You can find official text at: EO 20-56 Final_tcm1055-431921.pdf

It says:

Notwithstanding
Executive Orders 20-04, 20-08, and 20-18, the below facilities are permitted to be
open and do business, provided that they adhere to paragraph 6 of this Executive
Order and the Outdoor Recreation Guidelines available at DNR’s website
( (You need to Login or Register to view media files and links))

And in that list is:

Dispersed and remote camping sites for single household use. A dispersed campsite is a single campsite, not in a developed campground, used for overnight camping. A remote campsite is a designated backpack or watercraft campsite, not in a developed campground, used for overnight camping. Both private and public developed campgrounds remain closed to recreational camping.

Nowhere does it say the up to 10 (9 in bwca of course) people staying on that site have to be from a single household. I did see a journalist who interpreted such.

BillConner wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 3:03pm:



What other possible meaning do you interpret the phrase "remote camping sites for single household use" besides " to be used by members of a single household".?

Something I'm not seeing?  "Nowhere does it say the up to 10 (9 in bwca of course) people staying on that site have to be from a single household." As a native English speaker I have to say that is exactly what it says.

I listened to the governor's press conference. It was clear in the conference, as it is clear in the description, that a campsite, if it is to be shared, should be shared by people who are members of the same household- eg people that live together. Family is not mentioned.

The phrase "dispersed and remote camping sites for single household use" is not defining the campsite- it is defining the use (for single household use)  of a campsite- answer: a single household. The type of campsite is defined in the next sentence- eg "a dispersed campsite is a single campsite....." A household is a group of folks who live together in a somewhat extended existence. If the defined group was a "single party of campers" the term "party" or "group" would be used. There is no previous reference in the history of camping regulations that refers to a group of campers as a "household" (the word is defined as living within the same physical structure)- the choice of word and the modifier "single"  should make the meaning obvious.

Nowhere in the Forest Service announcement does it restrict the makeup of the parties. In the governor's announcement it clearly does- you can interpret however you want but it is clear that the governor wants people who camp together to be people who live together- to interpret any other way is be be deliberately obtuse.

I just found THIS interpretation which seems to spell it out fairly clearly: (You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

In case you cannot open that link, here is the pertinent text: "Can I start planning my camping trip?

Yes, but only if you’re planning to camp at a dispersed or remote campsite. That means camping in places like the Boundary Waters, where you must backpack or take a watercraft to get to the campsite. And those outings are still restricted to 'single household use,' meaning you can camp with family members but not with friends yet. Developed private and public campgrounds are still not allowed."

Hmmm, I shall wait & see....

Jimbo 

"Should" sounds like a recommendation.

"Restricted" sounds more like a regulation.

Since I understand $1000 fines are possibly involved, I, for one, am pressuring my outfitter to get to the bottom of apparent discrepancies.

Mainly, I just don't want permits for my entry point & date to run out if it turns out that the law dictates that campsites are restricted to family members.  If THAT happens, I'm looking to Wally13 to quickly "adopt me."  I think he's older than me by a couple days or so; maybe no one will notice.

Jimbo