Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
San Diego to Eureka is 776 miles and between the two borders add another 125 miles or so.. Well over 500 miles looks like to me.
A drive on I-5 from border to border, is an estimated 15 hours at interstate highway speed if you are lucky enough to go when traffic is light. Otherwise if you hit the high traffic areas at quitting time add a few more hours.
San Francisco is only 548 miles to San Diego.
Palm Springs to Eureka is 788 miles.
Remember when you go somewhere for recreation you have to return also. Combined the total trip will very often be from 500 to 2,000 miles. The one losing credibility is not me but you. Apparently I know a lot more about California than you do.
California is a big state. Remember, I was a 3rd generation Californian on both sides of my family when I was born there over 80 years ago, raised there and raised a family there and have been in every part of California there is over the years. Not down every single road, but in all parts of the state, from the Redwoods to Death Valley. From fishing off of Crescent City, to playing at the beach in San Diego Christmas Day 1950. Eating lunch at Whiskey Town going over the mountains, and skiing at the 1950s Winter Olympics site. Have you seen the entire state as I have? On top of that as a licensed pilot, I have flown over much of it. I realize how big it is, and you try to measure it from California to Utah, not how far the recreation areas and populated areas are apart in California and consider as recreation trip is a two way trip.
Wrong. There are restricted areas in the state, with no or limited access.
The Headwaters Forest Reserve, is another area with huge restrictions. Public only allowed on trails, and not into the forest itself. And only allowed partial year on some trails.
All the environmentalists saying it is ancient trees in the area. When I was growing up, my family had an exclusive lease for that whole forest and a lot more to run cattle, etc. It was logged over in the early to mid 1900s. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, my family had leased part of our ranch to the logging company where they built a logging camp. The camp had a big cookhouse to feed the loggers, and there were individual cabins built to house the workers. They hauled the logs out of the woods by train with tracks around the forest. they left a locomotive (steam engine wood fired) sitting on about 30 feet of track when they left, and that was my play thing when I was little. Second world war came along, and it was taken out as scrap metal for the war effort.
Here is a picture of a logging train in that area bringing logs out of the forest from the Headwaters Forest area. The engine is like I had for a plaything as a small child. The logs are 20 feet long, to give you a guide to the size of the logs.
The office building was converted later to a home I lived in as a youth. When I rode horses and drove cattle between the good pasture areas as a teen age boy, the trees were small at best and they were logging part of it that had become easier to log with trucks. Just as they reached the time to harvest again, so much fuss was made that they stopped the logging and took over the land.
And you cannot just wonder on any national forest, park land, or BLM land at anytime. There are restricted areas, there are areas with limited access or only with a guide, or other restrictions such as part year closed areas.
Yes but the issue brought up was NOT about how large California is. I know very well how large it is from northern end to southern. That has nothing to do with what we were talking about.
The issue was about accessibility from the populated areas. Yes - someone in San Diego that wants to see redwood forests would have to travel 500 to 1000 miles, and someone in San Fransisco would have to do the same if they wanted to see sand dunes.
But the way you worded it, suggested that people would have to travel 500 to 1000 miles to do accessble and large public land areas.
And as far as being "locked up" and "closed up", I understand that the public lands maybe innaccessible to certain uses, and I do believe that public lands should have something for everyone including off roading, and even some timber harvesting where it doesn't collide with other recreation/conservation.
However for me personally, I am primarily interested in more passive recreation use like hiking, wildlife observation, etc.
Thank you Curmudgeon and Leonard for answering my questions. Your stories were interesting and insightful.
I am happy to hear how much you love your adopted region.
You're are quite welcome. It's just too bad that the predictable and obviously obsessed cast of pom-pom girls and cheerleaders had to jump in with meaningless comparisons having obviously not read and comprehended your original post. It's both sad and funny. California is a wonderful state and I truly believe that most of us who are natives and/or long-term residents truly love it but simply, after many years of residence, wanted something different. California speaks for itself and doesn't need an embellishment in order to make it the unique and, in many ways, delightful place that it is. In my mind those approaches serve only to diminish and degrade it. Politicizing it makes it even worse. But I guess some people just can't help themselves
It's rather serendipitous. In my original response I mentioned wildlife. This morning when I got up and went into the kitchen to make coffee, I looked out the kitchen window at our backyard. Where we live, there are no privacy fences and our lots are relatively large. That makes for large, treed, open green belts between the homes. Looking back at me was a beautiful, picture-perfect, bushy tailed red fox. While we had seen them before in the wild and crossing in front of us on our country lanes, this was the first time one had come onto our property that we were aware of. It was a beautiful way to start the day.
Last edited by Curmudgeon; 11-23-2012 at 08:18 AM..
We moved to Northern Virginia 8 years ago, only because of husband's job. Two years unemployed in Silicon Valley made us grab the first job opportunity (I had just immigrated and was still a student). The move was supposed to be only for two years. Here we are, wondering how to move back.
I'm a fifth generation Southern Californian (with deep roots in Northern CA as well) who moved to Northern Virginia over 20 years ago for job reasons and more affordable housing (this has since changed, but after I bought my current place) I still like it here because we have such a strong, stable economy and it's beautiful where I'm located, right next to the Potomac River on what was part of George Washington's farm. We have a really good school system which my kids went all the way through as well as great state universities. Washington DC and Alexandria are nice cities to be located near.
I pretty much wrung everything one could out of California so don't really feel a need to go back to live, although I enjoy visiting from time to time. I don't have any negative feelings about my home state and remain a loyal Cal alum and fan. Go Bears!
There are many things we miss about CA. I was born there, grew up there and even loved Los Angeles of the past. I have so many wonderful memories, I could never hate it. I just did not like the changes. The gangs were becoming a problem for us trying to raise a kid there, the schools were becoming to interested in all subjects but math and science. Northern CA was a bit of a relief and we enjoyed the nature of it. Miss Napa landscape most of all.....Taxes drove us out and we realized CA is not all that compasionate towards old people so we looked for a softer landing for our old age. We are close enough to drive over to visit and that is wonderful.
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 9,680,939 times
Reputation: 2622
Hoo eee
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtrader
San Diego to Eureka is 776 miles and between the two borders add another 125 miles or so.. Well over 500 miles looks like to me.
A drive on I-5 from border to border, is an estimated 15 hours at interstate highway speed if you are lucky enough to go when traffic is light. Otherwise if you hit the high traffic areas at quitting time add a few more hours.
San Francisco is only 548 miles to San Diego.
Palm Springs to Eureka is 788 miles.
Remember when you go somewhere for recreation you have to return also. Combined the total trip will very often be from 500 to 2,000 miles. The one losing credibility is not me but you. Apparently I know a lot more about California than you do.
One can drive 500 to 2,000 miles and remain in California, and be in some pretty fine country, or you can live else where and drive 500 to 2,000 miles to get to some pretty fine country.
California is a big state. Remember, I was a 3rd generation Californian on both sides of my family when I was born there over 80 years ago, raised there and raised a family there and have been in every part of California there is over the years. Not down every single road, but in all parts of the state, from the Redwoods to Death Valley. From fishing off of Crescent City, to playing at the beach in San Diego Christmas Day 1950. Eating lunch at Whiskey Town going over the mountains, and skiing at the 1950s Winter Olympics site. Have you seen the entire state as I have? On top of that as a licensed pilot, I have flown over much of it. I realize how big it is, and you try to measure it from California to Utah, not how far the recreation areas and populated areas are apart in California and consider as recreation trip is a two way trip.
And gave it all up to live in a suburb for 30 years, guess all that specialness was not all that special.
Wrong. There are restricted areas in the state, with no or limited access.
This site states generalities, I have never found an area closed I challenge you to list one, the term "locked out" is a code word for "can't drive my machine and throw beer cans" You made a claim but the only example was the Headwaters Forest Reserve
The Headwaters Forest Reserve, is another area with huge restrictions. Public only allowed on trails, and not into the forest itself. And only allowed partial year on some trails.
And you cannot just wonder on any national forest, park land, or BLM land at anytime. There are restricted areas, there are areas with limited access or only with a guide, or other restrictions such as part year closed areas. Actually one can wonder on any land, I think you meant wander. And, one can wander on any National Forest, park land or BLM land at any time I challenge you to list areas that have limited access, or only with a guide (that especially seems silly) and or part year closed areas, While you are at it, give specific acreages of these "limited areas", I betcha it comes to less than 100,000 acres out of the 42,000,000 acres of public land in the state. Now remember, not being able to drive on certain lands, is not "limited" or "locked out" since those non vehicle areas can be walked or equestrianated.
Most of it will be 500 miles to 1,000 miles from the populated areas most people live, and very few will do a lot of recreating on any of that land, in any given year.
A lot of the federal land in California is not for recreation, but is off limits, or limited to very few people on it at a time.
I can't even finish reading the thread after reading this. I have lived in two metros in CA. San Diego and the Bay Area. Both of these area have lots of
public land just outside of them. In San Diego you can be on top of a mountain looking down at a desert in less than an hour. Hell in San Fran isco a quick drive across the Golden Gate Bridge can take you into virgin redwoods inside a half hour. Even LA has wild land very close by in the San Gabriel mts and high desert. The IE is close to the SB mts. Sits right under them actually. So the way I see it, most of the states population is less than 30 or 40 miles from these areas and in some cases less than 10, not 500.
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 9,680,939 times
Reputation: 2622
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVA1990
There's a word you don't see every day. Sounds like George Bush would do on a horse. I'd have paired it with perambulated though.
Sounds good though don' it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo
I can't even finish reading the thread after reading this. I have lived in two metros in CA. San Diego and the Bay Area. Both of these area have lots of
public land just outside of them. In San Diego you can be on top of a mountain looking down at a desert in less than an hour. Hell in San Fran isco a quick drive across the Golden Gate Bridge can take you into virgin redwoods inside a half hour. Even LA has wild land very close by in the San Gabriel mts and high desert. The IE is close to the SB mts. Sits right under them actually. So the way I see it, most of the states population is less than 30 or 40 miles from these areas and in some cases less than 10, not 500.
there is a million acres of Wilderness within two hours of Los Angeles.
Thank you Curmudgeon and Leonard for answering my questions. Your stories were interesting and insightful.
I am happy to hear how much you love your adopted region.
Thank you. As you will notice some try to denigrate anything that isn't in CA. When avaulating all of CA VS all of the areas I would be living in, the choice was still not easy, as I love CA. However the benefits were so overwhelming it was hard to not give it a try. For those who like what CA has become politically and socially, great. That doesn't change the State's beauty, just the day to day environment.
I know many who live in CA now and are simply making a few more dollars, waiting for their home price to rise a bit and then they are gone. Is this the majority, probably not, but is it representative of a large number? The exodus from CA bears this out.Are people moving in, yep and I hope they enjoy living there. Many times where they are moving from was not as nice as CA is now, in other cases they just want to live there to see.
If you take away the birth rate, CA is seeing an outward exodus and it isn't because the vast majority hated CA or it's beauty.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
