Marko_Mrko wrote:

SeekingSolitude wrote:

Opeongo (and probably any other motorboat permitted lakes) I think is a prime candidate for site specific booking. Even with the different arms, when the lake is full (despite unbooked sites) you could still waste a lot of time paddling the lake to find a free site & that can be tough at times due to distance & a big lake that can get Windy.

 
This seems like a reasonable approach. Make all lakes within a single day's paddle site-specific. Or alternatively, all lakes that are accessible through a 750-m portage or less (or maybe 1km?).

These are the highest-use lakes, and are the lakes where new campers would go.

Bang on!


It would also not be too intrusive for us who prefer deep interior camping - book a site-specific site the first night and last nigh, lake-based reservation for the rest of the trip.

Site specific would be better for Tom Thompson, Ragged, Rock, Opeongo, Ralph Bice etc etc.

But there is very little sense for deep interior lakes, and would significantly reduce the quality of the experience for people who do use those lakes.

boknows wrote:

West Koko Pond - Sent 2/13/2022 10:05 pm - from goneagainjon
Hi boknows, have you ever bushwhacked in there? Thx, Jon

Just my 2 cents that Jon does not have "mobility" or "limitation" issues.

West Koko Pond is at end of Koko Creek that runs into Proulx Lake.  My reply is listed below...

Re: West Koko Pond - Sent 2/19/2022 2:21 pm - to goneagainjon
No.....I've been up Koko Creek until it ends. After this, it is all swamp....

Bo
 

Yep, progressively worsening hip issues unfortunately Bo. Still some decent mobility and km left vs many others though. That said, one doesn't have to belong to a minority or marginalized or disadvantaged group to support their equality rights to limited public tax-payer resources, do they? Site-specific reservations at access lakes makes sense to many. Opeongo might be an exception due to potential safety concerns as well argued here.
He/him ;)
 

ChristineCanoes wrote:

I will stop camping in Algonquin if they go site specific. I prefer to do 2-4 week trips and I have no interest in spending time online figuring out what site to pick. It isn’t a hotel. Things like weather matter. They impact travel and site selection. I’m not staying on an open site in a storm on Big Trout when only 1/2 the sites are booked due to rules that ignore the reality of backcountry camping.

 
True, but wouldn't it be great if you could book like a boutique hotel?...."We need a ground floor 'cuz we have young kids and balconies are a problem...also, my spouse has arthritis so we can't climb up the stairs to your top floor on the third level...oh, and we're arriving late so no we cannot walk to your "sister hotel" 1 km down the beach...we need a cot for my sister-in-law who takes care of our special needs son - please ensure the room has floor space to accomodate it....oh, you can't accommodate our basic needs? You do realize I own this hotel, right?!?

Jdbonney wrote:

No one wants to see prices go up and I’ll be the first with pitch fork in hand if they really Jack the rates up and I can COMPLETELY understand why solo and double paddlers would be livid at the thought of a change to per site fees as opposed to per person and I would definitely have my torch out to storm the gates against that.

But does it really matter if you camp on the east end of the lake versus the west end? It’s not like we were allowed to camp Willy nilly up to now (since the 80’s anyway). If you can’t get to your specific lake now due to whatever circumstances, you setup on a portage or an open campsite. If it’s site specific and you can’t get to your specific site due to whatever circumstance, you setup on a portage or an open campsite. The spontaneous roaming of Algonquin has been gone for a long time. I recall in the 80’s they had a regional permit system (am I dreaming that?) where you had choice of 3-4 lakes to spend your night on and that evolved to the current system of a specific lake, largely due to the number of people ending up paddling around a full lake while the next lake over was empty. This possible change is almost assuredly due to people complaining of circling a large lake looking for the 1 empty site late at night.

Yes I’m sure there is also profitability involved but my experience is the lakes are jammed and have been getting ever more jammed every year and OP has to do something to try and create the best experience for the largest number of users. People camp off site now, and will continue to due so in the future. This does nothing to address that. If arriving at big crow lake and getting to choose a campsite on that lake is important to you I guess we see things differently. I would rather show up at big crow lake and paddle directly to the site I’ve already chosen. This doesn’t distract from my experience of paddling many hours to reach that lake.

 
Exactly!

ChristineCanoes wrote:

I will stop camping in Algonquin if they go site specific. I prefer to do 2-4 week trips and I have no interest in spending time online figuring out what site to pick. It isn’t a hotel. Things like weather matter. They impact travel and site selection. I’m not staying on an open site in a storm on Big Trout when only 1/2 the sites are booked due to rules that ignore the reality of backcountry camping.

 
Hotels don't normally allow you to book a specific room, do they?...anyway, poor planning (including planning weather contingencies) doesn't trump the rights of the many who
secure access, safety and overall predictability in their trip planning...that's why a hybrid system might work well...is Big Trout ever 100% booked? I doubt that Big Trout would ever really require a site specific reservation given its location and number of sites tbh

rgcmce wrote:

I'm not sure where you're coming from with this.  I am saying I have mobility issues that are age related and having a site specific reservation system makes it worse for me.  Your view of what is best for people with mobility issues is not universally held.  I am arguing for what is best for my issues. I am sorry if it doesn't accord with your world view.

 
You are speaking my language friend! How is not being able to book a site that can accommodate your challenges NOT helpful???

Jdbonney wrote:

goneagainjon wrote:

hiker72 wrote:

https://medium.com/the-mission/5-tactics-used-by-passive-aggressive-arguers-and-the-best-forms-of-defense-42a9348b60ed

 
Love it and couldn't agree more! But there is no family here for them to entertain... so who are they trying to impress? Who are they who attack those of us that require accomodations and mock Barry's PCI initiative? Simply put?  Each other of course..the good 'ole boys here who think they own the park..we all know who these angry old dinosaurs are...s%e&e, u€€a, and others...and they love playing to one another and ganging up on any opinions that threaten them, their sense of entitlement and the status quo...we've all seen them shout down others with whom they disagree - those that advocate for growth and progress and inclusion....think they're outdated views re access will withstand this court challenge? Lmao, ok

 
Nailed it.

Thank you my friend...I've never met Barry but  but my sense he is a good and pragmatic man who truly cares about the park and issues like fair and reasonable access...he has also no doubt had lots of interactions with Uppa and swedish pimple...i highly doubt he's unaware that many of us know what hotheads they are and how they love to bully us and shout diwn we newer members who don't support their views...they run roughshod over the chats here...not sure why they feel so angry and threatened tbh

rgcmce wrote:

goneagainjon wrote:

Lol, oh, I'm not that young...I just chafe at angry old men (who fought in 0 wars) and their sense of entitlement and love of the glory days when men were men and they couldn't give 2 f%$#s about anyone who required reasonable accomodations because of their mobility limitations

Wow, where did that come from?
I didn't really think you were  young, I was just trying to be polite.  You should try it sometime.

Actually, if you keep trolling like this it might have an interesting effect.  I don't think you really want to put Barry in the position of having to to lock his own thread.

 

 

Sad that you define trolling as fighting for equality and reasonable access for those of us with mobility challenges...what a world