Moving to a remote, small town in California - Bishop, CA (Los Angeles: 2014, home)

[JohnG72]

Bishop is paradise for outdoors people. Short ride to lakes, streams, hiking, hunting, and not much else. If you need culture or entertainment, Mammoth is around 45 miles and has various festivals and ongoings during the warmer months and excellent skiing in the winter.

[SportyandMisty]

We drove through there about 2 weeks ago. We liked it. It seemed much larger than its wikipedia page would indicate. Maybe because of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishop_Paiute_Tribe


Go for it.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by SW_Dreamer

I'm pretty new to posting on CD, but I read a lot of the postings. I have a tough decision. I am a single, 50 year old guy and live in Tucson, AZ. I just love Tucson, but am in a dead end job with the federal government. My dream is to be management level with the National Forest Service (NFS). However, the NFS is quite difficult to break into. Well...such a job is now presenting itself in Bishop, CA...and with great enticements like housing, relocation, great money, experience, etc.

Although I'm a big-time outdoorsman...I wonder how remote Bishop, CA really is (other than just looking at a map). I really enjoy Tucson with its crazy ethnic foods, social life, dating, outdoor activities, REI, Best Buy, etc. Is Bishop going to be paradise or be scene from "The Shining" with a newcomer gone mad whose single and used to big cities?

Do you ski?

One word.

Mammoth.

[LynnKrause1]

Bishop has always had great memories for me, but then you do have to love the outdoors. If in your position, I would jump at the chance.

[SoCalMomma]

Give it a shot! Definitely rent in case it doesn't work out or you are miserable. But its a really neat area for outdoor activities and you could drive into a bigger city if you need to. (would be a long drive, though).

As everyone mentioned, you'd be close to lots of great little mtn towns, lakes, skiing, hiking, etc. Its definitely better than Tucson!

[509]

Originally Posted by DMenscha

You may want to use the term US Forest Service USFS instead of the NFS in your interview. Good luck.

NFS....means National Forest System.

USFS was also NOT acceptable until recently. It is now politically correct, but older Forest Service employees probably do not like it. The previous correct term was USDA Forest Service.

Just stick to Forest Service.

Years ago, when I started a job with BLM somebody handed me a 2 page summary of "what do all those three and four letter codes mean". After you get the job sit down with someone and ask them to explain the "codes" to you. It will speed your learning curve.

[CA4Now]

A gorgeous area. Another thread about it here: //www.city-data.com/forum/calif...bishop-ca.html

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Well, I don't imagine anyone working for the Forest Service, also getting to live in a big city. Just don't work that way. The national forests are not in the city.

So, you'll have to decide which you want more - the Forest Service job, or a different job in the city.

I moved from the SF Bay Area, to the boonies in northern CA, so I could afford to retire. I've grown to really like things like no traffic, being able to walk into the local DMV without an appointment and be seen within an hour. That there are no parking meters where I live, and plenty parking wherever I go. That I can go to the beach with my dog, and not see anyone else...

But, I seriously miss my shopping options, and entertainment options.

You'll have to decide which you'd rather have. Because, unfortunately, you can't have it both ways.

And as far as dating goes, it can be really tricky in a small town. And your closest "big" city, would be Fresno, which may or may not have the population of folk you'd be interested in. So, then you're looking at going even farther to go for dating and entertainment.

I plan a couple trips a year to Redding, which is an overnight trip for me, for some decent shows, etc. If you could budget being able to go in SF or LA, or even Las Vegas on your weekends, you might find the balance you'd need to be happier.

[skelaki]

If this is an opportunity to have your career on the track you desire, I'd go for it.


You say you love the outdoors and you won't find any place with more opportunities for outdoor activities including fishing, hunting, hiking, and skiing.


As previously mentioned, you can always spend a few days each month (or week) in any of several cities.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

Well, I don't imagine anyone working for the Forest Service, also getting to live in a big city. Just don't work that way. The national forests are not in the city.

True. The National Forests are not in the cities.

However, the Forest Service has all kinds of offices all across America including in large, medium and small cities.

For example, I know a recently retired Fisheries Biologist with the Forest Service who spent most of his career headquartered in a suburb of Seattle.

Here's a list of Forest Service jobs available. If you browse them you'll see a variety of positions open in varied rural and urban places from Redding, CA, to Vallejo, CA, to Atlanta, GA.

https://www.usajobs.gov/JobSearch/Se...Forest+Service