I know this has been covered before, but an update on worst campsites encountered and why, and maybe campsites that used to be good, but have been degraded by overuse. I've found that I'm not usually as impressed by a campsite that has been called a 5 star as it seems like I should be. Lack of ground cover, hacked up and burned logs, an excess of mice have all gone to making those sites uncomfortable, but closed in sites with few water views are bad as well. We found a site on Thomas that had no seating logs, and a very thick surround of bushes that made it claustrophobic. Campsite 1178 I think it was. The only good thing about it was a very pristine latrine, except for the rose bushes encroaching it.

Campsite 917 on the northwest end of Sawbill Lake is a rough one. We checked this one out on our way back from the Cherokee loop as it was the only open site we found and decided to risk it and push further south. The site is overgrown and resides in a narrowing area of the lake limiting any chance of a breeze. Looked like a mosquito haven. There really weren't any good spots for a tent and a minimal selection of trees for hammocks. The open area around the fire grate was rather small and the landing in front of it wasn't the best either. Lastly, the latrine is quite a hike back in the woods. I would call this one close to a last resort on this lake.

It feels weird for me to list a "worst" campsite, because I would stay anywhere if it meant I don't have to work or mow the lawn or do just about anything else. Each campsite is still a gift! But two come to mind that I remember:

Omega Lake site 590: extremely small (like one tent...maybe), spooky, path straight up to latrine

Vista Lake site 2058: expansive, but hilly and rocky, without decent tent pads, also kinda spooky

Both these sites are hidden in the corners of the lakes, and have a dark, eerie vibe to them, at least to me.

Mike

MikeinMpls: "It feels weird for me to list a "worst" campsite, because I would stay anywhere if it meant I don't have to work or mow the lawn or do just about anything else. Each campsite is still a gift! But two come to mind that I remember:


Omega Lake site 590: extremely small (like one tent...maybe), spooky, path straight up to latrine


Vista Lake site 2058: expansive, but hilly and rocky, without decent tent pads, also kinda spooky


Both these sites are hidden in the corners of the lakes, and have a dark, eerie vibe to them, at least to me.


Mike"

Mike just beat me to 590 on Omega. Spooky is right. No real view, no room, dark and rocky. Any port in a storm, of course.

1052 on Malberg is rough. Aside from being tiny, in the Spring you see clearly see the common area from the shitter and vise-versa. Also, the water level can come up onto the only tent pad. I had had to pitch my tent right next to the fire so I wasn't sleeping in water (this was in May).

For me, it's all about perspectives right? Like others have mentioned, ANY campsite is better than no campsite or no canoe trip. That said, I have changed how I rate campsites by including a size. Like you, I found myself not really liking many of the "5-star" campsites because they were/are overused. I made up a [super nerdy] means for assigning scores to campsites off of like 20 variables and also assigned a size to them. That way a campsite isn't just good because it's big as is so often the case online, and a small campsite might be a 5 star site for a small enough group. Since then, my ratings are more based on campsite features and less on how much space the site has.

So, with that, my lowest-ranked sites are mostly burn or blow-down zone sites. You can't really fault them, but they are just awful to stay in like 1932 Rice Lake, 1522 Lake 1, 1361 Insula, or 1375 Hudson. Others I want to like, but they just have so few redeeming qualities that it's hard to make a case for them such as 1968 Trapline, 933 Middle Cone, 680 Clearwater, or 589 Kiskadinna. Many sites that are really bad according to the scores are ones I actually end up really liking because of their solitude (such as many of the hiking sites or sites on dead-end lakes.) On the flip side, my very least favorite campsites are what my friends and I call "witness campsites." These are the sites that sit directly on portages or right on narrows where every group passing by has to come right through/past your campsites. We call them "witness sites" because you get a chance to talk with everyone! Anyways, some classic examples (some of which are almost great sites) include 512 Crooked, 788 Ogish, 1106 Fourtown, 1765 Fall Lake, 359 Saganaga, 596 Little Gunflint, 647 Rat, or 754 Pine.

#1737










Pietro Lake has a couple that would be rough to have to call home. The first appeared to be more of an abandoned fire grate than campsite. :) #1738

Photos take this spring.

Well Pietro got burned out twice in 10 years. First was the Turtle Lake Fire and then a few years later the Pagami Creek fire took out anything left living from the first fire.
Pietro used to be a gem, now, well. It’s gonna be a while.

One of the first campsites you come into on Polly coming up from the lady chain is a bastard of a site. Ugly, tree stumps all over. Just not a nice place to stay. It was bad enough that I inquired with the USFS about why the keep campsites open that look like Woodstock was held there. Never got an answer that was worth remembering
Tom

Too much subjectivity with this question. What you like, I may not and vice versa. I used to attend to the "star system," but over the years I stopped. More enjoyable to approach open sites to see how they feel rather than relying on someone else's opinion-especially when many such posts are years old.

Just get out and paddle, explore and judge as you go and let your trip be your guide.

All that said, the "worst" site is the one that is occupied!

Like others, I tend to avoid 5-star sites. I hate the fine dusty powder that forms from too many feet pounding the dirt. But other than that, I would put the following 2 sites on my "not very enjoyable".

Kekekabic Lake #1473 - I was grateful we found an open site, but it was clear why it was open...nearly impossible to find, overgrown fire grate, barely squeezed in a tent, and no room to move around the site so it felt very claustrophobic. No view of the lake and no shoreline. But it was very private :)

Makwa Lake #983 - In a rainstorm, the entire site floods with 4 inches of water which runs into the fire pit area then runs like a river down to the lake. We were wondering why the fire pit was completely clean of any ash. There aren't options for the tent that stay dry except for a lumpy, bumpy tiny grass hummock. Fortunately, we had selected that before the skies let loose. It was a depressing site and I'm not just saying that because a mouse chewed a hole in the roof of our tent the night we stayed there.

I probably should have included campsite 1837 on Iron Lake. It gets 4 and 5 star reviews because it is an open red pine site, but when we were there the strong wind and direction made it pretty miserable and at dusk a herd of mice came stampeding through. We had to rush to close up the food pack. The next morning we had to cut a hole in our fishing net to extract a mouse that was caught in it. It has a lot of nice features, but judging by an obvious secondary fire pit with extensive wind shielding rocks, we weren't the only ones that had a problem with the wind.

Worst I have seen is 1968 on Trapline Lake. It is very small, has a tough landing, a fire grate and latrine, and no tent pads. It does have a nice view though.

campsite #800 on Jasper lake , the burn hit Jasper hard and this site basically has no trees and A LOT of wood in the water all around this site , shore fishing nearly impossible.

The lone sites on Trygg & Virgin Lakes deserve to be mentioned.

TuscaroraBorealis: "The lone sites on Trygg & Virgin Lakes deserve to be mentioned. "

I wondered where I could put a tent on Trygg. There seemed to be a spot near the water on the latrine trail--maybe? It looks like this site was fire-effected.

egknuti: "

TuscaroraBorealis: "The lone sites on Trygg & Virgin Lakes deserve to be mentioned. "

I wondered where I could put a tent on Trygg. There seemed to be a spot near the water on the latrine trail--maybe? It looks like this site was fire-effected. "

Yes, that seemed to be the only spot. Although, if it rains it doesn't take much imagination to realize where all the water would go. Also,since it was pretty much right on the shoreline, it might be compromised In spring with high water.

TuscaroraBorealis: " #1737











Pietro Lake has a couple that would be rough to have to call home. The first appeared to be more of an abandoned fire grate than campsite. :) #1738

Photos take this spring."

The second photo reminds of most of the likely campsite locations we find in NW Ontario and in Manitoba east of Lake Winnipeg.

Frenchy19: "Too much subjectivity with this question. What you like, I may not and vice versa. I used to attend to the "star system," but over the years I stopped. More enjoyable to approach open sites to see how they feel rather than relying on someone else's opinion-especially when many such posts are years old.

Just get out and paddle, explore and judge as you go and let your trip be your guide.

All that said, the "worst" site is the one that is occupied! "

I totally agree with this! There’s nothing worse than hoping a site is open and then come around the corner to see a tarp already in camp. That’s when I employ what I call the “Ol’ Yeller tactic.” If you remember the end of that movie, the kid who has to shoot Ol’ Yeller says to their beloved dog, “You dumb dog, I never liked you anyway!” When I see a site is taken I say to my tripping partner “it’s a good thing it wasn’t open.” Too big, too small, too overused, bad trees for hammocks, etc etc etc. And while we paddle past the site, under my eye I have a big ol’ tear just hanging on my cheek.

I’m not crying, YOU’RE crying! ??

Three "bad" ones that quickly come to mind for me are #620 on Henson, #784 on Ogish and #1084 on Gun.

I didn't stay the night there, just a 3 hour layover during a bad wind storm, but site 1071 on Kawasachong is definitely an "only if you have to" site. Totally exposed to the weather, nothing but scrub willow bushes, and really just had bad vibes. Not anyplace I would stay.

Vista Lake site 2058: expansive, but hilly and rocky, without decent tent pads, also kinda spooky

Mike"

I totally agree, Vista Lake site 2058 should be avoided if at all possible. I stayed there one night on a solo because the other two sites on Vista were taken and I was tired. It is very rocky, vertical, uncomfortable, and just lonely and creepy. In one post about 2058 someone said "this is where murders take place". I can believe it. I kept looking over my shoulder the whole time I was there.

Dave

Like the OP I'm often not as impressed by "5-star" sites as others and often not as bothered by low-rated ones. After years of reading reviews and how much they vary from one person to another, one situation to another, etc. I hesitate to rate one. How many times have you seen a site rating vary by 2 stars, even 3 . . . ? Is it a 2-star or 4-star?

I've stayed at site 1071 on Kawasachong that dschult rates "only if you had to" and it was because it was windy. Not the greatest under those circumstances but there was a decent tent pad, easy enough landing, I was off the water, better than a 1-star even under those conditions and better under benign conditions, depending on your needs . . .

I've stayed at a number of 1-star sites and been perfectly OK with them for a night or two. The site on Shepo Lake, 1036 on Kawishiwi River, 1043 on Amber, and some others, but . . .

Some would have been better or worse depending on conditions, needs, preferences . . . I'm usually solo, don't hammock, only put up a tarp if necessary, usually only there for a night or two, don't need a good bear-hang tree, usually there mid-Sept. or later, etc.

I've gotten to point where I feel a review I'd do might be a dis-service to many.

I stayed at one this past summer and by the time I laid down for the night, I had lost track at 20 ticks on me. 20 ticks in a few hours is enough for me to call a site “bad”.

1704 on the South Kawishiwi is wide open, one poor tent site, and tons of traffic.

This thread is interesting in that some of the sites mentioned as poor I tend to like. Pietro was one of my favorite lakes 20 years ago, 1738 was very nice back then before the fires.

deerfoot: "

TuscaroraBorealis: " #1737











Pietro Lake has a couple that would be rough to have to call home. The first appeared to be more of an abandoned fire grate than campsite. :) #1738


Photos take this spring."

The second photo reminds of most of the likely campsite locations we find in NW Ontario and in Manitoba east of Lake Winnipeg."

Although, there are better sites in Atikaki than those pictured! :)

HighnDry: "

deerfoot: "

TuscaroraBorealis: " #1737













Pietro Lake has a couple that would be rough to have to call home. The first appeared to be more of an abandoned fire grate than campsite. :) #1738



Photos take this spring."

The second photo reminds of most of the likely campsite locations we find in NW Ontario and in Manitoba east of Lake Winnipeg."

Although, there are better sites in Atikaki than those pictured! :)"

Yes, you are right. Atikaki definitely has better campsites than Wabakimi. Much more exposed rock along shorelines makes finding likely campsites easier with less clearing work to do.

302 Hassel Lake. Overgrown, lots of dead downed trees.
But would I be happy as a clam, should I find myself camped there again? You betcherass! :)

tumblehome: "Well Pietro got burned out twice in 10 years. First was the Turtle Lake Fire and then a few years later the Pagami Creek fire took out anything left living from the first fire.
Pietro used to be a gem, now, well. It’s gonna be a while.


One of the first campsites you come into on Polly coming up from the lady chain is a bastard of a site. Ugly, tree stumps all over. Just not a nice place to stay. It was bad enough that I inquired with the USFS about why the keep campsites open that look like Woodstock was held there. Never got an answer that was worth remembering
Tom"

Had to take this site on Polly one rainy night while coming back out from Makwa. It was the only site open on Polly so we had to take it. It was tough finding two spots to pull the canoes out of the water and two spots to put the tents. But the walleye did cooperate the next morning!

Be warned... ALL the campsites in Quetico are rated sub-par to bad. None are marked on maps. And if you can find one, there is no fire grate and no latrine. The sites are little used, so there they are often so overgrown that there is very little space for a tent of tarp! Avoid Q.

Grace Lake No. 832. Stayed there on a cold rainy night with a buddy of mine in the early 1990's. Very low, muddy, buggy, etc. Brandy made it marginally tolerable.

Tom

Campsite 854, on Dent Lake.
It's there, it's awful.

HowardSprague: "302 Hassel Lake. Overgrown, lots of dead downed trees.
But would I be happy as a clam, should I find myself camped there again? You betcherass! :)"

I like that attitude !

Camping on the Island River in a burn out area. Not real scenic is an understatement and all the wood was charred but still green so it was hard to make a fire. Great walleye fishing tho in the hole in front of camp, so that was cool.

scat: "Camping on the Island River in a burn out area. Not real scenic is an understatement and all the wood was charred but still green so it was hard to make a fire. Great walleye fishing tho in the hole in front of camp, so that was cool. "

That last sentence turns a bad campsite into a great campsite for me!

Campsite #1664 on Wind Lake (its not marked on this website).

This campsite is absolutely infested with mice, and was a small bit of hell for me at night.

I camped there in fall of 2022 and could only tolerate 2 nights before I HAD to leave. The mice were crawling all over our hammocks all night long. A train of little pitter patter across the ridgeline, vibrating through the hammock. Occasionally they'd slip and fall and I'd hear little claws scraping down the sides of my tarp. Then they started jumping onto and crawling up my bug net, with the weight of their little buddies causing the bug net to sink in and I'd feel them bump into the sides of my head and shoulders. Half of the night was spent with me swating my bug net to knock them off.

The only way I'd go back, is if I brought a 10 pack of mouse traps. The big nasty metal traps with teeth.

WesternHills: "Campsite #1664 on Wind Lake (its not marked on this website).


This campsite is absolutely infested with mice, and was a small bit of hell for me at night.


I camped there in fall of 2022 and could only tolerate 2 nights before I HAD to leave. The mice were crawling all over our hammocks all night long. A train of little pitter patter across the ridgeline, vibrating through the hammock. Occasionally they'd slip and fall and I'd hear little claws scraping down the sides of my tarp. Then they started jumping onto and crawling up my bug net, with the weight of their little buddies causing the bug net to sink in and I'd feel them bump into the sides of my head and shoulders. Half of the night was spent with me swating my bug net to knock them off.


The only way I'd go back, is if I brought a 10 pack of mouse traps. The big nasty metal traps with teeth."

LOL
I often sleep under the stars, when it looks like no rain.
I've had mice run right over my face, many times.

Table Rock is cool but the campsite is ugly with no trees of any use

I agree that Table Rock is not a great site to camp in. It was one of the few sites we stayed at that had no good limbs in the trees for hanging the bear bags. The tent pads had little to no soil for staking the tents. We had to find big rocks to tie the corners down. There's not much soil or grass in the whole site and the mosquitoes in the latrine area were fierce. The historical aspect makes it pretty cool, but it also means people will be stopping by to check out the rock in front of the site. It's been a while since we were there, but I seem to remember a lot of mice there too. It was the only place we couldn't get the bear bags up and we left them down, with pots on top to let us know if something was messing with them. There was something scraping on the side of the tent like it was trying to chew it's way in. I didn't get much sleep there.

Only been all over ep 14 but we have stayed at dozens of campsites in that area over the years. Never had a "bad" one. My suggestion is hammocking. Any of those sites you see on smaddle planner (you know the website) that are marked 1 or 2 stars can easily become a 5 star site without the limitations of tent pads. There were three sites that come to mind that were only rated 2 stars and I would definitely disagree ( one on Loon, one on hustler, and the lone site on thumb lake). All of those sites were rated poorly mainly because of the tent pads. Also want to say hammocking definitely has its disadvantages, especially in the burn areas. Rougher air flow also means you HAVE to have a good bedroll and decent sleeping bag, but I have forever been converted to the hammock for my BWCA trips

Stumpy: "

WesternHills: "Campsite #1664 on Wind Lake (its not marked on this website).



This campsite is absolutely infested with mice, and was a small bit of hell for me at night.



I camped there in fall of 2022 and could only tolerate 2 nights before I HAD to leave. The mice were crawling all over our hammocks all night long. A train of little pitter patter across the ridgeline, vibrating through the hammock. Occasionally they'd slip and fall and I'd hear little claws scraping down the sides of my tarp. Then they started jumping onto and crawling up my bug net, with the weight of their little buddies causing the bug net to sink in and I'd feel them bump into the sides of my head and shoulders. Half of the night was spent with me swating my bug net to knock them off.



The only way I'd go back, is if I brought a 10 pack of mouse traps. The big nasty metal traps with teeth."

LOL
I often sleep under the stars, when it looks like no rain.
I've had mice run right over my face, many times."

If mice running across your face happens "many times" when sleeping out in the open, I'm not doing it! Had a mouse get into our tent once when we were camped on South Lake and I woke up in the middle of the night startled when I felt "something" run across my face more than once. My tent mate tried to convince me I was dreaming it all but I was certain it was real. Then we saw the mouse cowering in the corner. To keep the story shorter, I'll just say that chaos ensued over the next few minutes as we chased this thing around the tent before finally smacking it hard with a shoe. As I tried to throw it's bleeding and quivering body out the door of the tent, it caught on a tent flap and sprung right back at me! On the second try I did get it out the door. When I was able to get back to sleep, there were nightmares!

Two points to conclude the story:
1. Either the thing came to a bit and was able to crawl away on its own or some scavenger found it for a meal because in the morning it was gone.
2. Good thing I don't usually sleep with my mouth hanging open!

Campsite 106 on Finger Lake. Has anyone ever stayed at this site? I couldn't find any place to put a tent and the trail to the latrine was littered with dead falls.

egknuti: "Campsite 106 on Finger Lake. Has anyone ever stayed at this site? I couldn't find any place to put a tent and the trail to the latrine was littered with dead falls. "

checked it out once.....pretty ugly. Stayed at 105

This thread really got me walking down memory lane. We've stayed at a number of less-than-optimal sites. Usually, this is a result of waning daylight and fatigue setting in, whereby the #1 criteria become, "any open site." By virtue of the site being open, no matter how bad, the site becomes a good one! In the fall of 1999, just a few months after the big blow down, we spent about a month in the BWCA. I'll never forget..... stopping at a site on Knife Lake and seeing this: an aluminum canoe, about 10-12 feet up in the air, bent like a "Z", with the center lodged in the fork of a "V" shaped birch tree. The canoe had a gaping hole, a seat tore out, thwarts damaged or dislodged, .... and this was right above the tent pad. That gave us pause -- thinking of what those campers endured during that storm.

Our first trip was in 1971. We entered at Lake One and went down the Kawishiwi River. The first day we checked out a site mid afternoon but it was so bad we couldn’t find a place for the tent. Not much further down was a great site. As we were cooking dinner we saw a couple canoes full of young ladies padding slowly by our site. Next morning we talked to them and they apologized in case we had heard them cussing us out the previous evening. Turns out they had been briefed on the campsite situation and had taken their last portage with their heart set on our site.


The other one that sticks in my memory is on Cap Lake. Basically a small area of bare rock. We had to buddy up because there no options for more tents.