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 would say the ten most heavily forested cities are generally in areas where trees grow in abundance. Like the Pacific Northwest, the deep South, upper part of the Mid-West, and New England ( Northeast states ). So cities in those regions will be more wooded than those out on the plains and desert areas of America. In my opinion the following ten cities will have to be given a nod as being "forested'.
1. Seattle
2. Portland
3. Charlotte
4. Atlanta
5. Pittsburgh
6. Tallahassee, Fl
7. Raleigh, NC
8. Minneapolis
9. Grand Rapids, Mi
10 Boston
Interesting list, but I would definitely remove Denver and add Pittsburgh or Atlanta. Denver has more deciduous trees than most people think- and even some nice color in the fall. But for the most part it is very exposed and open compared to the other cities on the list, which have natural canopies. The Botanic Gardens and arboretum in City Park don't compensate for a lack of indigenous trees.
the PNW and Piedmont stick out for me. DC is actually very lush and green in the summer. You would find it hard to believe you are driving through a major metro area in some spots driving on the beltway. Houston is pretty underrated too as already pointed out. Also, to that one other poster earlier, I would NOT sleep on Charlotte.
To be honest, I think all cities east of Columbus in the North and east of Houston in the South are probably pretty equal in this regard. Birmingham, Atlanta, Charlotte, Raleigh, Philly, Pittsburgh, Hartford, Albany, Richmond, Nashville, Baltimore, DC, Boston, Syracuse, Rochester (NY), and Providence all look like they were carved out of a rainforest. It's hard for me to say that any of those cities are any more or less forested than any other.
I think that a lot of statistics about what are the most forested cities have to do more with the amount of suburban area incorporated into the city limits and the number of parks within the city limits. In Baltimore, for instance, there are hardly any trees at all here in the inner city, but there are a lot of suburban neighborhoods on the fringes of the city proper that are shaded under a dark canopy of trees. If those neighborhoods incorporated themselves into separate towns, Baltimore's place in those rankings would surely fall dramatically.
I think your right about Baltimore, which never struck me as having alot of trees. Sure enough, from looking at satellite pictures, there does not seem to be a lot of trees in inner Baltimore. There is more in the outer areas.
yes, by MILES! what is it again that we were discussing?
Egos, apparently.
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.