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

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.

Quote:


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.

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.

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.