Creek
Fording
 |
|
Whitewater
Creek
|
Whether
thru-hiking eastbound in spring or westbound in autumn, you will
encounter creeks and rivers that require fording. Most creeks
are shallow enough that you can slosh confidently across as dictated
by the trail or terrain, with wet feet and perhaps slippery rocks
your only concern. Other creeks and rivers may be running high
enough that you'll need to wade, or fast enough to warrant your
full attention and a good fording technique. In springs of average
to high runoff, a few drainages may prove unfordable, requiring
a detour.
Predicting
generally which creeks and rivers may be higher is easier than
trying to determine in advance which ones will or won't actually
be fordable. Drainage flow can vary considerably from day to day,
and even between night and day due to variances in snowpack melt
rates. And a creek that might pose less trouble for an experienced
forder with long legs could prove unfordable for someone else.
For these reasons, only a firsthand scouting of a drainage will
reveal its true nature. Don't adjust your itinerary solely on
preconceptions about this or that creek, wait until you get there
before deciding whether you can safely cross it or should find
another way.
The following
chart indicates which creeks and rivers may be running high and/or
fast enough to warrant consideration.
|
Milepoint/
[Segment]
|
Drainage
|
Seasonal
Concerns
|
#
Fords
|
Bypass
/ Detour
Necessary?
|
|
70 [3]
|
|
spring/poss.fall:
current, depth
bypass: main route crosses on a road bridge
|
1
|
often
in spring
|
|
265
[14]
|
|
spring/poss.fall:
current, depth, # fords
bypass: 16 mi. detour via Highwater Bypass route
|
50+
|
sometimes
|
|
306
[16]
|
|
spring:
current
bypass: none convenient
|
1
|
rarely
|
|
330
[18]
|
|
spring:
current, depth
bypass: bridged crossing 1 mile away
|
1
|
rarely
|
|
340
[20]
|
Whitewater
Crk.
|
spring:
current, # fords
bypass: nearby trails and roads
|
20+
|
rarely
|
|
368
[21]
|
W.
Fork Gila R.
|
spring:
current, # fords ; fall: # fords
bypass: nearby trails avoid most fords
|
50+
|
sometimes
|
|
388
[22]
|
Middle
Fork Gila R.
|
spring:
current
bypass: nearby trails avoid all fords
|
6
|
rarely
|
|
593
[33]
|
|
spring/fall:
current, depth, width
bypass: bridged crossing 6 mi away by road
|
1
|
often
in spring
|
See the related
G.E.T. guidebook segments for a discussion of specific fording
scenarios, and when and how to avoid them. But please note here
that the number of fords dictated by a particular drainage is
secondary in concern to the condition of the creek or river itself.
The multiple fords of Eagle Creek and the Gila's West and Middle
forks are a part of the rugged trail experience in these scenic
canyons, where steep cliffs force the trail back and forth across
the drainage at bends. Aravaipa Canyon is similar in design, as
is the normally gentle Alamosa Creek near Monticello, New Mexico.
When conditions are safe, these remote and watery canyon experiences
can be a memorable highlight of the G.E.T. - challenging, in some
cases, but also wild and rewarding.
 |
 |
| A
River Changed: (at left) San Francisco River runs waist-deep
and quick, spring '05, posing a much greater challenge than
in fall of the same year (at right). (Note: Due to flooding
concerns, the GET no longer follows the San Francisco River
Gorge in AZ.) |
Fording
the Rio Grande
 |
| Rio
Grande in flood, early May '05 (photo taken from bridge along
detour) |
A few rivers
present themselves more as obstacles than rights of way. The G.E.T./Arizona
Trail reaches the lower Gila River near Kelvin, AZ, offering an
option to ford its 15 yard span or to find a bridged crossing
upstream, and then continue on and out of the drainage. The Rio
Grande near Polvadera NM can sometimes be considerably wider still,
and in many springs is high and fast enough to categorically rule
out fording. Instead, eastbound hikers would detour to a bridged
crossing, adding several miles to the route in the name of safety.
Westbound hikers in autumn are more likely to find a wide but
relatively calm and shallow Rio Grande, and may prefer the adventure
and time savings of fording this ribbon of life in the desert.
Lightweight
packrafts offer another fording option, and may be worth considering
for those who enjoy multi-sport adventuring more than following
detours. Obviously such watercraft would receive minimal use for
the time spent carrying them, but under the right circumstances
these lightweight inflatables might nevertheless come in handy
in places, such as at the Rio Grande in spring. (A number of creeks
and rivers along the route would lend themselves to extended packraft
touring when running near flood stage, but then that's another
sport for another guidebook.)
Current
Streamflow Conditions
The above
table also features links to USGS current streamflow data for
several of the more prominent creeks and rivers along the G.E.T.
in Arizona
and New
Mexico.
In each of
these cases, the measuring gauges are located nearby the route,
so data is "representative" of field conditions as if
you were confronting these bodies of water in real time. However,
in my experience the "gage heights" shown on these graphs
greatly overestimate the actual depth of water that a forder would
confront - perhaps by 200% or more. As well, it is impossible
to compare the current of one creek against another using these
graphs, since a streamflow measurements (in cubic feet per second)
alone say nothing about the creek's width or variance of depth
between banks. More useful is to compare the current flow (discharge)
and gage height of each creek to average (aka mean) conditions
for a given date; at springtime averages, most of these waters
would likely be fordable when arriving on a thru-hiker schedule,
with the possible exception of the lower Gila, San Francisco,
and Rio Grande. But whatever the case, wait until you actually
see the river before deciding what to do. (Please note that the
triangle symbols on the USGS stream discharge graph indicate median
flow for a given date, rather than mean (average), which is listed
in the accompanying table.)
Beyond the
larger creeks and rivers, the USGS site lists additional streamflow
data pertinent to GET hikers, none of it related to fording concerns
along the route, but useful nonetheless in taking a rough sample
of water source conditions along or near the route. (None of this
data should be used to predict the current status of GET sources
not listed on the USGS site, nor those encountered a significant
distance upstream or downstream from the measured location.) These
sources include the following, listed from west to east:
Queen
Creek below Whitlow Dam (well downstream of GET crossing W
of Superior, Queen Creek is usu. dry at the GET)
Aravaipa Creek near Mammoth AZ (downstream of Aravaipa Canyon,
where flow is typically diminished)
Frye
Creek near Thatcher AZ (drains from Mt Graham in the Pinalenos)
Gila
River at head of Safford Valley (route crosses the Gila near
here on road bridge)
Bonita
Creek near Morenci (likely measured downstream of GET crossing)
Mogollon
Creek near Cliff NM (not near the GET, but possibly indicative
of Whitewater Creek & Mogollon Mtn drainages)
Gila
River near Gila NM (not near the GET, but closest measurement
to source waters in the Gila Wilderness)

 |
| Gila
River in springtime: near Kelvin AZ (above)
in the Sonoran
desert; West Fork,
(at right)
300 trail miles to the east in the Gila Wilderness |
|