Here's the scenario:

You intend on staying two nights on a lake that has two obvious campsites. The next lake is farther than you intend on traveling that day but decent and doable with some effort. It only has one mediocre campsite.

One of the two sites on this lake is awesome with a big front porch and 4 great tent pads but it's beat (over used). The other kind of sucks with four obvious tent pads, one good, the others progressively less so and the landing is a challenge so it's rarely used and in rather good shape.

Both are open and within sight and earshot of each other and you know there is a big group behind you although they were far enough back that all you can make out is four identical canoes and a number of figures moving around.

Q: As a solo or two person group, do you leave the nicer campsite for the bigger group and take the less desirable site - or take the better one - or move on and hope for the best?

You can only choose one answer but members might be able to delete and/or change it. (I think) I set the "Time limit for deleting vote:" to 30. I'm assuming that's days and I expect I can change it if it's hours or minutes - we'll find out together eh?. No-one can see the results until the poll is closed. Will someone please remind me to close it mid May?

How do you work this thing anyway?  

I voted.  But I think it would be a better poll if you told me the time of day when I was making this decision.  If it is 1 PM I might make a different decision than at 4:30.  Just a thought.

I presumed that making the next site didn't pose any risk other than an extra hour or two of travelling.  One wasn't going to be forced to set-up in the dark or cross open water during a thunderstorm.  That the worst case was asking to share the next site if occupied or set-up on the portage or other less than ideal location for one night.


Move on, take my chances.  Mostly because of the noise that tends to come with groups of 4+ people.  Though there may be other circumstances that make the added security of a group near attractive, kinda rare though.


Ideally I would chat the group up and find out where they intend to camp if the opportunity presents itself.  If they mention the same site I'm bound for, mention that there's a race on.  I've pulled up to sites at the same time as others before with that awkward moment before one group grows a pair and stakes a claim.

In my experience the etiquitte is that if you know there are folks behind you and another site ahead of you, leave them the closer & more appropriate site for their group.  This is mitigated by the solo paddler needing to TCB & if you're out-pacing tandem folks - you rock & they suck.  Solo changes my priorities a little from allocating based on what's appropriate to making sure I'm safe.

One should be prepared to share their site for the night if there aren't *any* other sites that can be gotten to before sundown.  Fault & poor planning be damned when the sun is setting an folks need to make camp.  Something I find is missing from some contemporary trippers.  Often folks behave like they've founded a nation when they make camp.  Back in the day any port in a storm was the norm and the occasional shared firepit respects the people & the land.

I voted for moving on. However I wouldn't put my personal safety at risk in doing so.

I use a hammock.  Anywhere I can land the canoe (in Quetico) is fair game for my campsite... presuming I can find trees.

Jimbo   

I went with move on, I don't want to be by the big group no matter  what your morals regarding campsite choosing in that situation are.

Amen Mad_Mat.  The Boundary Waters seems to have more of a problem, what with the designated campsites only rule.  The only time it's been a problem was when we were camped on Bootleg Lake with another group claiming the only other campsite within miles.  Unfortunately a 3rd group came through at about 6pm.  They never stopped by, but we would have gladly shared our site.  I believe they brush crashed at the portage that night and left in a hurry that morning.

Mad_Mat wrote on Apr 20^th, 2010 at 1:25pm:

Totally agree with you.  Solo paddler late in the day gets to land wherever is available.

Not sure about the "better site" concept.  Depends on the size of the group.  Comparing a site with one good spot to pitch my shelter vs. a site with 4 good spots to pitch my shelter.  Both have met my need for a good pitch.  Three extra pitch spots that I'm not going to use does not improve the 4 spot site for me and may be a detractor depending on the overall state.  Once I meet one criteria I move on to the next.
1.  Good tent pitch, level, well drained, not in a floodpath.
2.  Appropriate shelter/exposure depending on the season/conditions, breezy if buggy, sheltered if windy/rainy.
3.  Nice view, good sunrise or sunset view, good sky view.
4.  Reasonable bear bag options.
4.  Nice firepit.

Set up camp on the good site with the tent easily visible from the lake, maybe hang some laundry up to dry. Then quickly paddle over to the lesser site and sit on the rocks near shore. When the big group comes by, they will see both sites as occupied and move on to the next lake, leaving you the good site AND peace and quiet.



Just kidding (maybe I'll get flamed again).

I take the good site (on the first come first served basis), and come out ahead if the other group is quiet (there are some like that) or if they weren't planning to stay at that lake anyway, and they move on. If the other group is noisy but move on the next day, then I still have a chance at one quiet night at the lake I planned for.

When I planned my trip, I could see on the map that the first lake had two sites close together, and that I would probably have neighbours for either one or two nights. Knowing there is a big group behind me has changed the odds a bit, but probably not much, and I must have had good reasons for planning to stay two nights on this particular lake in the first place. If solitude was that critical, I wouldn't have planned to stay here at all. So why change the original plans?

No I would never jerk someone around like that either, and I sure hope nobody else on these boards would seriously consider it. But the way the question was stated sounded sort of like a logic puzzle, so I couldn't resist exploring all the possibilities.

If I were the leader of the big group, I would know in advance that I would have trouble finding big campsites. So I would either stick to big lakes with lots of alternatives or get up very early and make camp early too.

If someone gets to a site before me, it's theirs, period. If it's 1 pm and my prize site is already taken by a solo canoeist, well there are worse things in life than a little extra paddling in Q, aren't there? (ie your hypothetical whiny group member may need some attitude adjustment, but Q is a good place for that)

On the question of etiquette: shouldn't all groups on nonisolated sites try to be as quiet and unobtrusive as possible, regardless of whether the other site is occupied by Greta Garbo or another pack of schmeauxs? Whether the solo paddler wants to be alone, or just wants to paddle alone, or is alone due to other circumstances should have nothing to do with it.

Joe, I'd do it

I'd personnaly choose to move on. (Although I couldn't say that may my choice would be the group consensus) As someone who tends to be the larger group. (The smallest group has been 6) I find that the group will gladly travel how far we need to go that day with no complaints. Once they hear that this lake is the one we intend to camp one, there is a great deal of grumbling if we are forced to push on.

" I certainly would never set anchor and fish in front of anyone else's campsite. I at least hope I'm not in the minority with that. " -DB

I think you may be, at least in the B-dub, where the campsites in some places are on top of each other.  Can't recall how many times I've had canoes just drift past the shoreline in front of my camp while I'm having dinner or just relaxing for the evening. Not even an "oops, we're sorry, we'll fish the other shoreline".  Makes you want to fire a shot across their bow.

pigsmoke wrote on Apr 21^st, 2010 at 5:48pm:



Careful, we might shoot back!

Hey DB, I want to know what spurred the query, the scenario?

If I was solo and solitude was the gig, I would push on. If it was a lake that I wanted to fish I would stay... If I was in good spirits and the struck me as good souls or had kiddies I would leave the "good site" to them; maybe even make a chocolate cake for them or give a fish. If they were "_________" I would  enjoy the breezy point and proceed to sprawl, and let them talk crap and give me the eye ball and smile back. If the weather was crap or they were in a pickle I'd share, with an open invitation, and cook up a storm; leave the next morning even if it was a lake that I wanted to fish.

The "manners" thing is an interesting idea; a way. I always thought that it was a drag to have to stop so dang early to snag that site that has been on the list for many years; but that is the way of policy and use. PMA's here I come.

Feeble not I think it is a neato dialog, got me thinkin' "who do I want to be"; and I did find the double campsite "posing" humorous in a twisted sort of way. I wouldn't do it, but I thought on it! Thanks for gettin' off the ground DB

No question, take the better campsite.  You have no idea what the other group intends.
They may not be planning on stopping.  They may only stop for one night.  They might all be using hammocks.  They may evaluate campsites differently and think the other site is better.

Ummm, now.