Is this a good description of Washington? (Port Angeles, Port Townsend: place to live, beach)

[jbuc123]

I asked this in the Oregon forum, but they suggested I ask here. I have never been to Washington, so do the following features sound like it would be a fitting description of it? I'm trying to help someone make a decision.

• A quiet highway near an ocean and a small, friendly community
• A large snow-capped mountain or mountain range
• Pine trees

Input would be appreciated!

[rainforest338]

Yes. There are a few places like that in SW Washington. Sounds like the northern part of Ocean Shores and Moclips. If you consider the Strait of Juan de Fuca to be ocean, then it could be like Sekiu, Joyce or Salt Creek on the Olympic Peninsula. Also, the San Juan Islands kind of match that description (but the mountains would be visible, but not close).

[Inkpoe]

I'm trying to understand the OP... Are you asking if those 3 things can be used to describe the state of WA? Obviously as a state, it's more complex than that. But those things can be applied to towns/cities in WA.

[jbuc123]

Yeah, basically I'm asking if Washington possesses those qualities, and where in the state.

[Inkpoe]

ok...

Originally Posted by jbuc123

• A quiet highway near an ocean and a small, friendly community

I always think of Whidbey Island, crossing over Deception Pass and visiting the little towns. Very beautiful. You can also drive around the Peninsula via rt 101 (visit Port Townsend, Port Angeles especially).

Originally Posted by jbuc123

• A large snow-capped mountain or mountain range

Mt. Rainier is our most famous one, obviously! But we also have Mt. Baker and a couple other smaller ones as well. We have two mountain ranges: Cascade (which extends out to OR) and also the Olympic range (on the Peninsula)

Originally Posted by jbuc123

• Pine trees

We have Pine trees... among others. Why limit yourself to that? We have a rainforest that you can visit if you like.

[sll3454]

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

We have two mountain ranges: Cascade (which extends out to OR) and also the Olympic range (on the Peninsula)

The Cascades go all the way into Northern California: Mt. Shasta and Lassen Peak are part of the range.

(Sorry, OP.)

[YouJustHatetheTruth]

Originally Posted by jbuc123

I asked this in the Oregon forum, but they suggested I ask here. I have never been to Washington, so do the following features sound like it would be a fitting description of it? I'm trying to help someone make a decision.

• A quiet highway near an ocean and a small, friendly community
• A large snow-capped mountain or mountain range
• Pine trees

Input would be appreciated!

Those are... pretty broad terms. I mean, yes, I'd say they're accurate. There's a picture thread at the top of this forum, and I've seen photos that perfectly match all three. But... you might want to go a little more in-depth if you're trying to choose a place to live or something. There is a lot more to most states than that (plus, you could arguably say that some place like Maine or New Hampshire or New York fit the bill, too -- all three have snow-covered mountains, lonely roads by the beach and pine trees).

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

Mt. Rainier is our most famous one, obviously! But we also have Mt. Baker and a couple other smaller ones as well. We have two mountain ranges: Cascade (which extends out to OR) and also the Olympic range (on the Peninsula).

And, I appologize for piling on, but Mt. Baker doesn't qualify as a small volcano. Now, you could argue that Glacier Peak does, simply because it's actually a rather small stratovolcano that's built up on the shoulders of an already-tall non-non volcanic ridge. But Baker? Nope. And not Adams, either. They're both truly large volcanoes in their own right. They're not quite Rainier tall or Shasta huge, but they're big -- some of the biggest in the Cascades, in fact.

[David Aguilar]

WA can also be described as

*A gridlocked freeway with variable speed limits and passive-aggressive drivers.
*A bunch of annoying little hills, or if you prefer: flat.
*No trees.

[Inkpoe]

Originally Posted by YouJustHatetheTruth

And, I appologize for piling on, but Mt. Baker doesn't qualify as a small volcano. Now, you could argue that Glacier Peak does, simply because it's actually a rather small stratovolcano that's built up on the shoulders of an already-tall non-non volcanic ridge. But Baker? Nope. And not Adams, either. They're both truly large volcanoes in their own right. They're not quite Rainier tall or Shasta huge, but they're big -- some of the biggest in the Cascades, in fact.

Uhm, I know that it isn't small... and I never referred to Mt. Baker as a "small volcano". I know it's the second most active volcano after Mt. St. Helens, and all that stuff. I was simply saying we have a couple other smaller volcanos. Both Mt. St. Helens and Glacier Peak are closer to the ocean than Mt. Adams. Mt. Adams isn't anywhere as close to an ocean, so it's not even a consideration for the OP (or his friend).

[Bill Loney]

Originally Posted by sll3454

The Cascades go all the way into Northern California: Mt. Shasta and Lassen Peak are part of the range.

(Sorry, OP.)

Actually there are 63...

List of mountain ranges in Washington - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia