drainage, and the hydrology of its soils, but also the amount of the annual snowpack. The Yosemite Creek watershed is overall at a lower elevation, with corresponding less snowpack, compared to the Merced River watershed above Nevada Fall.

.

Isn't there a glacier at the source of the Merced?

Quote
hotrod4x5
Isn't there a glacier at the source of the Merced?

There's Lyell Glacier that is the source of the Tuolumne River, but no glacial source for the Merced. There is a Lyell Fork of the Merced, a really cool place to backpack to btw, but it's on the otherside of the Mt Lyell glacier.