Simblissity home > G.E.T.



A Prerequisite
Trails & Terrain
Following the Route
Resupplying
Itinerary
Hiking Pace
Camping
Permits
Weather
Water Sources
Snow Travel
Creek Fording
Precautions

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 





3Trek Planner:
Snow Travel

 

Copyright © 2004-2008 Simblissity Ultralight