I have searched for an answer but I can not seem to find anything. Is the PCD in it's original form gone and everything has moved over to the Paddler Planner site? Or is there another site that I am missing. I have searched in vain for definitive answer, but no luck.

It has migrated to MNCanoeing.com (and taken all the mystery out of both parks).   :P

Important new concerning PCD
  (You need to Login or Register

It's just two threads above this one at the moment.

Yes, it was clunky… eh, so am I. I didn't like it to begin with yet I still miss it. Go figure.

The new version might have a prettier interface, but it is way clunkier in use than the original. My attempts to use it (basically to see what campsites others were referring to in posts) was frustrating enough that I gave up reading posts that refer to PCD numbers.

Solus wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 10:05pm:

The new version might have a prettier interface, but it is way clunkier in use than the original. My attempts to use it (basically to see what campsites others were referring to in posts) was frustrating enough that I gave up reading posts that refer to PCD numbers.

>:(
Agreed

Quote:

I gave up reading posts that refer to PCD numbers.

That might not be such a bad thing?
I like many here installed that Memory Map software from the CD that was going around.

I use that to mark "potential" campsites as well as the ones marked on my McKenzie maps.
For me, those PCD ratings are so subjective, I don't really worry about them being accurate.

I also think that if too many people rely on ratings you get the inevitable overuse of campsites on popular routes.

When the BWJ started doing the ratings on sites, it was the last straw for me.

Since you can camp anywhere in the Q, I don't really worry about finding a site that has been "rated".

For me and maybe some others, I kinda like leaving a little to the thrill of discovery, of finding that hidden gem that isn't marked on a map.

Of course my needs as a solo paddler are much different than a group, but I hate to see some sites get too well known while others becasue of a arbitrary rating get passed by?

If you've paddled for awhile, you can pass close by and pretty much tell if a site is workable regardless if it's marked on some map.

ST -

Completely agreed re: BWJ & campsite reviews!  The only thing THAT piece ever does for me is to nudge me towards WCPP and other less-domesticated places!

I only learned that "PaddlePlanner.com"existed when I could no longer find the PCD... and that only happened since about New Year's.  I'm already devoted to that website, test-driving & documenting 3-4 new "fantasy routes" most weekends (one of the most productive things I do in the hard water season).  I find I don't always agree with what they suggest as "best routing"or with their campsite ratings but, hey, it's entertaining & constructive to figure out the differences/biases. 

It's proving to be a great tool.  My thanks to Wally13 for pointing it out to me!

Jimbo   8-)

Jimbo,
I get they probably think those reviews will get more newbie's into paddling or make people feel more comfortable in a new activity, and they are running a business and so are they're advertisers.

My problem with making things too easy, is that IMHO your going to attract people who becasue everything is laid out for them, might not have that respect for the environment that paddlers who have put in that sweat equity do?

When I stayed this fall on that site on the narrows of upper Cirrus before Sue Falls, you could tell it was a well used/beaten down site.
It was a good location, nice landing and plenty of room for multiple tents, but I have to think becasue it was probably a high rated site, people just kept staying there regardless of how beat up it was becoming.
I only stayed because of a storm and the lateness of the day. Even though there was plenty of downed trees in the woods, people had cut green limbs on just about every decent sized tree, as far up as they could reach.

I do think you can find plenty of decent campsites that either no-one has bothered to notice becasue they were going to rated sites, or are tucked away, those gems you find becasue you took a look sees back in a quiet bay and were pleasantly surprised.

I understand that "clunky" comment about the new PCD site. I found it so much different than the old QJ one, that it took a little getting sued too. Still not as comfortable as before, but it does have some great features and is worth the effort to get to know.

[rant]Lot's of knucklehead posting 3-10 pictures of campsites on there now.  For shits sake man, if Quetico was going to produce a visitors brochure, they would have done so by now.  Keep your campsite rankings to yourself . . . and your kids[/rant]

A lot of the arguments seems to be the same views that were made when the original PCD went online. I always viewed the PCD as a tool, like a map. Something to pour over in the winter months while I dream about my next vacation. I was never so concerned about the ranking more about the known existence of a campsite.

That said PaddlePlanner (MnCanoeing) does seem to have a bit of learning curve, but then I'm sure so did the orginal PCD.

Quote:

My problem with making things too easy, is that IMHO your going to attract people who becasue everything is laid out for them, might not have that respect for the environment that paddlers who have put in that sweat equity do?

Because of its nature, I viewed the PCD as a means for QJ'ers to share information efficiently (not trying to describe campsite location), as we would if we were physically together at some location, sharing a beverage or 6. And as C92 pointed out, a tool for QJ'ers to "pour over in the winter months". The new site is much more modern with tech improvements and also intended for a wider audience. That is both good and bad, the major bad being the one ST pointed out.

I think the location of the info is the key here.
Many of us discovered the PCD here on the QJ after getting a "feel" for our collective groups thoughts on the Q/BWCA.
Same on new site. You have to put in some time, read a little and maybe if a "newbie" get some perspective on the tripping experience.

In the BWJ, you flip open a page and there are those great pics/maps/ the ratings, everything laid out with little or no effort on your part.
I'm waiting for some tech type to do a "Drone" survey of the lakes and portages and post them real time on-line. :'(

solotripper wrote on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 8:49pm:

I'm waiting for some tech type to do a "Drone" survey of the lakes and portages and post them real time on-line. :'(

I'm blaming you ST if I have Google drone chasing me around on my next trip.

So, that was ST's drone chasing me around on my last trip? :o And some complain about skeets? >:(

The PCD served a meaning purpose for me at its inception.
1.) I was not aware that so many (Fisher map) unmarked campsites existed.  I felt alot more comfortable traveling in the Quetico later in the day because of this.
2.) It gave an outlet to share information (give something back), answer an inquiry, etc. (same as does the portage database).

My inquisitiveness mostly satisfied after x number of trips, I don't feel a need to know whats out there anymore.  Its good enough to take what comes.  In the last few years, I have not used it and am not even curious of what the new site offers.

-YB

Chicken092 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 9:51pm:

solotripper wrote on Feb 8th, 2015 at 8:49pm: I'm waiting for some tech type to do a "Drone" survey of the lakes and portages and post them real time on-line. :'( I'm blaming you ST if I have Google drone chasing me around on my next trip.

:o :P The Google Drone would be bad enough, but imagine the AMAZON drone. :-?
In the BWCA you'd have guys getting beers and pizzas delivered or maybe more fishing tackle. ;D ;D

IF my dire predictions ever come true, rejoice in the knowledge you have a "defense" for Drones at least in the BWCA. IF they're no laws governing the use of them, then it's FLYER beware. ;) OS from the size of those skeeters you get in MN, this would work for them too.

  (You need to Login or Register

What kills me is that some people use the PCD to stroke their fragile egos; i.e. "Look where I've been".  There are a few people _{(joe_schmeaux)} who appear to travel around an area for the sole purpose of surveying campsites, snapping photos and then posting a complete review of an entire area.  The only reason someone would feel a need to do that is not for sharing info but for self promotion.

PCD gone? ::)

Gone but not forgotten ;D

  (You need to Login or Register

I've posted a new site or two. But once you post a site and return for another visit and see it's changed, you learn the value of discretion.
Maybe it's good to have some campsites rated on easy to reach lake for the newbies to get started.
Personally I don't need a 5 star site so much anymore.

Tools......I like em and have a fairly substantial collection. I see the PCD as a tool. When I first came to this site I spent a few hours going over some campsites and if nothing else it stoked my anticipation level. I respectfully acknowledge the people who spent time putting it together and contributing.

But like Jim J I don't think so much about campsites unless I'm running late and daylight is fading. Then pretty much anything will do and I'm generally glad to see some flat ground.

On the other hand if I were base camping and taking my family and knew next to nothing about what to expect I can see the PCD as having quite a bit of value.