U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-03-2012, 11:10 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MO
3,572 posts, read 6,497,427 times
Reputation: 2574

Advertisements

I was talking to a friend about Arkansas and how cool I think the landscape is there. We are both Kansas City natives and while he's been everywhere, it's interesting he hasn't seen Arkansas except Eureka Springs, which is just south of the Missouri-Arkansas border. For the record, I think Arkansas beats both Missouri and Oklahoma in terms of mountainous terrain. Most of the western 2/3rds of Arkansas is interesting and has both the Ozark mountains and Ouachita mountains, which are divided by the Arkansas river valley, which makes for an interesting feature in and of itself. However, while Arkansas has quality, large lakes, it simply seems to have fewer than either Missouri or Oklahoma. This is the line of thinking that prompted me to start this thread. Missouri and Oklahoma seem very close in terms of interesting geography. Personally, I haven't seen all there is to see in either state so I can't be sure which is more interesting, but I know they are close. I haven't seen the most mountainous terrain in Missouri (Mark Twain National Forest, St. Francois mountains) south of STL, for example. Nor have I seen the Wichita mountains in Oklahoma.

All that said, both Missouri and Oklahoma each have several large lakes. Both have a similar sized area of mountains. Oklahoma perhaps has a bit more variety in that they have the Quachitas, Ozarks, and Wichita Mountains. Missouri has its river valley. Oklahoma has the Osage Hills (which actually extend northward into Kansas, forming one of Kansas' most interesting areas).

Missouri and Oklahoma seem so close, but which is more interesting?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-03-2012, 11:49 PM
 
Location: Muncie, IN
588 posts, read 1,090,288 times
Reputation: 495
I'd give the edge to Missouri , though Oklahoma has similarities to Missouri but it also has the panhandle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2012, 01:15 AM
 
3,644 posts, read 8,998,915 times
Reputation: 1798
Looking at a topography map, it looks like Oklahoma's mountains are more dramatic, whereas Missouri's "mountains" look more like hills in comparison. But in Oklahoma, they're mostly confined to the Southeast corner of the state, whereas half of MO is hilly. I haven't seen the mountains in OK because when I go there I always go to the Northeast corner where it's moderately hilly.

I haven't seen real mountains in MO either, but the drive from roughly Cape Girardeau to St. Louis is beautiful because of the hills. To me, they're almost mountains because I'm from a flat area. I'm sure there are even more beautiful drives a little further West.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2012, 01:49 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MO
3,572 posts, read 6,497,427 times
Reputation: 2574
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smtchll View Post
Looking at a topography map, it looks like Oklahoma's mountains are more dramatic, whereas Missouri's "mountains" look more like hills in comparison. But in Oklahoma, they're mostly confined to the Southeast corner of the state, whereas half of MO is hilly. I haven't seen the mountains in OK because when I go there I always go to the Northeast corner where it's moderately hilly.

I haven't seen real mountains in MO either, but the drive from roughly Cape Girardeau to St. Louis is beautiful because of the hills. To me, they're almost mountains because I'm from a flat area. I'm sure that further from the interstate it gets even more beautiful.
Google's terrain map is interesting because it shows most of the area between KC and Springfield in that darker green which I guess means hilliness (or trees?) and I've recently been back and forth to Springfield a couple of times from KC on both 13 and 65 and it doesn't seem that different from eastern Kansas (except for the lakes, obviously) along 69 or 169, which is NOT covered in the green on the terrain map. I guess I just haven't been down through Kansas in a long time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2012, 08:17 AM
 
Location: IN
20,846 posts, read 35,937,611 times
Reputation: 13287
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOKAN View Post
I was talking to a friend about Arkansas and how cool I think the landscape is there. We are both Kansas City natives and while he's been everywhere, it's interesting he hasn't seen Arkansas except Eureka Springs, which is just south of the Missouri-Arkansas border. For the record, I think Arkansas beats both Missouri and Oklahoma in terms of mountainous terrain. Most of the western 2/3rds of Arkansas is interesting and has both the Ozark mountains and Ouachita mountains, which are divided by the Arkansas river valley, which makes for an interesting feature in and of itself. However, while Arkansas has quality, large lakes, it simply seems to have fewer than either Missouri or Oklahoma. This is the line of thinking that prompted me to start this thread. Missouri and Oklahoma seem very close in terms of interesting geography. Personally, I haven't seen all there is to see in either state so I can't be sure which is more interesting, but I know they are close. I haven't seen the most mountainous terrain in Missouri (Mark Twain National Forest, St. Francois mountains) south of STL, for example. Nor have I seen the Wichita mountains in Oklahoma.

All that said, both Missouri and Oklahoma each have several large lakes. Both have a similar sized area of mountains. Oklahoma perhaps has a bit more variety in that they have the Quachitas, Ozarks, and Wichita Mountains. Missouri has its river valley. Oklahoma has the Osage Hills (which actually extend northward into Kansas, forming one of Kansas' most interesting areas).

Missouri and Oklahoma seem so close, but which is more interesting?
Oklahoma has more varied diverse terrain, vegetation, climate zones, and topography than most states in a relatively short distance. They have the edge there.

I hate to rain on the parade but Oklahoma, Missouri, and Arkansas do not have lakes. All the bodies of water there are reservoirs, so they aren't naturally occurring. If you want to see real lakes take a trip to the Upper Midwest and visit the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The Porcupine Mountains there along with naturally occurring lakes make for a fantastic diverse landscape. Google Ontonagon County for more info. The Northwoods of MN and WI have excellent lakes as well with water clarity that beats any southern reservoir, as those are often quite muddy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2012, 08:19 AM
 
Location: IN
20,846 posts, read 35,937,611 times
Reputation: 13287
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOKAN View Post
Google's terrain map is interesting because it shows most of the area between KC and Springfield in that darker green which I guess means hilliness (or trees?) and I've recently been back and forth to Springfield a couple of times from KC on both 13 and 65 and it doesn't seem that different from eastern Kansas (except for the lakes, obviously) along 69 or 169, which is NOT covered in the green on the terrain map. I guess I just haven't been down through Kansas in a long time.
Light green shading is generally indicative of vegetation cover that is comprised of a higher percentage of treed land vs open land. The National Weather Service uses google maps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2012, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 4,227,179 times
Reputation: 998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zachj7 View Post
I'd give the edge to Missouri , though Oklahoma has similarities to Missouri but it also has the panhandle.
Oklahoma's similarities to Missouri are only in the northeastern part of the state...southwest Missouri is the only area which I'd say could be compared to Oklahoma, though it's not mutually exclusive by any means.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2012, 12:28 PM
 
Location: IN
20,846 posts, read 35,937,611 times
Reputation: 13287
Quote:
Originally Posted by stlouisan View Post
Oklahoma's similarities to Missouri are only in the northeastern part of the state...southwest Missouri is the only area which I'd say could be compared to Oklahoma, though it's not mutually exclusive by any means.
Only two rural counties in Oklahoma have very high population densities and they are both in the northeastern corner of the state. Those are Mayes and Delaware. This comprises the towns of Vinita, Big Lake, Pryor?, Grove, and Grand Lake of the Cherokees Reservoir. This is more of a recreation and retiree area similar to what one would find in southern Missouri or the Ozarks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2012, 02:20 PM
 
Location: Silver Springs, FL
23,440 posts, read 31,715,256 times
Reputation: 15560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smtchll View Post
Looking at a topography map, it looks like Oklahoma's mountains are more dramatic, whereas Missouri's "mountains" look more like hills in comparison. But in Oklahoma, they're mostly confined to the Southeast corner of the state, whereas half of MO is hilly. I haven't seen the mountains in OK because when I go there I always go to the Northeast corner where it's moderately hilly.

I haven't seen real mountains in MO either, but the drive from roughly Cape Girardeau to St. Louis is beautiful because of the hills. To me, they're almost mountains because I'm from a flat area. I'm sure there are even more beautiful drives a little further West.
Technically, the hills in my beloved Sainte Genevieve County are foothills of mountains.
Just really ancient ones.

St. Francois Mountains - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2012, 04:00 PM
 
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 4,227,179 times
Reputation: 998
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
Only two rural counties in Oklahoma have very high population densities and they are both in the northeastern corner of the state. Those are Mayes and Delaware. This comprises the towns of Vinita, Big Lake, Pryor?, Grove, and Grand Lake of the Cherokees Reservoir. This is more of a recreation and retiree area similar to what one would find in southern Missouri or the Ozarks.
Pretty much. The Ozarks are a cultural hodgepodge of Midwest and south.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top