American Rockies vs Canadian Rockies (pine, park, area)
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.
I largely agree with your opinion. So many of the peaks in the Front Range are relatively featureless, compared to the rugged profile of the San Juans, particularly the Sneffels subrange. However, don't forget the Elk Range, most notably the Maroon Bells. If you haven't been there before, the Sawtooth Mtns. in Idaho strongly resemble the Tetons in terms of craggy peaks that rise, without foothills, from a sage-covered valley floor. The Sawtooths simply receive far less visitation than the Tetons.
I have seen the Sawtooth Mtns. Your comments are 100% spot on.
The Sawtooth's in Idaho are a much larger range than the Teton Range and true there are similarities.
The Tooth's are around 30 miles long and nearly 25 miles wide of constant ridges of serrated mountain peaks and lakes and rivers and streams. Most of this range is unseen from the highway, you have to get into them and hike. They are really in a league of their own.
One reason the Tetons thankfully get more visitors than the Sawooths is because the Sawtooth Mountains are protected by official Wilderness classification which restricts the activities and forms of transportation one can use in them. The Tetons are a National Park which attracts hordes of visitors mainly because of the National Park status and easier access. At one time it was debated if the Sawtooths should become a national park but the ultimate decision is that they are too precious to become a tourist trap like many NP's and they were given the more holy Wilderness status to protect them.
I think all of the Rockies are beautiful from the SW USA all the way into Canada. I do feel amongst all of the Rocky Mountain states, that Idaho has some of the finest mountain scenery and has the most lush and green mountains of all of the USA Rocky states which makes sense because Idaho is the most forested of the USA Rocky States. The spine that forms the state line of Idaho and Montana is amazing. The Idaho side is more moist while the Montana side is dryer.
The only mts. in Colorado worth a s*** are the San Juans. The rest are just rounded/flat tops and not much to look at. It's also difficult to enjoy because they are so packed with people. To really enjoy the U.S. Rockies go to WY or MT.
To answer the oringal question I would have to say Canada's are more beautiful.
I agree. The Rockies in Colorado are actually quite boring. Yes they are tall but from a climbers perspective they are boring. The Canadian Rockies are glaciated and more jagged with greater vertical relief.
In reality the North Cascades in WA state are far superior compared to anything in the lower 48. The Canadian Rockies trump both though =)
http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1448495684470&id=b24326e29369f1da 6a39c1ccdfc3b156&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.worldofstock .com%2fslides%2fNAL1789.jpg (broken link) is this really that boring! ( i do not own this picture)
Many of the most spectacular landscapes in the American West owe their rugged profiles not only to glaciation but also to their comparative youth. The Tetons, for example, are believed to be only 9 million years old (Geology of the Grand Teton area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) and the current uplift of the Cascades began ca. 8 million years ago. The major volcanic peaks in the Cascades are even younger, having begun to rise within the last 1.6 million years (Geology of the Pacific Northwest - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ). By contrast, the Laramide Orogeny, which was the catalyst to formation of the Rockies, began in the Late Cretaceous, some 70 million years ago (Laramide orogeny - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ).
I agree. The Rockies in Colorado are actually quite boring. Yes they are tall but from a climbers perspective they are boring. The Canadian Rockies are glaciated and more jagged with greater vertical relief.
In reality the North Cascades in WA state are far superior compared to anything in the lower 48. The Canadian Rockies trump both though =)
Some parts of the Front Range or central Colorado Rockies are fairly mellow mountains in comparison even with their high elevation, yeah... I went to Colorado a year ago and climbed three fourteeners(14 Thousand Foot Peaks) in one afternoon hike. In the Cascades or Sierra or Tetons, the mountains are too rugged or steep or have a higher elevation gain between them to do that. There are more rugged parts of the Colorado Rockies like the Maroon Bells and San Juans. But I see where you're coming from--climbing Mt. Baker or Mt. Rainier or even Mt. Hood is a much longer and much more challenging experience going over miles of ice flow, dealing with late season snowpack, climbing up steep headwalls...
I hate to be picky, but the last pic you have there (lower right) is not in the rockies, it is Mr. Shuksan in Washington state. That is in the north cascades- not the rockies.
I hate to be picky, but the last pic you have there (lower right) is not in the rockies, it is Mr. Shuksan in Washington state. That is in the north cascades- not the rockies.
The one in the middle is Denali(McKinley) in Alaska. Which isn't the Rockies either. But I think the OP might have assumed that the entire Western Cordellia is assumed to all be "the Rockies"--which isn't true.
I hate to be picky, but the last pic you have there (lower right) is not in the rockies, it is Mr. Shuksan in Washington state. That is in the north cascades- not the rockies.
Ya I saw that as well. Mt Shuksan is in the Cascades of Washington State, and the other pic at the top right corner is Denali in Alaska (Brooks Range).
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.
