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.
Is the reason that Canada doesn't have any officially designated part of the Pan American Highway because Canada's foreign policy was more Atlanticist (e.g. NATO) than pan-American for the longest time? That is, a similar reason as to why Canada didn't join the Organization of American States until 1990?
My guess would be more that roads in Canada are under provincial jurisdiction. The federal government cannot do anything about how the provinces name or number their highways. If Alberta (for example) chose to designate the applicable parts of highways 2, 3, and 4 as the Pan-American highway, it could. But the federal government can't make Alberta do so, nor stop it from doing so if it wished.
One thing that the map doesn't show are all the spur routes of the Pan American Highway that go through Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, Brazil, and Venezuela.
Perhaps because it's unclear where its northern terminus should be. It's an important symbolic road that links the Americas together but there are countless ways to link Mexico, the US and Canada, so nothing particularly symbolic would be achieved by officially designating I-35, I-5, and whatever Canadian roads as the Pan-Am Highway.
The US hasn't properly dealt with the designation either: Congress just solved the problem by designating the entire Eisenhower Interstate System as part of the Pan-American Highway.
Perhaps because it's unclear where its northern terminus should be. It's an important symbolic road that links the Americas together but there are countless ways to link Mexico, the US and Canada, so nothing particularly symbolic would be achieved by officially designating I-35, I-5, and whatever Canadian roads as the Pan-Am Highway.
The US hasn't properly dealt with the designation either: Congress just solved the problem by designating the entire Eisenhower Interstate System as part of the Pan-American Highway.
So you're saying perhaps that there are fewer ways to link the west-coast South American countries (Chile to Colombia) together, or the east-coast South American countries (Argentina to Brazil/Bolivia to Venezuela or whatever) together, than to link Canada, the US, and Mexico together?
I agree that the Pan-American highway runs through Canada (heck, the Wikipedia entry tells me that I drive on part of it pretty much daily), but I'm understanding the OP as wondering why no signs indicate "Pan-American highway," as Ontario's 401 is designated the "Highway of Heroes," Alberta's Highway 2 between Calgary and Edmonton is designated as the QEII Highway, and so on.
Are there signs indicating "Pan American Hwy" everywhere else through the Americas?
The Wikipedia page shows a photo of such a sign used in Chile. Mind, it is in Spanish ("Chile via Panam"), though it does show both North and South America on the sign. I've never seen similar signs on I-15, though; which from your map, I understand to be part of the Pan-American Highway.
Quote:
As a side note, I think it would be really cool to take a road trip on there from far north to far south.
See Tim Cahill's Road Fever, about a trip where he and a co-driver drove the length of the Pan-American Highway. I've read it; it's quite good.
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.
