A New BWCA Record High was Set-not so good

Boundary Waters cancellations hit a record high in 2025
No-shows are also on the rise. Overbooking by would-be campers remains “excessive,” Forest Service says.

By Bob Timmons

The Minnesota Star Tribune
April 28, 2026 at 4:42PM

Quota permit no-shows to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness increased in 2025 from the previous year. (Brian Peterson/The Minnesota Star Tribune)

Every January, a rush for permits for the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness signals big plans for summer adventure. But not all of those reservations result in a trip — an increasing trend.

More than 40% of permits for entry during the coveted quota season from May 1 through Sept. 30 were never used in 2025, according to the U.S. Forest’s updated BWCAW visitor report.

Both no-shows (3,674) and cancelled permits (12,096) — the latter is a new high mark — rose in 2025 from the previous year. The Forest Service attributed both to “excessive reservations,” meaning that would-be campers secure more reservations than they need. The number of permits issued was static.

Cancellations have risen steadily since the Forest Service moved from a lottery system to a first-come, first-served approach, beginning in 2019.

Reservations for the quota season go live online at Recreation.gov annually the last week of January. Popular vacation dates and entry points are quickly nabbed.

Other factors have contributed to the rush to reserve. Before the 2022 season, the Forest Service reduced overall entry permits by 13% because of complaints about overcrowding and damage to the wilderness. The agency cited a surge in visitation during the COVID pandemic. Permits were reduced from about 285 per day to 248.

In a 2023 report, local government officials, outfitters, conservation groups and others recommended wilderness management changes as part of a bridge-building process with the Forest Service.

Regarding permit-hoarding, the group said the agency should consider raising fees and making those nonrefundable; penalize no-shows; and roll out reservations to tamp down the immediate rush in January. Last year, Forest Service spokesperson Joy Liptak VanDrie told the Minnesota Star Tribune that a staggered rollout would “probably be several years in the making but it is something that we are looking at.”



Overall in 2025, 148,687 people visited the wilderness. That was fewer than 2024, owing mostly to decreased day use.

Securing a single reservation costs $6. Entry permits cost $16 per adult and $8 for a child 17 and younger. The maximum group size for a BWCAW permit is nine people and four watercraft.

Permit-holders who cancel at least two days before their entry are refunded the permit cost. The $6 reservation fee is nonrefundable. Those who cancel within a day of their entry are charged $32 as a penalty. No-shows forfeit all payments. Cancelled permits become available within 24 hours.

I have even some on this forum state they are going to make only one trip this year, but don't know when so they book 4 different trips.

I is very excusable if something comes up needs attending to but cancel much further out.
Cancelled permits the Vendor gets paid, but the USFS gets nothing for maintenance I believe.

I have previously described how the permit application system can be gamed - while paying MINISCULE penalties - to improve the odds of privacy on a route. These numbers indicate that the feds are bringing a pen knife to a gunfight when it comes to counteracting abuse of the system.

“More than 40% of permits for entry during the coveted quota season from May 1 through Sept. 30 were never used in 2025, according to the U.S. Forest’s updated BWCAW visitor report.“

Crazy…but even crazier…people will say the system isn’t broken :)

T

It would be hard to come up with a worse reservation process for the BWCA than the current derby style system.

Very disturbing.

I’m sure there are other opinions and alternate solutions, but I’d suggest a cancellation policy like most hotel chains. Cancel more than X days out and you just lose your reservation fee. Pull a no-show and you get docked $250. Sure, there are legitimate reasons to cancel at the last minute…but you run that risk when you make a hotel reservation, too.

soundguy0918: "I’m sure there are other opinions and alternate solutions, but I’d suggest a cancellation policy like most hotel chains. Cancel more than X days out and you just lose your reservation fee. Pull a no-show and you get docked $250. Sure, there are legitimate reasons to cancel at the last minute…but you run that risk when you make a hotel reservation, too."

AS you get closer to your permit time the penalty should increase.

I thought they were raising fees this year? Maybe that was for next year?

My favorite possible solutions are:

a. 2 or 3 month rolling reservations, like 90% of everywhere else

b. Increased non-refundable fee. $6 for the rec.gov contractor, that's fine, leave it in, but lets add $100 when you book your permit, earmarked for the local USFS. If you actually show up and use your permit, after adding people etc you get it back. If you do anything other than show up to use your permit, you lose it and all of that money goes into the BWCA.

Right now the cost of buying every permit a week before and a week after a, say, Lizz/Swamp permit (3/day, x$6, x14), assuming you refund at the last minute, is $252. You'd need multiple people logging on at 9am january X, you'd have to float a few hundred more dollars for a few months and you probably won't get every single one but still... WE CAN DO BETTER. The data shows this problem is just getting worse every year.

If me doing the maths on here inspires anyone, honestly, F off.

Like many things the first month of reservations you should be allowed only two permits.

I think a rolling reservation window is the easiest (least consequence) and most effective solution. Raising prices, even if just a deposit, is going to favor higher income visitors. Limiting the number of permits is going to hinder people that take a lot of trips or are running programs. Implementing system controls and oversight takes time and money for the company managing the reservations, and often doesn't make much of a difference.

Rolling windows have already been done and should be easy to implement. Best of all, it limits the artificial scarcity of Permit Day. It makes it so you can still log in that morning and rush to get the permit you want, but you are only competing with others that are looking for a permit on the same day you are. Not someone shopping for a variety of dates and grabbing redundancies. If they double the cost of the service fee and institute the rolling window, I think they would maintain about the same income of service fees and make everyone looking for permits much more happy.

no shows should be charged the entire fee amount for the number of people they booked for the trip.

form a committee to delve into the cancellations.
contact the permit holder by phone and ask them if they realized they had a permit(s) that they did not use and did not cancel, and why?

look at the social media of these people and see if what groups they belong to (such as the groups that are considered to be the main culprits of the permit hoarding).

it all comes down to money. Permit no-shows need to have a stiff penalty. perhaps if the permit hold has a certain number of infractions they wouldn't be allowed to reserve permits for X amount of seasons.

it is all just so frustrating that this has been an issue for FOREVER!!!

Z4K: "I thought they were raising fees this year? Maybe that was for next year?

My favorite possible solutions are:

a. 2 or 3 month rolling reservations, like 90% of everywhere else

b. Increased non-refundable fee. $6 for the rec.gov contractor, that's fine, leave it in, but lets add $100 when you book your permit, earmarked for the local USFS. If you actually show up and use your permit, after adding people etc you get it back. If you do anything other than show up to use your permit, you lose it and all of that money goes into the BWCA.

Right now the cost of buying every permit a week before and a week after a, say, Lizz/Swamp permit (3/day, x$6, x14), assuming you refund at the last minute, is $252. You'd need multiple people logging on at 9am january X, you'd have to float a few hundred more dollars for a few months and you probably won't get every single one but still... WE CAN DO BETTER. The data shows this problem is just getting worse every year.

If me doing the maths on here inspires anyone, honestly, F off."

WAS this ever approved-I think it still is just proposed;
An individual adult overnight fee is currently $16. The proposal would increase the fee to $40 per person. The current youth overnight fee is $8. The proposal would increase the fee to $20.

The agency stated that the money collected from the increased fees would be returned to the national forest by enhancing public access and safety while helping to preserve the unique character of the wilderness.

Mocha: "no shows should be charged the entire fee amount for the number of people they booked for the trip.
Permit no-shows need to have a stiff penalty."

Mocha, I just looked this up on the rec.gov page because I wasn't sure what/if there was a penalty for a no-show.

"No Show Policies
No Show: USFS retains the entire payment if the group is a "No-Show". A No-Show is when a group does not cancel or pick up the permit."

"Cancellation & Change Policies
You may cancel online anytime up to two days before the entry date for overnight permits. If you cancel reservation two or more days prior to entry date, all recreation fees paid will be refunded. If you cancel reservation on the entry date or one day prior, you will be charged a penalty of $32.00 (two adult user fees), any additional recreation fees paid will be refunded."

Pinetree: "I have even some on this forum state they are going to make only one trip this year, but don't know when so they book 4 different trips."

It is really selfish to book 4 permits knowing full well they will only use one of them. They are blocking other groups from getting those permits. It is totally selfish. What would their Mom say???

gravelroad: "I have previously described how the permit application system can be gamed - while paying MINISCULE penalties - to improve the odds of privacy on a route. These numbers indicate that the feds are bringing a pen knife to a gunfight when it comes to counteracting abuse of the system."

I agree 100% that some people are buying up extra permits to reduce the number of people around them on their trip. You can see it when multiple permits at the same entry point and date show up on the BWCA.com cancelled permit notification system.

soundguy0918: "I’m sure there are other opinions and alternate solutions, but I’d suggest a cancellation policy like most hotel chains. Cancel more than X days out and you just lose your reservation fee. Pull a no-show and you get docked $250. Sure, there are legitimate reasons to cancel at the last minute…but you run that risk when you make a hotel reservation, too."

Hotels typically let you cancel more than 24 hours before your arrival. That won't work with the Boundary Waters as people typically want weeks or months to make their plans.

I just had to cancel my fishing opener permit. Back injury last fall that I was hoping would be better, isn't.

If anyone is looking for a missing link on Friday before opener, it just came open.

Bromel: "

soundguy0918: "I’m sure there are other opinions and alternate solutions, but I’d suggest a cancellation policy like most hotel chains. Cancel more than X days out and you just lose your reservation fee. Pull a no-show and you get docked $250. Sure, there are legitimate reasons to cancel at the last minute…but you run that risk when you make a hotel reservation, too."

Hotels typically let you cancel more than 24 hours before your arrival. That won't work with the Boundary Waters as people typically want weeks or months to make their plans. "

The problem the BWCAW is having, is systemic of our society. Hotels are another example. For some reason people over book hotels too and cancel last second. More and more hotels are requiring more than 24 hours notice because of the same issues the BWCAW has had with reservations. My last 2 hotels I booked needed 4-5 days notice or you had to pay the full amount. They also offered a significant discount to pay full price ahead of time but it would be non-refundable. So they charge 25% more those who can cancel up to 4-5 days out, but no longer offer cancellations within 24 hours. This was the Hilton Chain in IA and MN.

We see it in health care. People book multiple appointments and then just go to the one they can actually make in real time. It affects access for people. In real time we have 20% of the schedules open, but 6 weeks out nothing is available. Just like the BWCAW, it's a fake shortage. We started banning offenders from scheduling, only allowing same day scheduling or walk in and wait access. It only takes about 5-10% of the users to foul it up for everyone else. Of course, in health care, the issue has far greater consequences to others than missing a BWCAW trip.

T

Love the passion of the group :)

Never thought I’d see a thread about permits get locked (I am sure for good reason) while a mining thread keeps going LOL.

Just says people really care about the resource and how this problem the Forest Service has identified affects fellow paddlers.

T

Was posting this right when it locked down ...

Recreation.gov/Yellowstone/Glacier/OntarioParks etc all use a rolling system several months in advance.

Should access favor early planners or flexible users? Why not both?
50% of permits released in January, per usual.
50% of permits released 3 months in advance.

Early planners and outfitters get their fix. Those who didn't get a permit for the date/location they preferred will get a second chance three months before their preferred entry date/location.

Win win :)

They lock one thread on this subject and another starts up. ;)

Michwall2: "They lock one thread on this subject and another starts up. ;)


"

To be fair...this one started first, but thanks for keeping it going by posting on it :)

portagerunner: "

Mocha: "no shows should be charged the entire fee amount for the number of people they booked for the trip.
Permit no-shows need to have a stiff penalty."

Mocha, I just looked this up on the rec.gov page because I wasn't sure what/if there was a penalty for a no-show.


"No Show Policies
No Show: USFS retains the entire payment if the group is a "No-Show". A No-Show is when a group does not cancel or pick up the permit."


"Cancellation & Change Policies
You may cancel online anytime up to two days before the entry date for overnight permits. If you cancel reservation two or more days prior to entry date, all recreation fees paid will be refunded. If you cancel reservation on the entry date or one day prior, you will be charged a penalty of $32.00 (two adult user fees), any additional recreation fees paid will be refunded." "

Perhaps the "No-shows" are actually the magnanimous group. The US Forest Service reaps the entire user fee, but the wilderness suffers zero impact from the non-visit and scarce USFS resources are preserved. Considering that the Quota Permit On-sale Utilization is essentially unchanged (41%) over that past 5 years, "No-show" seems preferable to cancelation. ;)

USDA Permit and Visitor Use Report

OCDave,

I think you are saying that the FS isn’t looking at the No Shows as an issue. They still get money, less use of the resource? That’s how I read your message?

It could be true…overall though it doesn’t make sense.
1. The FS has several times come out and stated they don’t like it and are taking steps to combat late cancels and fails. There was a summit awhile back I attended and the FS rep said they are compiling data on users abusing the system for probable action it has become such an issue, Talks of permanent bans on users or limits. I know they have taken action on some really bad users. Maybe it’s an elaborate ruse? They did a good job selling it. I think it is more of the Government moves at a snails pace to take action…they just haven’t gotten there yet. Remember the Cisco poaching in Canada? That took 10 years to do Federal Charges.

2. They have already imposed several permit changes in the last few to combat this. It hasn’t worked but they do seem to be trying. The recent proposal to signifcantly increase fees in 2027 was directly related to no shows and lost revenue.

3. Comparing BWCAW usage the last 5 years doesn’t really meet historical numbers. The BWCAW used to attract 225,000 to 250,000 visitors per year. A high year now is 150,000. There have been years with only 130,000. Although recent trends are flat, all time numbers are significantly down. There isn’t an over use or crowding problem, there is an aging, more concentrated entry use crowding problem. Perhaps the double secret way old people know how to get permits is part of that overcrowding at entry points? Maybe not?

Anyway…it’s all just talk. The FS is the only one who can fix it. They have lots of tools to do so…fun to talk about solutions but ultimately it is what it is for now.

T

FS statements, not mine ...

per: https://www.fs.usda.gov/r09/superior/passes/permit-and-visitor-use-report

“Analysis indicates excessive reservations during the permit on sale, with rising last-minute cancellations and no-shows.”

“In 2025, over 40% of on-sale reservations were never used.”


per: https://queticosuperior.org/report-shows-rise-in-last-minute-permit-cancellations-for-boundary-waters/

“It highlights a growing ‘book now, decide later’ culture that leaves popular entry points empty while other paddlers are locked out.”

I know I'm beating a dead horse with those statements as they've already been posted one way or another. Just wanted to point out that the FS is very much aware of the issue we continue to discuss here.
Their official statement for raising fees doesn't mention no-shows, only: Campsite maintenance, portage repair, increased operational costs, staffing shortages, inflation since 2008 and visitor management needs. Which I think we can all support in some way.

timatkn: "OCDave,


I think you are saying that the FS isn’t looking at the No Shows as an issue. They still get money, less use of the resource? That’s how I read your message?

...
...

T"

No, I do believe the FS is considering alternatives the reduce the number of unused permits. However, given that greater number of those permits were reserved, cancelled and then still went unused suggests that the "problem" of permit unavailability is far smaller than the outrage. (I'd consider the declining popularity of BWCA visits to be s separate issue)

Two facts about me:
1) I purchase State Park plates for all my vehicles regardless of whether I will take those vehicles to any State Park. This is somewhat more expensive than buying the stickers (no discount for multiple vehicles) and not necessary for the collector aged convertible and commuter motorcycles that never travel to a State Park. Why? It is a reasonable manner for me to contribute to the MN State Park System.
2) Visiting the BWCA annually is enough of a priority that I make both a plan and a back-up plan which get initialized on the final Wednesday in January. In the past, once my primary plan is finalized, I have cancelled the back-up.

One might imply that having a back-up plan is selfish. The 3 threads posted here recently have encouraged me to educate myself on the issue. Having learned that a high number of cancelled permits are going unused, I wonder, wouldn't it be more beneficial the the BWCA to simply retain the back-up permit and "no-show" to ensure 100% the USFS captures a user fee for that permit? (Comparable to State Park plates on my motorcycles) This would in essence be equitable to increasing the registration fee to at least $38.

Food for thought.

OCDave: "

One might imply that having a back-up plan is selfish. The 3 threads posted here recently have encouraged me to educate myself on the issue. Having learned that a high number of cancelled permits are going unused, I wonder, wouldn't it be more beneficial the the BWCA to simply retain the back-up permit and "no-show" to ensure 100% the USFS captures a user fee for that permit? (Comparable to State Park plates on my motorcycles) This would in essence be equitable to increasing the registration fee to at least $38.

Food for thought. "

The issue is timing. Early cancellations improve access because permits can realistically be rebooked. Late cancellations and no-shows both reduce effective capacity. The real problem isn’t cancellation itself. It’s a system that allows speculative (or back-up) reservations without efficiently redistributing unused permits.

Z4K: "I thought they were raising fees this year? Maybe that was for next year?

My favorite possible solutions are:

a. 2 or 3 month rolling reservations, like 90% of everywhere else

b. Increased non-refundable fee. $6 for the rec.gov contractor, that's fine, leave it in, but lets add $100 when you book your permit, earmarked for the local USFS. If you actually show up and use your permit, after adding people etc you get it back. If you do anything other than show up to use your permit, you lose it and all of that money goes into the BWCA.

Right now the cost of buying every permit a week before and a week after a, say, Lizz/Swamp permit (3/day, x$6, x14), assuming you refund at the last minute, is $252. You'd need multiple people logging on at 9am january X, you'd have to float a few hundred more dollars for a few months and you probably won't get every single one but still... WE CAN DO BETTER. The data shows this problem is just getting worse every year.

If me doing the maths on here inspires anyone, honestly, F off."

The disincentives for excessive cancellations or no shows has to be something other than financial or they will only impact lower income folks and people with families. Back in my landscaping days, I worked for plenty of customers who could have afforded to buy up every permit for an entry point for the whole season, and a few who probably could have bought up every permit for the entire BWCA for the season without blinking an eye. An increase in fees, or a $200 - $500 cancellation fee would mean nothing to them. The answer might have to be loss of privileges to enter the BWCA for a number of seasons for abusers of the system

LiquorPugs: "

OCDave: "

One might imply that having a back-up plan is selfish. The 3 threads posted here recently have encouraged me to educate myself on the issue. Having learned that a high number of cancelled permits are going unused, I wonder, wouldn't it be more beneficial the the BWCA to simply retain the back-up permit and "no-show" to ensure 100% the USFS captures a user fee for that permit? (Comparable to State Park plates on my motorcycles) This would in essence be equitable to increasing the registration fee to at least $38.

Food for thought. "

The issue is timing. Early cancellations improve access because permits can realistically be rebooked. Late cancellations and no-shows both reduce effective capacity. The real problem isn’t cancellation itself. It’s a system that allows speculative (or back-up) reservations without efficiently redistributing unused permits."

Timing is so crucial-as you get closer to permit date, money loss should increase.

I think you guys need a new hobby. Haha. I never have a problem getting a permit so I couldn’t care less what other people do. It’s a bit hard for me to believe people are ‘hoarding’ permits to have a lake to themselves and some of the other scenarios seem like a stretch. Some people suck, I won’t argue that, but I'm sure the number of cheaters, if you prefer, who do things like that are very few and have a relatively minor impact on the availability of permits overall. I do like a good conspiracy theory though.

I just paid my Illinois vehicle sticker and had to pay a $28 late fee. Ouch, stupid me - four months late. Got me thinking, if I can pay an ascending late fee (increases the more late you are that’s a new one), why can't the USFS charge an ascending cancellation fee like was mentioned? The closer you cancel to your entry date, the more the fine is. That kind of makes sense.