Quote:


OT:  On our campsite on Jake Lake many years ago we had a cairibou lumber through our campsite and proceed to swim across the lake.  We were in our canoes at the time and were able to paddle up to the animal and watch it from about 25 feet or so as we followed it to the other side.  Cool stuff.

Here is the info you are looking for:

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

Note that the way that visitors are counted is not the same for the BWCA and the Q so you are comparing apples to oranges as far as a direct comparison.

But the Q numbers bear out the trend I've been noticing firsthand over the past several years.  Useage is dropping pretty fast.  I'm seeing far fewer and sometimes no people at all on lakes that used to be on the verge of being crowded.

There is a point where TOO few visitors would be a concern but we're not there yet IMHO.  If this lower useage remains the status quo we will probably see the park begin to feel a bit wilder again as the human footprint falls more softly on the land.

Does anybody have any information on how the numbers of Quetico entry permits has varied over the years and decades. My dad's first trip up there was around 1959, I think, and my maiden voyage was in 1980. I went on my seventh trip in 1992, and didn't get back there again until 2008, but I have to say, the park really seems to have taken on a different feel the last time I was there. The park seems just a tad less "wildernessy" to me, and there seemed to be more people than I ever remember. I guess it seemed like a really wild place in the late 50's/early 60's when my dad was going.

ripple,

They estimate approximately 600 or so woodland caribou in the park, I think.  During two 12-14 day trips, I've never seen one but I've seen plenty of droppings, particularly on small island nurseries in the very early summer.  The park can provide you with maps to show what lakes are most frequently by these caribou.  Certain habitats give them a better shot at survival vis a vis the wolves.

Jimbo   

I travel from Iowa and have had numerous trips in Quetico and (more recently, for cost and access ease) BWCAW.  Have never seen a woodland caribou.  Are they doing pretty well up at WCPP, as the name would suggest?  (ps, rarely post, but much enjoy reading the forums)

DD's assessment lines up well with my personal experience... which isn't too surprising since half of MY experience was pretty much the same as half of HIS experience!  

Trees are more sparse & shorter in much of WCPP.  The sections of WCPP we travelled this past year had their share of "vertical" terrain, though.  Once you get past the fly-in lakes w/grandfathered resorts, it's all yours baby; there ain't much of anything else.  The park exudes "wilderness".  As mentioned campsites - where you can find them - are often ancient, with shrubs growing in the fire rings.  Tent pads tend to be fewer & smaller.  Canoe traffic off the beaten track is virtually non-existent.  We spent 14 days there in late last June/early July.  We saw NO other canoeists on the water (though there were some girls camped on our entry lake, Lund Lake, as we were leaving).

WCPP hasn't put in the same fishing restrictions as Quetico... yet.  You can use your barbed hooks still.  I think lake trout fishing is a good deal easier in WCPP than Quetico.  However, if you like smallmouth fishing, best to stick w/Quetico.

While WCPP may not offer the variety of trees as Quetico, there are some striking differences in terms of the smaller flowering plants.  There are definite influences from the western prairies.  Also, thick carpets of luxuriant caribou seem more plentiful in WCPP.

I love both Quetico & WCPP.  I'll be heading back to Quetico on an "old man's trip" this year... a kind of "milk run" trip.  I'd characterize WCPP as more of a young man's park (ok... make that "young person's park").  You'll be roughing it more in WCPP.  There seems to me more of sense of wilderness.  It's a place that FEELS like something wild can happen at any moment and that you'd better keep your eyes open or you will miss that bear, caribou, or moose.  Better keep an eye on the ridgeline across the water; you might just see a bear flipping over rocks looking for grubs.  Also, you keep your eyes peeled for portages... otherwise you might not ever find them.  They can be nearly invisible.

You can say much the same for portions of Quetico, too.  Yet, in Quetico, there are times I feel a little more rushed about securing that decent campsite before some other paddling party beats me there.   In WCPP, the feeling is more like you'd WELCOME seeing another paddler after several days of keeping your own company.

Both are great parks.  Experience will vary according to what you are after and whom you are traveling with.

Jimbo  

Thanks DD
I really wasn't sure what to expect as far as topography goes. All I know is I can't wait. Yeehaw! It's coming up baby!! I'm going to be lovin life!!!

When are you going in? Maybe I'll run across you. We can eat a meal and talk shop for a few minutes............ It's on me, I insist, I'll even pick up the tip.

If you go in before me don't tell the "denizens of the deep" I'm coming..........
I prefer it to be a surprise .

DD outlined it nicely, but it should be noted that Quetico is more of a hassle to get a permit, more expensive (unless coming in from North or are Canadian) and also native People have motor rights to lakes on west side.
And then there is Wabakimi...

Thx, DD.  That's a great compare/contrast summary of two unique paddling areas.

Here are my votes for various aspects of each park:

Scenery:  Quetico ... more vertical dimension and more variety of tree species; WCPP is somewhat flatter and fewer large trees (if you are a food pack hanger, there will be challenges).

Portages:  Quetico for condition and ease of finding; WCPP for fewer rock gardens and distance (on average, they seem shorter to me)

Fishing:  Quetico for better variety of species by lake; WCPP has more selective species per lake...all have pike, others have walleye but no trout (and vice versa), some have all three species; small mouth action in a very few spots.  WCPP has the edge as far as size of fish and ease of catching

Bugs:  I've probably been lucky.  The past two seasons, I've made trips to WCPP in June and July.  Bugs didn't seem bad at all either time (and WCPP has no tick population).

Weather:  WCPP has more lightening strikes (most in Ontario I've been told) and because the terrain is flatter, wind can be more of problem ... both are influenced by the Manitoba plains to the west.

People & solitude:  WCPP has been a case of hot and cold for me.  On my first trip, I only saw 3 other canoeist over 12 days (beyond my own group).  Last year, I stopped counting at about 18 in 10 days.  However, as a general rule, I think you could expect to see fewer people in WCPP (annual permits tend to run under 1000 per year, where they are more like 30,000 for Quetico).

Signs of civilization:  Since WCPP is a newer park (and some of the older outposts have a grand father clause exemption), you will find more establishing/operating cabins inside the park.  And although new limits will be imposed in July, there will still be 4 lakes for fly-in traffic INSIDE the park.  (I'm assuming other lakes will continue to have fly-in traffic because of private ownership of cabins).  

Hassle factor:  It takes longer for most travelers to reach WCPP.  There is town access (Red Lake) on the east side.  No significant development on the west side.  EP's tend to be on either east or west, and I'm guessing in excess of 80% of non-flyin's use the east side.  East side has 4 significant EP's and west side is essentially 2.  The other issue of significance here is that you don't need an advanced permit to enter the park, i.e., no reservation required.  And, since this park doesn't border the US, camping fees are consistent with a north-side entry into Quetico.

Which do I prefer?  Hard question.  My single trip this year will be to WCPP.  (In the past 2 years I've made 2 trips ... one to each park.)  I love Quetico for the sheer beauty and because it offers a wider fish species selection on most lakes.  I like WCPP because it feels more like wilderness and less like park.  For example (from my limited experience) it is not uncommon to wind up on a campsite in WCPP with grass and small plants growing in the middle of the fire ring.  (I guess I should add that finding a campsite on WCPP can be a bit more of a challenge ... even some of the "park registered" campsites are either non-existent or in the wrong place ... and don't plan to drive a stake in the ground just anywhere (or at all in some places).  I guess I should add that because of historically limited staff at WCPP, they only plan to have a portage crew cover the trails on a 4-year rotation basis (with an obvious bias toward the eastern side of the park).

dd