BB, you will likely be assaulted by insects.  Between the skeeters and the black flies, I would make plans for all means of defense:  DEET, long sleeves, bug jacket, headnet, smoky fire, exposed point sites, etc.

Maybe donate blood before leaving...just to get in the mood for the trip.

@Martin - what does "better" mean?  Better forests?  Better garbage dumps?  Better maps?  Better access?  Better fishing?  Better camping?  Better cottages?  Better outfitters?  Better artists?

As I posted in the previous topic...these matters are almost entirely subjective and quite biased based upon the perspective of the single poster and their individual experience and preferences.  

I chose 2040 - first in the hopes that at age 73 I will be able to visit the interior (fingers crossed!), secondly to observe with greater perspective and understanding the continued preservation and management efforts of the provincial governing bodies.  If I can trip in AP in 2040, that would mean I would have journeyed in the park over a 63 year span...that would be roughly a lifetime of experience, appreciation and an ever-developing understanding.  

One bit of 'developed understanding' I have achieved is to never bring a 17' Michicraft Aluminum canoe into the park again...so please don't interpret this as a 'holier than thou' attitude. ;-)

Ha!  No worries...group decision-making is often dynamic.  Enjoy the trip!

I used to have a preference for loops but as I've matured I find the pleasure of setting a base camp and day tripping from such a point more rewarding - less time spent on the rigors of making/breaking camp and more time spent enjoying our surroundings and one another's company.

We call them 'wood roaches' down here in PA. Their appearance evokes that uneasy or queasy feeling at first...and then a mystery tingle on the back of your neck or under you clothes like after you see a tick!

While a healthy dose of skepticism is nearly always appropriate, the manner in which it is expressed can create a bond or a division.  "To be perfectly honest" might not be the sweetest way to introduce an idea compared to "a similar thing has happened to me before and I was mistaken".  

Regardless, varieties of those cockroaches are relatively common in forested areas of North America.  Capturing a good photo of one would make identification much easier to compare with the images on this site:
https://birdwatchinghq.com/cockroaches-in-ontario/ 

Mine were all weather-related.

- Crossing Dickson towards Lavieille in May as a kid in the 1970's with brutal headwinds and cold rain.  Tough week of bad weather that trip...we all lost a lot of weight.
- Portage from Redrock to Opeongo to catch the taxi in the morning...3" of snowfall from the night before made the portage slippery and treacherous.
- Wind in May across Big Trout held us up for a few hours...we bided our time on an island by eating our steak dinner at 2pm then the winds died down and we made Red Pine Bay by 7pm
- Dickson to Bonfield portage with an 85 pound aluminum canoe.  We knew it would be tough but that boat taught me a lesson on how to portage through the pain.  I now own two kevlar canoes and zero aluminum!

Terribly touching stories, Dave. 

It's wonderful that you were blessed to have had them play such instrumental roles in your life and the stories and memories will carry you like a canoe through a lake of grief.  So sorry for you loss, but so happy for your recognition of the impact it has.

Could this be a site on Robinson Lake?

@RobW thank you for identifying all the things you believe I need and certainly for the link that supports your point and informs of the definition of fishery.

Here's a bit of unsolicited feedback:  you might consider using a different phrase from  "you need" as it comes across as a bit condescending and domineering.  Maybe it's just me and the way I read it, but if I were to reply with "You need to understand that there is no evidence linking fleas and fishery collapse" it might be interpreted negatively by you.

I'm not committed to this subject and am certainly no expert as well, but I have spent over thirty years in the medical field (although I only have an undergraduate degree in physics) and have a robust understanding of the design, intent, interpretation, limitations and potential flaws of peer-reviewed published research.  I did a cursory search in google scholar and did not find any papers that link the spiny water flea introduction with fishery collapse (a distant link, I get it).  The point I am trying to make is, it is a leap of faith to project 'undoubted fishery collapse' from water flea introduction as a causal relationship.  I'm not arguing the 30-40% reduction of native zooplankton wouldn't have an impact, I'm arguing that linking an extreme, subjective conclusion that isn't supported by the evidence wouldn't stand up to scientific scrutiny. 

We often see this type of statement in areas where one stands to profit from it:  like extra clicks on a news story that inflates the information with dramatic terms like 'collapse' or 'chaos'.