Talk:Clark Fork River

message: ----
According to the GNIS  the name of this river is just "Clark Fork" not "Clark Fork River".Kmusser 14:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

message: I've added a geobox and new map. There are some differences between the stats given in the geobox and those in the main text -- they are due to the differing ways to define the river. The USGS GNIS length is only up to the Silver Bow & Warm Springs confluence and only down to Lake Pend Oreille, so is shorter than the "total length". Drainage area differs for the same reasons.
I also created a footnoted references section, but have yet to convert the older links to that style. Also I assume some of the external links could/should be footnotes to specific statements in the main text. I'll try to get around to cleaning up. For now, whew! Pfly 02:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Geobox, map, edits

message: I believe the Kootenay is larger - but can't find any reliable discharge data. There are two stations at the River Discharge Database for the Libby Dam area, but one gives a flow of 11,300 cfs, and the other says 50,600 cfs. The first is somewhat low and the second is really impossibly high. But I'm doubting the Clark Fork is the largest in the state. Shannontalk contribs 04:54, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha, I realized why I couldn't find USGS data- the river is called the Kootenai in the U.S. Searching... Shannontalk contribs 05:14, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Some years ago I drove along Clark Fork at sunset. It was gorgeous, and I was stunned to find such a huge river in the middle of the Rockies. Ever since then that image comes to mind when thinking about the Clark Fork and how large it is. I could see the Kootenai being larger, but I'm going to bet on Clark Fork. <tosses poker chips onto table> Pfly (talk) 08:23, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I guess so. The Kootenai's discharge at the MT-ID border is, at the very most, 13-14,000 cfs and the Clark Fork at the border is over 19,000 cfs at least. Interesting, as the Kootenai comes from big Canadian glaciers – I've always thought Canadian rivers were really big. But then again, the only one I'd ever seen was the Saint Lawrence and once I passed the mouth of the Skeena without realizing it. Never been around the area though... but I'm pretty surprised too, when most of the other rivers flowing out of the Rockies really don't have that much volume, except the upper Colorado and the Gunnison, the Salmon and the Clearwater... none of which come close to the Clark Fork by several thousand cfs... Shannontalk contribs 01:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Woohoo! Well, Clark Fork does come from Glacier National Park, via the Flathead River. Looks like over half of Clark Fork's flow comes from there. But I'm not sure why Clark Fork gets so large so fast. And I don't know why the Kootenay isn't quite as large, but it is fairly close. Maybe it's just topography luck. I checked the stats myself last night and found the Kootenay reaches 16,100 cfs by the time it nears the Idaho-BC border. Seems to exceed 30,000 at its mouth. Pfly (talk) 02:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest river in Montana? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Clark Fork River. 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/20090310102406/http://fwp.mt.gov/content/getItem.aspx?id=24929 to http://fwp.mt.gov/content/getItem.aspx?id=24929
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified