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.
On my list to visit are two national parks which don't get much attention -- Badlands and Great Basin. Has anyone been to these parks? How were they?
Great Basin is a neat park, one that I was going to mention. Small, remote, not crowded or well known, off the beaten path and takes a bit of planning to get to. If you visit, be sure to take the ranger guided tour of Lehman Caverns.
North Cascades- Mt. Rainier and Olympic seems to get way more tourists, but that just because North Cascades lacks an easily accessible focal point like Hurricane Ridge in the Olympics or Paradise on Rainier. You can barely glimpse the full size of the area from a drive on the North Cascade Highway--the best stuff you've got to hike a little bit to reach--but when you get there it's easily the scenery is almost the equivalent of Glacier, the Grand Tetons, or even the Alps.
Kings Canyon-Everyone goes to Yosemite, but Kings Canyon is almost just as impressive. High Sierra scenery at it's finest.
Capitol Reef and Canyonlands-I went to Capitol Reef once on a September trip through all the Southern Utah National Parks...While Zion, Bryce, and Arches are all amazing---Capitol Reef had a quiet remote feel to it that was cool--there's old Mormon orchards in the middle of the red rocks and there is a ton to explore around there. Same with Canyonlands---it's not as spectacular on the Grand Canyon on some level, but to sit on the point above the confluence of the Green and Colorado Rivers you're staring at vase otherworldly landscape.
Those are some of my favorites, although I also thought Badlands, the Black Canyon of the Gunnison, and the Everglades were all really cool---and not very crowded once you got a little ways into them. I once got briefly lost on a canoe trip in the Everglades---luckily I had a compass and half a brain, but it made me appreciate the size of that area. Pretty cool paddling through the mangroves and alligator filled pools...
What does that mean? The west has plenty of national parks, especially the most famouns ones.
It means that Eastern National Parks wouldn't even qualify as state parks in many Western States, particularly Oregon, b/c they are not very impressive by Western Standards.
Capitol Reef and Canyonlands-I went to Capitol Reef once on a September trip through all the Southern Utah National Parks...While Zion, Bryce, and Arches are all amazing---Capitol Reef had a quiet remote feel to it that was cool--there's old Mormon orchards in the middle of the red rocks and there is a ton to explore around there. Same with Canyonlands---it's not as spectacular on the Grand Canyon on some level, but to sit on the point above the confluence of the Green and Colorado Rivers you're staring at vase otherworldly landscape.
Capital Reef is a great place. In addition to what you saw, we liked the petroglyphs on the sandstone walls near the orchard. Also, we saw an immature owl in the orchard. There is a lot to see if you get up at 6 am.
IMO, Canyonlands was more impressive than even Grand Canyon. In addition, there were some really great walks along the rim.
While not a national park, the views from Dead Horse Point State Park were also very impressive.
It means that Eastern National Parks wouldn't even qualify as state parks in many Western States, particularly Oregon, b/c they are not very impressive by Western Standards.
I take it you've never been to most of them. Adirondack NP, Shenandoah NP, Smoky Mtn NP are all "impressive", IMO, and I live in the west.
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.