Q up to $19 a day, BWCAW is $16 per trip, don't know what a reservation to Q costs, but BWCAW is 6 bucks, so a 7 day trip to the Q can easily cost well over a $100 more than BW
ah, the days when it was only 10 bucks a night
me? I'd rather go to WC or Wabakimi for that money

quote ZaraSp00k: "I'd rather go to WC or Wabakimi for that money"

It's a semi-free country (as is Canada). I suggest you go where your heart takes you. If your decision to go, or not to go, to Quetico is based solely on price, you'll likely have very few people try to talk you into it. Those of us who go to Q regularly will continue to go and enjoy the solitude, the wilderness and the overall experience. (Now if Q only had fish...)

quote ZaraSp00k: "Q up to $19 a day, BWCAW is $16 per trip, don't know what a reservation to Q costs, but BWCAW is 6 bucks, so a 7 day trip to the Q can easily cost well over a $100 more than BW
ah, the days when it was only 10 bucks a night
me? I'd rather go to WC or Wabakimi for that money"

I can think of much more foolish ways to spend $100 :)

I have concluded that for me it is. I am only able to make one trip per year and life is just too short to settle for the semi wilderness that the BWCA has become.

If I was doing 3 or more trips a year I would certainly go the cheaper route once in awhile.

Having done countless trips in Quetico and Wabikimi, I think both are fantastic areas. Each has its plusses and minuses. You get what you pay for.

In the Quetico, you pay for the solitude.

We can only make a trip every 2 or 3 years, so we want the best canoe trip possible....so the small amount of expence is worth it. We used to go to the BWCA in the 60's & 70's, but when they put in the firegrates & plastic potties we went to the Quetico and haven't been back since. Quetico is like the BWCA used to be like.

quote snakecharmer: "I can think of much more foolish ways to spend $100 :)"

Heck yeah...the booze and cigars for a 7-day Q trip can cost more than $100. :-)

I've been going on 6 trips a year. If I could, I would go to the Quetico for all 6. However, because of the cost, I usually go to the BWCA. My "special" trips to the Quetico are worth the extra cost, but I can't afford to go 6 times a year.

oh yeah

No, not at all. If you have to ask, it's too expensive...

I kinda like the fact that because of the higher cost the park won't attract people who aren't as serious. To be more specific, the type who leave toilet paper in the bushes.

I'd hate to see what Quetico would look like if the fees were the same as the BW.

quote TomT: "I kinda like the fact that because of the higher cost the park won't attract people who aren't as serious. To be more specific, the type who leave toilet paper in the bushes.

I'd hate to see what Quetico would look like if the fees were the same as the BW."

That's a very good point TomT. While it probably does limit some family tripping, it also keeps out some riff raff. Net positive IMHO.

quote TomT: "I kinda like the fact that because of the higher cost the park won't attract people who aren't as serious. To be more specific, the type who leave toilet paper in the bushes.

I'd hate to see what Quetico would look like if the fees were the same as the BW. "

I don't agree with that, I see more toilet pape,r tampons, and other assorted garbage in Quetico. Also since people tend to camp at the same places, the campsites seem to be more worn even though they get less use.

I'm not surprised by the response, after all, this is the Quetico Afficionados forum :)

actually I don't think the fees affect use that much, I'd say the permit itself is more of a hinderance.

My experience is that the BWCA campsites in general are much more overused and strewn with leftover stuff than campsites in the Quetico. Yes, there are some oversued campsites in Quetico, especially near the entry points.

quote PineKnot: "My experience is that the BWCA campsites in general are much more overused and strewn with leftover stuff than campsites in the Quetico. Yes, there are some oversued campsites in Quetico, especially near the entry points."

Agree with PineKnot I saw very very little trash in the Quetico and the one and only BWCA site I saw (by accident) you could have filled a large trash bag. The BWCA isn't for me, I'm willing to pass through on a tow or paddle out...but I will NEVER (YES! I'm that firm) take a BWCA trip when the Quetico is right next to it.

A BMW vs. a Pinto....one costs more than the other but you get what you pay for.....

Is Quetico worth the extra cost? Yes, absolutely.

Is the BWCA a great deal? Yes, absolutely.

Certainly, if you're traveling as far and spending as much as bojibob and many others on this forum do, you might as well go to Quetico. If you live close and do multiple trips per year, you do a big Quetico or northern trip and other smaller trips in the BWCA. The off-season, especially winter, is very remote and pristine over most of the area.

quote arctic: "Certainly, if you're traveling as far and spending as much as bojibob and many others on this forum do, you might as well go to Quetico. If you live close and do multiple trips per year, you do a big Quetico or northern trip and other smaller trips in the BWCA. The off-season, especially winter, is very remote and pristine over most of the area."

Arctic, TY for pointing out the time/distance/cost factor for many of us. I think if you consider the 2 extra days of travel on top of the 2 that most people already have to do and the cost of air travel or even more days driving, 99% of the world would also choose the Quetico.

If I lived within hours of the BWCA vs days, I'm sure it would be a very frequented desination as the North Georgia and Smokey Mountains are for me now.

However, I still must point out that fire grates, latrines and motor boat access don't exactly scream wilderness to me. Add in the number of vistors, competition for campsites, trash, etc and I don't think we can really compare them. They are not the same thing.

I think the BWCA is a great learning ground for families and scouts. There is some solice for those that will venture into some of the more remote areas. The BWCA is what it is....

Yeah, there are big chunks of the BWCA that I avoid and haven't paddled in many years, like the whole swath from Fourtown Lake eastward through Basswood and Ensign Lakes. We blast down the Moose Chain in well under two hours to get to PP and Quetico. That being said, there is some excellent wild country from the Little Sag/Gabimichigami area, westward toward Frazer Lake, where the fishing is excellent, and people few.

Likewise, in Quetico there are areas that could probably benefit from having latrines, such as the entire swath from Pickerel to Sturgeon and the Russell, Chatterton, Keats Lakes area. That area is heavily used, and finding human waste/toilet paper has been commonplace for decades.

This is a good question, but I agree with most that Quetico is worth the price in both money and effort that we make to get there. I've been doing it for 30 years, and I truly think Quetico is unique, mostly because of how they keep the permits to a minimum. That's the big difference between Quetico and BWCA. I like both, and with some effort and planning you can find solitude in The BWCA, but, over the years, I've always liked Quetico better. So, I think it's worth it.

Without a doubt!

Absolutely.

There are still places in the 'Q' that you can go and make a campsite in a spot that, while it might have been used in the past, still gives you the opportunity to clear a small flat space, circle a few stones and then leave with little trace. There's a difference between a 'canoe trip' and a 'wilderness experience'. It's different for everyone and that's why it's great to have choices.

quote arctic: "Likewise, in Quetico there are areas that could probably benefit from having latrines, such as the entire swath from Pickerel to Sturgeon and the Russell, Chatterton, Keats Lakes area. That area is heavily used, and finding human waste/toilet paper has been commonplace for decades."

oh, great.

quote HowardSprague: "

quote arctic: "Likewise, in Quetico there are areas that could probably benefit from having latrines, such as the entire swath from Pickerel to Sturgeon and the Russell, Chatterton, Keats Lakes area. That area is heavily used, and finding human waste/toilet paper has been commonplace for decades."

oh, great."

"Heavily used" is a relative term, Howie. MNGreene and I paddled through the Poet's Chain last summer and saw no evidence of a TP infestation. Maybe if we had looked harder, we would have found some, but considering the fact that we were there the 2nd week of July, we didn't even see people!

I guess it's hit or miss. I paddled through Keats Lake in late July last year and there were three groups camped on the lake and two others (including us) passing through. The Poet Chain is a destination area for groups entering from the north, because it's such a fine area. Solitude was an easy portage away though.

Absolutely, positively, no doubt about it, for sure! --Goose