I'm planning a solo trip in Sept. starting at Beaverhouse. I've put in there a few times but have always been driven in by an outfitter and never paid too close attention to the trail. I don't remember it being a direct route in. Does anyone have any advice / experience that would help me navigate the trail?

Jimmar,
 I've never driven in myself, but have been there many times via Quetico Dave.
 On the way in from the highway, be sure to keep to right side of road, and IF you see an oncoming dust cloud, get over as far as you can, or even pull off a little if possible.
 The logging trucks run this road, and they get paid by the load ;)
They run fast and don't always keep to THEIR right, so just be aware.
There's big sign announcing  the turn into Beaverhouse, and the trail winds in, with a few places you could turn off, but the MAIN trail is easy to follow, you shouldn't have any trouble.
A few spots can get flooded over if they've had a lot of rain, but the roadbed is solid, and every time I've gone in, there have been just as many small compact cars as PU and SUV's.
 I haven't been in 2 years, but I know they did a recent parking lot improvement, so I'm "guessing" they probably made sure the trail is in good shape as well.
 Sept is a nice time to be in park. Enjoy the trip.
Do you have a route planned yet?

ST, They parked a large rock in the middle of the road blocking the last ~50', or what was the old unloading/parking area. They want everybody to use a larger parking area just back some up the last hill. There is a small turn around and unload area near the rock,,,some are still parking there, even though it's well signed to use the parking area farther back.

Hi, Jimmar.

We used that entry last June.  The gravel road is not bad as far as gravel roads go, although get going too fast and one tends to slide a little.  We made the mistake of taking the left fork a few hundred yards or so before the actual left fork to the put in...I think the road was called "Surprise" and we followed it for about 15 minutes before turning back...I think the word I used to describe that detour wasn't much of a "Surprise".    >:(  ;)

 

ST,

Thanks for the info. I thinking about an idea Jim Clark gave me, that is cruising the shoreline of Quetico Lake with my kayak. I'd like to get into Jean Lake since I skipped it on my trip last spring. If I do and like it maybe I'll abandon the shorline cruise ( or at least shorten it ) and paddle around on Jean for a few days. This would be my first solo and my first trip in a kayak. I'm not too sure how the kayak will portage so I have a few bugs to work out before I go.

Jimmar,

That's a good idea, Quetico lake has some real nice campsite's and back bays on the south shore heading toward Jean. If you get to Jean, and the water level is up, don't forget to check out the creek between CONK lk and Jean? Flow is out from Jean, BUT people have reported coming and going when water level is right. With shallow draft kayak, it would save you portage except for the one into Conk?
Do you have portage yolk for kayak?
Here's one, I've seen others similar. Little pricey, but a few tough portages and that doesn't seem to be an issue ;)
    (You need to Login or Register

 JJS,
 I'm not surprised that people park illegally after the parking lot redo.
I've seen people camp there a few times and when I mentioned it was "illegal", they got a pissy with me. Sadly too say they were ALL Americans that had come in from the west, and either hadn't gotten any info from the Park HQ, and were wind bound, planning on heading to Ranger station next morning. They ALL had fires going, which is he biggest concern, especially in dry weather.
 Quetico Dave said that there is a group of outfitters, that want to restrict the entry points to thru outfitters only (transportation), to eliminate the fire hazard and trash, plus the opportunity for vehicles to be vandalized/broken into? Looking for a revenue source as well.
 I imagine that IF the ILLEGAL parking gets out of hand, they end up towing the vehicles and you'll pay a fine/impound fee and towing costs.
THAT would be a rude awakening, hitting the takeout and your vehicle not there :o " DUDE" Where's my car ;D

Flanders Road is a good road, recently widened and new class 5 - not much logging going on down there these days either.  The road down to the trail head is marked by a large Green Ontario Park / Queitico sign so it's not easy to miss IMO.  Just take that left and the road narrows after a while.  Easy travel jimmar!

solotripper wrote on Aug 10^th, 2009 at 6:27pm:

Do you have portage yolk for kayak?

I have a clamp on yoke, that I used for an old canoe I once had. I adapted (meaning: used duct tape and drill press, the cut it down) for the kayak combing last night. Carried the yak around the yard, looks like it'll work :)

The road into Beaverhouse was much improved this July from what I remember 10+ years ago.  Easy to follow signs, etc.  Wouldn't be a problem with just about any vehicle.  We didn't meet any vehicles on a Sunday AM.

First time in there (1997?) somebody broke (busted the vent window) into my Jeep, left the tools, cassette tapes, clothes for the takeout, etc - only took some brake fluid and motor oil - guess you do what you have to >:(

I agree with those that said the road between Hwy 11 and the Beaverhouse parking lot is a decent road.  Back in the day, it was difficult to get in there without the clearance of a truck.  Nowadays, a car would get you there just fine.  Might have to take it a little easy in a couple spots, but they're not a big deal.

And honestly, if you can't find your way to the parking lot with the signs they have on the road, both on Hwy 11 and the gravel road heading south, you're blind.  It's 14 miles from blacktop to parking lot with no turns that don't have signs.

If the outfitters get their way and Beaverhouse becomes an "Outfitters Only" entry point, I would not be a happy man.  I have not heard this before and I doubt it would happen anyway.  We fully outfit ourselves, other than the occasional solo canoe from Q-Dave, so this would not be a good thing for us.

Paddlerpj,
 I had a "bad" experience backpacking in the Porcupine Mts back in the late 70's, it left an indelible mark.
Four of us came out of the park to find that vandals/thief's, had stole ALL our street clothes, tool box, cooler, cut radiator hose's, cut fan belt, cut battery cables and stole battery, and broke the front windshield.
No cell phones in that day, I hitched into nearest town, and found service station and had it towed in for repair.
It was my brothers BORROWED 4x4. Cost me $500, big money back then. WE made a police report, and the detective told us about a guy who they KNEW in a local village, fenced stolen property. WE made a little visit and recovered thee tool box and a few clothes, a story better left for another time ;)
From that day on, I've NEVER left a vehicle in back country, other than for day trips.

Jackfish,
 There's "local" politics involved in the OUTFITTER only idea. Sadly some AMERICANS do their part to fuel the idea. ALL of the illegal campers I've seen are from here. Unfortunately some people from the US "think" that the rules don't apply when their in a foreign country.
That attitude, plus some outfitters clients have had their vehicles vandalized/stolen property, gives rise to the idea that IF no-one parks there, the problem goes away?
 Tribal politics might be involved as well? I had one Native Ranger tell me that since many people don't check in at ranger station because they have their permits/licenses all ready, that "he" didn't know who was in legal or not? He said that they had caught people who came in with O paperwork and just thought they could get away with it?
 Politics/Control and Income issues, are all in play. Don't know if it will EVER happen, but morons, especially US grown ones, parking illegally won't help any that's for sure :( I figure one good fire from an illegal campfire there would probably get the ball rolling?

solotripper wrote on Aug 10^th, 2009 at 6:27pm:

Quetico Dave said that there is a group of outfitters, that want to restrict the entry points to thru outfitters only

C'mon ST, you know better than that.

You park anywhere at your own risk so just be mindful of what you leave in plain site and last I checked the parking lots that I have visited this year (BH, Nym, Lerome) were not littered and I can't recall a time when I have picked up garbage at an access point with the exception of Nym Lake, whose parking lot hosts the local garbage bin.  No one is camping at trail heads either.  Although i've witnessed folks dozing in their truck bed before, by the look of it, it was after they got out of the park. Lastly, Americans are not sneaking into the park at a rate that you seem to suggest.  Spending an extra day?  Possibly, but certainly nothing to the likes of what you or an Outfitter might suggest.

So, can we please stop dispelling rumors, speculation, exaggeration, half truths or outright lies about this subject and stick to the facts please.   [smiley=dankk2.gif]

I would suggest a reading of the   (You need to Login or Register, pages 65-66 on proposed changes for visitor use as there is no mention of restricting access for the purposes proposed here.  In fact, I would suggest that they are trying to implement changes in the exact opposite direction.

Well PJ,
 I have first hand knowledge, of the Native ranger telling me what I said, and the camping illegally was a first hand encounter as well.
 Quetico Dave's comment was told too me after MY encounter with the illegal campers at Beaverhouse. I have NO reason too doubt what he told me. The local outfitters are NOT all in agreement with how the park is run, I would say that it's probably the same in the BW.
 I NEVER said that I knew Americans were sneaking into the park, BUT that a Native Ranger told me that.
I stick by what I was told, but since you don't know me personally, and haven't experienced it, I can see why your dubious, and others will be as well.
As for the Quetico Planning document, that's what the government is proposing, like any issue, not all the locals are necessarily in agreement with it. Remember TRIBAL concerns and THEIR economic interests are in play here too.
 
Quote:

rumors, speculation, exaggeration, half truths or outright lies

 Is 1st person encounters a rumor? Speculation? maybe, the rest, your way off base.
 
 Since I can't PROVE my statements, I agree, I will refrain from saying anything more on the subject.

Please take no offence ST - but if it was an issue it would have been brought up so it could have been implemented or at least talked about.  Outftters and the 1st Nation have a direct line of communication with the MNR as well.  However, it was not.  

How does one illegally camp in Quetico while on at Beaverhouse though?  It's not in the park.  

BTW, a native Ranger at BH once told me that day, he caught 40 walleye in one hour at the outlet of the river from Quetico to BH too.  "Really?" I said.  "Yup, 40 just this morning."  Funny, since we were there at 8am and the motor wasn't on his boat AND his wife had to get him out of bed.  So, I wouldn't believe everything I hear nor would I repeat it unless I could verify it with a secondary, reliable and credible source.  But thats just me.

Beaverhouse /or parking lot is not in the Q?....what did I miss?  My maps show the parking inside Q borders as well...It's a Fisher and always suspect though.  Perhaps I should go back and re-read this entire thread.

Let me spread some rumors as well...I've met and seen Americans in the park without a Q permit on more than one occasion...6 days to boot.  Some got caught though at PP.  My OPINION...I bet it happens all the time.

Some folks might even say that Wally has snuck into the Q....but that's second hand rumor.

I buy the idea that local Canadian outfitters want restricted access through themselves.  IMO...they are cutting their own throat.  But I don't give a hoot...their park/their rules.  I think their recent rule changes/fee changes over the last two years are bitting them....but that's only opinion as well.

So many questions . . .

Do you people ask for other people's permits?  Or, do they volunteer the info?  How do you get so close to people to have a conversation?  Do you paddle up to people?  They paddle up to you?  If so, why don't you paddle away from them?  Where are you having all this interpersonal communication in the Quetico?  (You must enter from the  PP Interstate down south I assume)

I've heard that the PhantomJug has spent unpaid nights in the Q too - but 6?  C'mon.  Look, I'm sure it's happened but certainly not enough to warrant the emergency flag that ST threw up here.  If an outfitter is going to live and work right next door to gov't controlled real estate that they depend on for a living, well . . . you get what you get I'm afraid.  While they offer a service for many people I'm sure, no one owes them a living.  

And Wally, BH is not in the park.  You enter the park once you complete the portage into no name, quetico or the river on the west.

I can't believe you guys have so many conversations with other people up there though ? ? ?  Ive frequented Quetico 2 or more times per year since 1993 and can recall maybe 2 times when I had a conversation with someone other than an MNR ranger.  Weird.

My only point here is that I believe ST regurgitated some things he probably heard that I have to believe that even HE thinks are moot, insignificant political issues for the purpose of exaggerating a point.  There is no "Illegal camper" crisis or "trail head camping" crisis.  What we have are whining outfitters, tribal ranger and hear-say.

[

  I don't take offense, I don't expect anyone/everyone too believe the way I do or for that matter believe me.
 I can only say that like most people, my personal experiences shape what I say here.
 The outfitters and the 1st Nation do have a direct line of communication, I don't know IF they debate among themselves and their concerns are then put in one statement, or everyone gets a say?


Quote:

How does one illegally camp in Quetico while on at Beaverhouse though?  It's not in the park.

 It's my understanding that's it's illegal to camp in the BH parking lot OVERNIGHT or have fires, unless you go thru an outfitter and for whatever reason, you couldn't enter the park that day? I'm not positive, but I believe that there was a sign posted in Beaverhouse lot telling users that.  I know the time I went in thru Stanton Bay, I spent the night before camped in parking lot, with another couple that got there late. I was told, they told me that as long as we went thru outfitter, we were okay?
 The 1st Nation ranger that told me that, said that people were parking in Beaverhouse lot, and paddling in. When asked by him, he claimed that a number of them had NO park permits.
 Maybe he was the 40 walleye guy.
 My point was that WE shouldn't give the  "whiners", as you call them, ANY reason to point to "alleged illegal" activity as a reason to make
Beaverhouse like Stanton Bay.


Quote:

author=Jim J Solo link=1249906901/0#2 date=1249917714]ST, They parked a large rock in the middle of the road blocking the last ~50', or what was the old unloading/parking area. They want everybody to use a larger parking area just back some up the last hill. There is a small turn around and unload area near the rock,,,some are still parking there, even though it's well signed to use the parking area farther back.

 I ALWAYS have people paddle over if they pass by, or hail me when I pass their campsites. Maybe it's the solo thing, They either think I know "something", or want too ask how I can be up there all alone.

I believe you ST - It's the exaggeration and inflation of these so called "crisis" that have me miffed.  I'm curios to how anyone can get a vehicle past the rocks separating the old parking lot from the new one too?  There's barely room to walk through there?  Lastly, there are no signs at the BH lot - the only sign I have seen that says "no overnight camping" is at Lerome; which is private property BTW, allowed by the good graces of the land owner.  Stanton Bay is also private property, only he/she apparently has a deal with the Outfitters only.  The other northern entry parking areas are Crown land.


Quote:

I ALWAYS have people paddle over if they pass by, or hail me when I pass their campsites. Maybe it's the solo thing, They either think I know "something", or want too ask how I can be up there all alone.

I would paddle away in the opposite direction.  I've had a friendly "wave" at the campsite before and passing on portages but if I wanted company I would go the BWCA.   ;D

I can't say about the getting by the new rock thing?
The sign, well since it's been 2 years since I've been able to do a trip, maybe it was taken down?
I could "swear" there was a sign about "overnight" camping, and fires?
Anyway, I can "see" your point, that's what "reasonable discourse is all about" ;)

hope my post didn't spark a rift between two of my favorite contributors. Seems like healthy disagreement so far.

PJ - 40 Walleyes what was he using a gill net?

ST - 70's "street" clothes, you should be glad they were stolen.

It's all good jimmar.   ;)


jimmar wrote on Aug 12^th, 2009 at 12:47am:

PJ - 40 Walleyes what was he using a gill net?

Pretty sure he was using his imagination.  I know it's one of my best lures.   ;D

Let me help about the rock thing. The rock separates the new unloading area from the old parking/unloading area. The signs tell you to park farther back after unloading in this new area.

All my maps show BH lake as in the park.

Jimmar, If you try portaging kayak gear,i.e. lots of small bags,,,try a sling over your neck & shoulders and carabiner the bags together at the ends of the sling,,,trouble then is keeping them out from your legs as you walk.

Continue as you were.

Beaverhouse Lake is in Quetico Park.  

Is not.  Sorry guys but you do not need a Q permit to be on BH.  Only a crown land camping permit.  Thats why they call the 3 access points on the lake "ENTRY" points.  thats where you ENTER the park. I don't care where your maps show the lines, BH is not in the park.

What map are you looking at PJ?  I think it's a nasty rumor that BH lake has been removed form the park.

PJ...Ususally when you see someone, if you want info...you say "hi" and then you start up a conversation.  Folks won't bite you!  And besides...you've had your rabies shots!  You often hear the strangest things (exagerations?)  Watched 'em get a ticket at PP...they spilled their guts.  After the fiasco...we talked.

I call BULL on PJ's BH lake issue.  If wrong, I will humbly bow and send a pint/1/5th of his fav drink.  Hoping I'm right (but I do not have a clue....as my cupboard is bare of Bailey's, I'm desperate).

I need some of this....
  (You need to Login or Register

If someone can show me a "Beaverhouse" entry permit I will eat your . . .  well, I don't know what I'll eat but I'll wait to see the permit.  10 bucks that it says a "#31 - Cirrus Lake, #32 - Quetico Lake or if you went west, #41 - Threemile Lake.

You can keep your Bailey Wally.

I'm waiting . . . . . .

PJ....the issue is to the location of BH lake....IN Park or OUT of Park.
Those were your words...I don't care what a permit says....the real question is
......BH LAKE....in or out....for a bottle????

deal?

I'm waiting....
I loose and you get your fav sipping stuff

Not in the park based on the fact that one does not need a Quetico camping permit to be there - only a crown land camping permit.  Anyone can drive to the BH parking lot (one reason for the lot expansion) launch a canoe and camp on the lake without ENTERING the park.  So, it's out.  Ditto with French lake although my maps show a fuzzy red line around that lake too.

So, to recap....
Do you need a Quetico Camping permit to camp in Quetico Park?  Yes.
Do you need a Quetico Camping permit to camp on BH?  No
Logic, and the real Park Boundaries here as demonstrated by park rules and by definition will demonstrate that BH, as a whole, is not a Quetico Lake.  I say "as a whole" because of changing high water levels.  Like when the BH Ranger station was underwater one year.  Then I suppose BH was encroaching over the park boundary.

I'll stop in when I'm down that way Wally.  We can go to the store together where I can pick out a bottle.   ;D

Absolutely, positively BH is in Quetico Park.  And absolutely and positively, you need a permit to camp on BH.  A few years ago, we talked to the Park Ranger on BH and he was looking for a couple who entered BH without a permit.  We knew which couple he was talking about and told him where they were camping and he made them leave.  We talked to the ranger before and after the eviction.  

I think you could canoe and fish on BH without a permit, but you can not camp without a permit.

When you make a reservation, they ask you two questions.  First what is your "access"  point and what is your entry point.  BH is your access point and then either Quetico Lake or Cirrus is your entry point.

The Ranger I talked to said he caught a 30 pound lake trout.  Do I believe him.  Sure I do.  I want to believe there are 30 pound lake trout in BH.

Westwood

The problem PJ is that you've  got to talk to more people when you're out there camping! ;D ;D


IN THE PARK dude...I'll be in Bemidji this weekend!  Wife says the Bailey's is a "sissy drink" but hey I love 'em.
  (You need to Login or Register   (You need to Login or Register

Really Westwood?  You actually paddled around a 7000 acre lake to find a camper on the lake, were able to pinpoint their location and set the Ranger straight?  AND, you knew they were there illegally AND you hung around after the arrest to see the results?  And this was a "few" years ago?  At least be believeable with your story.  A few Years ago, they were having trouble staffing the BH ranger station so having a ranger their that actually gave a crap is really questionable.  I've never been asked what my access point is either.  If I'm ENTERING the park at Quetico isn't it obvious what my access (whatever that means) is?  If a ranger legitimately asked me if I knew about some illegal campers I would look him in the eye and say;  "What?  How the hell do I know.  I just paddled two miles across the lake from the parking lot.  How the hell do I know if someone is here illegally?"

I don't want to have to pull rank on you guys but owning property in Ontario has it's privileges.  BH is not considered being IN the park.  If you go to reserve a permit today they will ask; "What entry point would you like?"  And you say - "Oh we just want to be on BH for the week."  They will tell you to call the MNR or go down to Walt's Dry Goods and get a Crown Land Camping permit.

The BH Ranger tracking down campers on BH?  PuhLEASE!!!  He's too busy catching 40 walleye in one hour.

Your wife is right Wally.

How long 'till PJ admit's BH is in the park?  I'm too thirsty.
I say he caves and admits his mistake by next Mon.



PJ "pulling rank" and teaching Wally a thing or two about park boundaries.....
  (You need to Login or Register   (You need to Login or Register

BEAVERHOUSE IS IN THE PARK YOU MAGGOT!!!
  (You need to Login or Register   (You need to Login or Register

I just spoke to the park office (10 minutes ago) in Atikokan because I want to enter at Beaverhouse on 9/7 when the quota expires. When I asked if I could enter on 9/6 and camp on Beaverhouse with a just Crown Land permit they said no, I still need an entry permit. They told me that Beaverhouse is in the park.

That is info I'm going with, but I have enjoyed the debate and the wagering.

The jury is still out.  I'm awaiting a return call from my MNR friend.  There may be a mis-trial here though . . . . I'll keep you posted.   [smiley=thumbup.gif]

jimmar wrote on Aug 12^th, 2009 at 12:47am:

hope my post didn't spark a rift between two of my favorite contributors. Seems like healthy disagreement so far. PJ - 40 Walleyes what was he using a gill net? ST - 70's "street" clothes, you should be glad they were stolen.

 What are you taking about WILLIS ;D
Check out the kids music-fests, the bell bottoms/platform shoes and acid died t-shirts are coming back ;)
 I'll get too wear that NEHRU jacket again IF the current trend keeps up 8-)

Quote:

The Ranger I talked to said he caught a 30 pound lake trout.  Do I believe him.  Sure I do.  I want to believe there are 30 pound lake trout in BH.

 Right out from put-in on Beaverhouse after you get out of the "river", there is a big hole, that I saw a a young lady pull up a huge Lake trout out of! She was with a guy, and there were 2 other gals in kayaks.
 She caught it on a yellow curly tail jig. I paddled by, just as it hit the surface. It was easily 20#+. The guy with her in the stern said that all the while she was reeling it in, he told her that it was just a big dead log.
When it got close enough to see, she freaked out, and when it finally hit the surface, she barely could compose herself long enough too reach over and get the jig loose. The Laker lay on its side for a moment and then headed for the hole again.
 She said that was the biggest fish she had ever caught, and her male companion said that NOW that was all they were going too hear about the rest of the trip ;D
 I usually camp on Beaverhouse the night before pick-up by Q-Dave, and when the ranger comes around in the evening checking campsites, he's trolling for a Laker supper.
I think BH gets overlooked as a fishing lake by trippers who want to get into the park. I think if you had a fish/depth finder, and could find the "holes", you would be surprised what you might catch ;)

BH is an excellent fishing lake passed over by 99% of the people that just want to get into the park.  At the very least one should pull a Rapala or "deep diving something" once you can't see bottom out of the swamp.  On several occasions we have camped at the sandy beach site just before the rapids/portage but the bears became a little too friendly after a while.  The location ST speaks of is a baitfish black hole when the wind is from the west.

(I'm not trying to change the subject here either - just commenting on the recent topic.)

Check your PM wally.  Too sensitive to post I'm afraid.

Sorry.

While we await a verdict here lets pass some time.

Phantom Jug tag line:

Quote:

Someday they will name a lure after me.

How's this:
  (You need to Login or Register

A Bass Lure????  I was thinking that Rapala might develop a sister company with a new product line or . . . maybe just rename the Jig to the Jug.  :)

"Wow, what did you catch that on?" /  "Oh, I was just verticle Jugging with a leech."  

Or, "How many 1/8 oz. Jugs you got?"

Or, "Cast your Jug near that rock pile; You'll be sure to catch something."

Thats perfect.  You will all now refer to the "Jig" as the "Jug"!

Hi all, just thought I'd weigh in on the whole "Is it in? or is it out?" thread.

Beaverhouse is mos def in Q, and you need a park permit to camp on it.  Check out the park maps.  The entry permits are for the most common routes of entry, not necesarily the lake that you go in on- they sort of cover a geography, if you get my drift.  

My thoughts.

On the PCD, it looks like the parking lot is outside the park.

beefman

PH

You really are sounding desperate.  I won't dignify your response other than to say that you are incorrect, you misread the facts and you made assumptions not warranted.

If you can't win on the facts or logic, then you insult the other person and declare yourself the winner.

Plus, I am willing to take any bet you want to make about whether BH is inside the park.

Westwood

Well, by PJ's logic, it's going to be a mess trying to figure out which lakes are in the park and out of the park down by PP.  Down there, the entry points are Basswood River, Sarah, Kashahpiwi, Agnes, and Carp.  Those are all quite a ways from PP.

So apparently next time I go to North Bay I won't need a park permit, just a crown land fee.  Also, Isabella, the S-Chain, and a host of other lakes should also require just a crown land fee and no reservations since you have to go thru them to get to an entry point lake.

Enjoy your Bailey's, Wally!

Gotta jump in on PJ's behalf (sort of). My understanding is you do not enter the park until you portage into Quetico from Beaverhouse. Not sure about when you officially enter going in other directions.

J

We will wait till wally reads his PM.  "Why just Wally?" you ask.  Well, I can trust him with the data provided (and there's a bottle of whisky in it for me  ;) ).  Not that I can't trust any of you as well, it's just that I chose to limit my dissemination of the "facts" at the request of a friend.  Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong, maybe we are all wrong or even all right.  I'll let him decide.

BTW - I didn't attack anyone here either.  I just happen to be privvy to some sources regarding many issues around Atikokan - thats all.

I'm on 24 hr call ....y'all

....this will have to wait until tomorrow....promise I will come by and comment

waiting with baited breath until then!

Quote:

I just happen to be privvy to some sources regarding many issues around Atokokan - thats all.

Atikoken has issues?  Well gooooooooolly.  Love the Gomer/Sgt Carter poster, Wally - made my day.

-YB

Atikokan has many secrets . . .  ::)

We will wait on the good doctor then.  See ya tomorrow.   8-)

Sure is humorous following this thread.  IMHO, it's like telling PJ that the sky is blue, only to have him argue against it.

Beaverhouse Lake is inside the boundaries of Quetico Provincial Park.  No ifs, ands or buts about it.  Look at any map - Fisher, McKenzie or whatever - the entire lake is inside the boundary.

I'm not looking to win a beer out of this thing.  I'm simply amazed that it's even a thread.

Indeed, BH is clearly in the park.  This does not preclude the possibility that PJ could go with a Crown Land permit & get away with it, even if stopped by rangers.  After all, he's got that jug hidden to offer up in case of emergency.  ;)

Quote:

I just happen to be privy to some sources regarding many issues around Atokokan - thats all.

I thought that was what got this whole thing going, ME quoting a "source" about the "issues" around Atikokan/Park ;D
 Whoever wins the "jug", Wally or PJ, I think I should get a short snort out of it for "sparking" the discussion ::)

After PJ has called a "Official Time Out" to review the replay tape....I have decided one thing....PJ does have a "secret source" that makes him feel as if he's right.

Now I'm inclined to disagree with his source, but I do agree that a truce should be called.  But I will say that he's on thin ice...but yes, I will call uncle and concede to a truce :D

I will concede that there is some "gray area" here too.  It's kind of like going to the American tobacco store and asking "Where's the Cubans?"  "Cubans?  We don't have no Cuban's here"

Well, for some of us there are no Cubans in the store but for others . . . "I'll check in back.  Hold on."   ;)

It was a great debate however - sure to go down in the annals of QJ history.

I will have to check my dictionary on the definition of debate.  I don't think this was a debate.

If I put lipstick on BH would that put it inside the park?

Westwood

PhantomJug wrote on Aug 13^th, 2009 at 9:49pm:

I will concede that there is some "gray area" here too.  It's kind of like going to the American tobacco store and asking "Where's the Cubans?"  "Cubans?  We don't have no Cuban's here" Well, for some of us there are no Cubans in the store but for others . . . "I'll check in back.  Hold on."   ;)

But isn't that the point, PJ?  All us mere mortals care about is the laws that us mere mortals must follow.  The concerns of the gods are not the concerns of mere men.  We just try not to get struck by stray lightning bolts when a god awakens from his slumbers in a contrary mood.

Snow_Dog wrote on Aug 13^th, 2009 at 11:11pm:

But isn't that the point, PJ?  All us mere mortals care about is the laws that us mere mortals must follow.  The concerns of the gods are not the concerns of mere men.  We just try not to get struck by stray lightning bolts when a god awakens from his slumbers in a contrary mood.

Not me.  I want to try & sneak behind the curtain from time to time.

double post

Here is a picture of my kayak yoke. I have been using it for 4 years and it works well.

---

If a kayaker is paddling a kayak on Beaverhouse Lake while in possession of that portage yoke, would he or she be inside the boundaries of Quetico Provincial Park?   ::)

kstarr215 wrote on Aug 14^th, 2009 at 5:31pm:

Here is a picture of my kayak yoke. I have been using it for 4 years and it works well.

I like it. The slip on / bungi cord attachment looks alot easier and quicker than my improvised clamp on.