Photo & Video Atlas of WHOLE BC & WASHINGTON COASTLINES!!!

[mick_allen]

This is unbelievable: a video and photo atlas of the whole bc coast. Some parts are dated and low quality helicopter video only: others have both with great 6000 x 4000 px shots every 100 m or so . . . I've only looked at a few locations to get a feel, but it's amazing.

https://mcori.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Viewer/index.html?appid=c76377500f814914ad90149f229d4d66

Someone in SISKA found this app and it's been circulating around BC marine trails - an amazing resource for all. [I'll try and confirm if credit should be given or not for this info]

 

[chodups]

Well, that is a little too entirely addictive. I think I'd better go smoke some crack now to break the spell. I have to admit that it is kind of disorienting and the camera is often not looking where I want to look at the moment but damn! So much of the footage is shot at low tide levels so almost every great place I have camped looks terrible. Maybe that's a good thing but gee whiz..............I doubt that I'll get much sleep tonight.

 

[CPS]

I was checking this out after it was shared on a Facebook group. Super interesting for those times where I see something interesting on Google maps and want a better idea of what it looks like. I'll admit I spent an evening looking at this already.

 

[mick_allen]

The low tide aspect of the photos is great as it shows what the landing is at all water levels . . . so helpful. And I've already downloaded a pile of photos of places that I wish to look at more closely.

edited to add - I just realized that the whole of Washington's islands and coastlines are also in helicopter video as well - with a lesser photo density!

 

[chodups]

The low tide aspect of the photos is a great thing as it shows what the landing is at all water levels . . . so helpful. And I've already downloaded a pile of photos of places that I wish to look at more closely.

Some of this footage, since it was shot at low tide, explains so much about why conditions where what they were when I was trying to figure out what was going on. Frankly, the footage of Perez Rocks on VI leading to Homais Cove is terrifying and I realize that I am lucky to be alive. You read your charts and consult your GPS, make an informed decision and then have a WTF moment where you make a successful retreat but wonder why it was necessary.

 

[Jurfie]

That is super cool!

 

[mick_allen]

I've still only touched this, but I'm not quite as amazed as before:
- it seems there a large areas of the coast not covered by photos
- it seems as if even shown helicopter tracks of large areas of the coast cannot be accessed: I click on data points of a track and no video or photos linked [for me at least!]

however there is a lot there for sure.

 

[Peter-CKM]

California has similar:

California Coastal Records Project -- Aerial Photographs of the California Coastline

California Coastal Records Project -- Aerial Photographs of the California Coastline

www.californiacoastline.org

 

[chodups]

California has similar:

California Coastal Records Project -- Aerial Photographs of the California Coastline

California Coastal Records Project -- Aerial Photographs of the California Coastline

www.californiacoastline.org

Likewise for Washington

 

[AlphaEcho]

I am a technologist and this is both wonderful and worrisome.

It does offer one the ability to "pre-scout" locations, which is pretty cool beans. This goes beyond charts by providing similar information to doing an 'on sight' survey. Not exactly the same information, but more than we've had from just looking at a chart and reading pilot directions.

At the same time I worry .. for a bunch of reasons I am struggling to articulate. Good tools show you their limits so you know what you can and can NOT do with them. Best practices teach you how not to get hurt when using a tool.

This is a very new tool. I hope we don't lose sight of the importance of understanding these limits and of establishing best practice.

 

[mick_allen]

I think it's far more wonderful than worrisome - the water is still cold, heh heh. The main concern I have is that we didn't know about this much much earlier: and what will happen in the future with this and other info now out there but which exists at the pleasure [and influence] of others.

For example I have already seen some good info on several sites - for one even where the indistict old heli footage showed something I didn't know was there and that it is now worth checking out - I'm smiling.

 

[cougarmeat]

How is this different than Google Earth? I confess, I was too lazy to compare them side by side. Even though I have often selected and copied an area where I’d be paddling, and taken it down to OfficeMax to have it printed on 17 x 11 and laminated for a couple of bucks, on the water, it looks a lot different. From the internet, I get (AyeTides) tide and current info. I can see the same using AyeTides in conjunction with iNavX when on the trip (no WiFi or Cell needed), but I like a paper (laminated) backup.

It is interesting to “see the area” a bit - making note of the month AND YEAR the photos were taken. But mostly I end up at sites already covered in the various paddling books of the area. And it’s good to leave a little “unknown”.

 

[mick_allen]

For the areas that are covered [many are not] even the old, low resolution heli shots show additional information that is useful - espec the when they are at low tide. Higher res and photo areas show additional helpful info. [and I have used GE extensively and have found many interesting locations because of it - lots of disappointments too, heh heh]

 

[AM]

Wow, Mick, that is a great resource! I agree that used in conjunction with Google Earth, these videos give us a very good idea of what landings and camping opportunities might look like. It’s almost too good: maybe we are cheating a bit??

Cheers,
Andrew

 

[mick_allen]

Yah, when I say that I used/use GE extensively, I am really understating the amount of time I have spent waypointing every location [often with waypointed prop line extents and prop lines] to be prepared for efficient small motor skiff investigation. Even so, probably 70% or more of the locations are not really that useful for us, but the remainder check out to be usable variations from semi-ok to spectacular. [The spectacular and the surprising hidden gems make it all worth while - some of them just lock in my mind]
But the trouble with this new resource is that I can see going back over 'old' and new 'ground' in order find more things that I didn't know were there and the immense additional time to be spent.