I'm planning a family trip out to the Bonds for the end of July/beginning of August. We're looking to camp out somewhere along Bondcliff Trail, I've heard rumors of good legal spots near one of the crossings of Black Brook. I'm curious if anyone has any input on the normal level of biting insects, as I'd rather drop three pounds out of my pack by bringing a tarp instead of the tent but I don't think the kid would like sleeping if it's very buggy. Any input is greatly appreciated!
Bugs on the way to The Bonds?
- Thread starter Ignomer
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
Mark
Member
There were quite a few black flies swarming on the summit of Garfield Saturday, 6/28 - a little surprising for this late in the season. I didn't get any bites, but my sons must taste better because they did get bitten. The black flies should be gone by the end of July. Not much trouble with mosquitoes, but we were not out after dark. If you opt not to bring a tent, I would at least bring some bug netting to put over your heads.
You can compromise by carrying a few ounces of bug net. I haven't used a tent in a while. If there are skeeters, they are usually bad at dawn/dusk. You probably be fine overnight, but the head net will protect anything not in the sleeping bag. If you anticipate more lounging in the dawn and dusk hours, a pyramid bug net might help.
As for that specific area, I have not camped there, but I have gone through at dusk twice in that date range and didn't recall it being buggy.
As for that specific area, I have not camped there, but I have gone through at dusk twice in that date range and didn't recall it being buggy.
Early Bird
Active member
We were up on Galehead overnight Saturday, and the black flies were out. I agree they like kids better because my daughter and her cousin were bit more than I was. The naturalist at the hut did say they wind down around July 4th.
peakbagger
In Rembrance , July 2024
There is a 200 foot rule for camping away from the trail in the wilderness area. There is a marked 200 foot section of trail just prior to the bridge at Franconia falls to count your paces. Finding a legal spot 200 feet from the former junction of the Bondcliff trail and the Lincoln Brook trail shouldn't be a problem as its open woods.
And also, the 200 foot rule applies past the Franconia Brook bridge for the East Branch of the Pemi itself, not just the Bondcliff trail, so if you are camping before you start climbing the old trail, just keep that in mind. I would consider that area to be a 'high enforcement area'.
Higher up on the trail (if you are thinking of the site after the highest crossing of Black Brook) you may well find a hardened site that is technically illegal. IMO, I would rather people use established sites than tramp and create new ones, but you could be cited. If you offered that as your reasoning though, I would hope they just ask you to move.
I agree that using an already beaten down area is better than beating down a new area, but the (I think) $500 fine for being too close outweighs that.
I'll see if I can find my old boy scout bug net, otherwise I'll bring the tent. The weight is less of an issue than making sure they all enjoy it, so they'll let me make plans again sometime!
I'll check the trip reports as the date gets closer, too. Thanks everybody.
I'll see if I can find my old boy scout bug net, otherwise I'll bring the tent. The weight is less of an issue than making sure they all enjoy it, so they'll let me make plans again sometime!
I'll check the trip reports as the date gets closer, too. Thanks everybody.
Yeah, I hear ya. Bondcliff trail is very popular. You could probably get away with it in a bunch of places in the Pemi, but that does seem too risky. Checking the reports as you get closer is a great idea too.
Anybody camp out that way recently that wants to share a bug report? Just hiking through bug reports are useful too. We'll be bringing DEET, so please don't mock me.
Any good (legal) camping spots that already exist would be appreciated as well! I've heard rumors of a few and plan on talking to the Rangers when we walk by on the way in.
Any good (legal) camping spots that already exist would be appreciated as well! I've heard rumors of a few and plan on talking to the Rangers when we walk by on the way in.
HAMTERO
Active member
Came down Bondcliff Tr Saturday. No bugs. Camped off of Thoreau Falls Tr that night. Used headnet for a few minutes. Was fine with tarp.
natron
New member
i couldn't believe the lack of all types of bugs on the pemi loop yesterday.
The Sikes
Member
Just went this past weekend and we didn't have any bugs until a couple of black flies on the way out of Lincoln Woods (there was a very muddy section). That was it! We were oh so happy!!!
JustJoe
Active member
natron
New member
aren't all the sites on the bondcliff trail illegal? due to proximity of trail and water?
JustJoe
Active member
There are no bodies of water that are an issue there. The 200' rules does apply. Whether they are outside that I don't know.
I called the ranger station a few days ago. He said you had to be 200' from black brook to be legal, so I'm guessing that second picture would at least get you a stern talking to if one of them happened to walk up on you camping there. I'm sure there's either a good established legal or very close to legal site at the very least.
Awesome news about the lack of bugs, for sure! I've been outvoted on the tarp instead of tent thing anyway, though...
Awesome news about the lack of bugs, for sure! I've been outvoted on the tarp instead of tent thing anyway, though...
JustJoe
Active member
First, that's not Black Brook in the second photo. It's a feeder stream to Black Brook. But that's interesting about Black Brook. I see nothing in the back-country camping rules that would suggest that is so. I've never camped at any of those spots but they've been there for years.
Lefty E
Active member
Page 163 of the WMG gives info...says no camping near Black Pond but does not mention Black Brook...in Wilderness of course, no camping within 200 of any trail....
JCarter
Member
Interesting. Black Brook is not listed in the Backcountry Rules as a body of water with a 200' exclusion. Leave No Trace says "Camp at sites that have already been heavily impacted (but be sure it's a legal site) or 200 feet from trails or water."
I'm just going off what the ranger told me. I didn't push the question and say "200 feet from which waters exactly?". He said '200 feet from water', so there might be some confusion in the enforcement. I'd bet with the decision to remove a bunch of bridges pretty recently, they'd be more than happy to write someone a ticket with a decent fine even if the people camping were legal by the letter of the law. I don't have the time to go and fight it, or the spare cash to just pay it.
That would be an awesome spot to camp, though, for sure. I'll ask the rangers a lot of questions when I get there (and get a name!), but there's no way I'm going to argue if they're planning on writing me a ticket. Things can get ugly when you challenge authority when they think you should just roll over...
Honestly, though, any obvious spot that is clearly old and used frequently should have been brushed in if it's not legal.
I wasn't looking to start a huge debate on how/when/why rules get enforced about camping. Sorry!
