Planning potential campsites

[sbennett3705]

I'm planning 2024 trips in Caltopo. Is there advice on how to spot potential campsites? Caltopo has some shown, but certainly not all. For example, can't always tell if a lake is camp-able, or is it surrounded by steep talus with no established sites.

[balzaccom]

You can always tell if a place is flat within about forty feet--the contour level of the map. But you don't know if that area is full of talus, overgrown with aspens, marshy to the point of soaking wet, etc. And forty feet of variation is a long way from dead flat.

So no, there is no way of telling, just from a topo map, if someplace would be a good campsite.

You can always find references to campsites on this site, if you read through the trip reports. And I think that part of the fun of backpacking is arriving at your destination and then deciding, based on quite a few factors, where you will camp that night. And yeah, just occasionally, that will mean hiking either farther or back, to find a better campsite.

[sbennett3705]

And yeah, just occasionally, that will mean hiking either farther or back, to find a better campsite.

Thanks balzaccom; as a dyed-in-the-wool planner, this causes distress. Oh well...

[Bishop_Bob]

I do what balzaccom said - I search HST for mentions of campsites along my route and, more importantly, comments on whether places lack campsites. For example, I'm wanting to traverse Ionian Basin, and many on HST have commented where campsites can and cannot be found along that route.

[TahoeJeff]

Google Earth Pro is a very good resource for camp site planning.

[Wandering Daisy]

Access to water is also an important factor in selecting a campsite as well as wind/storm protection and drainage. This is a lot more than you are going to discover on maps or Google Earth. I have used Google Earth but even if a site looks good, it can be bad when you get there. The trouble I have with Google Earth is that when I am on the ground, I often cannot find the exact place I saw on Google Earth. I only use paper maps and do not use a GPS. I like to make each day's camp a scenic destination. In this case, I do like the Google Earth on-ground views. As for talus or vegetation if you are really interested, geologic maps are useful, and I think there also are vegetation maps available.

Even though I am an obsessive planner myself, I do not try to plan exact campsites. Sometimes I have to be creative to make a site work. I also keep an eye out while I am walking well before I need to camp. Sometimes I will go back to a site I saw earlier. I almost always put my pack down and scout around for about half an hour. Even then when I wander around in the evening or go fishing, I find a better site. Sometimes I will move the tent, most often not. I have become better in my old age at "letting go" of a requirement of a perfect campsite. Sometimes I even stumble upon an outstanding campsite where I never would have thought it was possible.

Your equipment may also be a factor. As for rocky or lumpy ground, I find that I need a smoother surface because I use a thin sleeping pad. I suppose if I were to buy one of those 2-3" thick blow-up pads I could do fine on less than perfect ground surface. And if I carry two 2-L playtpus water containers I can actually camp quite a distance from water sources.

[kpeter]

The weather makes a huge difference, too. If you are completely assured of good weather, you have all kinds of options that you won't have if the weather could turn bad. For example, there are many flat spots suitable for a tent that are flat precisely because they puddle with water after a heavy rain and the sediment settles (flatly) there.

But if there is a possibility of rain, you want a well drained site even if it is on a slight slope, ideally you want porous soil so the water soaks in, and you don't want to be downhill of a large granite sheet that will drain an acre of rain right on top of you.

I also agree that carrying enough containers to haul water a ways opens up many possibilities that are foreclosed otherwise. This can be especially helpful during mosquito season when you want to get AWAY from green, buggy, watery areas.

I tend to prefer lakes that are not above treeline but rather at treeline. I like to have some afternoon shade on my tent so I can take a cool nap if I want to. And I have NEVER found a lake at or below treeline that does not have at least one or two serviceable campsites. The lakes that are down in a hole and have talus 360 degrees around are lakes I would not want to camp at anyway.

Finally, don't dismiss stream camping. In many ways, I prefer it to lake camping. Streams in U-shaped glacial valleys often have flat areas if you look for them. Streams in V-shaped valleys not so much. Stream camping in the Sierra is thus much more feasible than stream camping in the Olympics in Washington State, I discovered, since our streams tend to meander down those glacial valleys and theirs tend to be at the bottom of steep canyons.

[wildhiker]

The original Sierra Club backpacking guide from the 1950s ("Going Light With Backpack or Burro") had a long list of considerations for choosing a campsite. At the end of the list, it had this advice that I try to always take: "And if your campsite hath all these things, but no view, it profiteth thee nothing!"
-Phil

[giantbrookie]

I second Tahoe Jeff's recommendation of Google Earth to prospect for campsites before leaving home--this is my preferred tool. I tend to like to choose campsites a bit higher above water than most, which generally reduces the mosquito issues, and, for more popular destinations, will commonly result in a more secluded campsite. On the last two long backpack trips I did with my daughter nearly all of the places we camped were "scouted" with Google Earth, and my route around a lake on arrival was based on heading the potential flat area I'd located on Google Earth. The use of Google Earth has resulted in finding some of the very best and most memorable campsites I've camped in, including a place so nice (at a trailless lake in NW Yosemite) that my daughter and I spent three layover days there this past summer. Prior to Google Earth it was far more general and improvised---I'd simply look over the lay of the land on arrival at destination and explore. If I didn't find something right away I'd drop my pack and go scouting.

Note, although I use Google Earth a lot for pre-trip planning there some good campsites that Google Earth doesn't effectively prospect for---these are the sort that are beneath a tree canopy. The place I camped on my last backpack trip of 2023 was one of those. That site was one of those "scout on arrival" (old school) schemes, but the trail/path to our destination pretty much led us there.

[sbennett3705]

Google Earth is an eye opening - thanks for the recommendation, seems awesome, but the current pictures are snow covered – is there a way to see a picture from summer? Also like the idea of “carry once from the water source”, I now carry a 2L CNOC, 1L clean bottle and 1L BeFree. This is my second year with a trekking pole tent, so camp selection is a bit more challenging: prefer higher up from water, stake-receptive surface, wind sheltered. Successfully did some slab-camping last year, but the 3-rock-stake method definitely takes more work.