Black Creek (and Quakake Creek) - Hudsondale (PA Route 93) to mouth


Black Creek (and Quakake Creek), Pennsylvania, US

Disclaimer

Hudsondale (PA Route 93) to mouth

Usual Difficulty II-IV (for normal flows)
Length 6.6 Miles
Avg. Gradient 58 fpm

Gauge Information

Name Range Difficulty Updated Level
Lehigh R bl Francis E Walter Res nr White Haven PA
usgs-01447800 4.00 - 8.40 ft II-IV 00h25m 4.57 ft (running)
Upper limit for best boatability uncertain. Please help your fellow boaters with a comment or report.


River Description

Lat / Longitude data are approximate, from TopoZone.
The first couple of miles are on Quakake Creek; the rest is on Black.
StreamTeam Status: Not Verified
Last Updated: 2003-07-22 12:13:18

Rapid Descriptions

icon of message No rapids entered. If you know names, and locations of the rapids please contact and advise the StreamTeam member for this run.

User Comments

Users can submit comments.
June 2 2016 (841 days ago)
garygentile (156090)
A detailed description of this stream can be found in the "Lehigh River Paddling Guide," which can
be purchased online at http://www.ggentile.com/nonfiction_books.html. Scroll down to the
appropriate title.
September 6 2012 (2206 days ago)
WillBill (154869)
Any ideas as to how much other creeks in the area need to be running at to run this?
August 29 2011 (2581 days ago)
Mark ZakDetails
The last comment about navigability law took place in Virginia, which has much different stream
access laws than PA. Please just put-in in Weatherly, where the visual gauge is anyway. In my
opinion, there's no reason to run the Quakake anyway.
October 4 2009 (3275 days ago)
x (1)
I found out the hard way that legal State navigability doesn't necessarily make you foolproof if a
landowner decides to block your run...The landowner ordered me off the river by shouting then
shooting at me (Amherst Co, Va.) and blasted several bullet holes in my boat--within inches of
me--while I was running a class 3 rapid near the bridge takeout...The sheriff (his cousin) arrested
me for trespassing and the judge (another cousin) threw out the case (knowing I would appeal to
State Court citing the logic of "sheep grazing in cattle country." AWA told me they would support
my case. What a crock! That was 20 years ago and I'm still waiting for a replacement Dagger
canoe... le scott, Carolina Canoe Club
August 17 2009 (3322 days ago)
Drew KmiecDetails
While he may be able to argue the creek is non-navigable, he cannot interfere with boats, at least
as far as I can gather from the state site on the bottom of the page at the state site listed in
previous post: "Can a riparian landowner prevent the public from boating or floating in a
non-navigable water? No, because there's a "navigation servitude" that gives the public the right
to use the water for purposes of navigation only. This servitude does not extend to fishing. Can a
riparian landowner string a cable across a non-navigable waterway? Yes, as long as: 1. the
landowner owns property on both sides of the stream; and 2. the cable doesn't interfere with
navigation. However, from a liability perspective, it may not be a good idea."
August 17 2009 (3322 days ago)
Drew KmiecDetails
Do the rights of the public include being able to cross private property to gain access to the
public waters? Off PA state website - as long as your entrance is legal if he touches your car and
you do not touch his land above the high water mark that guy has no right to tell you what to do -
So don't get out to go to the bathroom on the red-faced prick's land and you should be fine. If he
threatens you or your property I'm pretty sure you could call the police and have him arrested for
vandalism if he touches your car on public lands. Of course, a pleasant attitude usually works
better, but something to keep in the back of your mind in case something does arise. No. The public
does not have a right to cross on private property to gain access to public waters. However, ***if
you enter a public waterway lawfully (e.g., through a public access point), you can wade, boat,
float or otherwise be in the waterway where it passes through private property.***
http://www.fish.state.pa.us/water/public/faq_public_waters.htm
February 13 2007 (4238 days ago)
Art BarketDetails
I have had the same experience with this the landowner on river right. He told us this was a
private creek and told us to leave, even after trying to put in from the municipal land. As we
started packing up without making a big fuss, he offered to let us put on their and we did. I
recomend if you want to paddle this stretch that you knock on his door and ask permission before
you start unloading. If you don't feel like dealing with him put on Hazel Creek (Upper Black that
runs through Weatherly). By the way the Quakake section that he guards is very scenic but is only
has a few class 2 rapids. Hazel Creek is shorter and has better rapids to reach the confluence of
the Black. As far as his rights as a landowner its very questionable, but he would have a chance if
taken to court. Boaters only have established rights on streams that are proven navigable or are
historically navigable. The majority of PA creeks are in a grey area, meaning they aren't proven
navigable, but aren't proven non-navigable either. So if he took the case to court and found the
creek to be non-navigable it would not be legal to boat or fish on it. So please tread lightly and
ask permission.
December 11 2006 (4302 days ago)
Ryan McCallDetails
You just need to be slick to get on the Quakake. Yes there is a red faced fellow that would just as
soon punch hole in your boat than to have you put on the river near his land. Fact of the matter is
the town's Municipal Offices and Public Works land makes up on of the banks at the bridge for route
93. To avoid any headaches though if you drive couple 100 yards in the opposite direction of Jim
Thorpe there is the intersection that you hang a right on to go toward Weatherly. On your right
hand side there is a very small rivulet that feeds into the Quakake. If there is enough water in
that stream then there will be enough water for you to enjoy the ride down the Quakake to the
Black. It also means that you don't have to deal with the folks that own land around the bridge on
93 because you can float the small stream into the main flow. Put in on the tiny stream and get
ready to duck some trees - you'll be at the Quakake in no time and on your way into the Black Creek
Gorge. Very scenic and if the water is pumping, you will be in for a surprise of run once you hit
the confluence of Quakake and Black creek.
July 2 2006 (4464 days ago)
Phil FisherDetails
We had the same problem two years ago. This rather stocky red faced fellow came out as we were
unloading our boats and told us that he could not guarantee the safety of our vehicles. We put-on
in Weatherly too.
January 17 2006 (4630 days ago)
Ryan MoyerDetails
I tried to put in at Route 93 on the side of the bridge with no posted signs and some crazy guy
came out of his house and said this is a private creek. He started to video tape me and said if we
put on the creek he would have us arrested and my car towed (which was not parked illeagally) Does
he have the right to keep people off of "his" creek. Has anybody else had trouble with
this guy. I started on the Black Creek in Weatherly instead.


Do more than just check gauges; join over 5,000 AW members today.


Or, consider donating