multiple Redwood forest parks

[Mr5150]

Originally Posted by 509

don't get your panties in a bunch...it ain't worth it.

When Redwoods National Park was founded, the "crown" jewels" were the state parks. Basically, the Save the Redwoods League and the state of California had protected the best groves by the time the Redwood National Park legislation was passed in 1968 or so. The Federal government thought the state of California would transfer their park lands to the Federal government. That did not happen.

Much of Redwoods National Park was cut-over land. That is fine, trees grow and redwoods grow fast. But right now....visit the state parks.

The best Sierra Redwoods are in Sequoia National Park. Other groves are good and interesting, but the southern groves are special. I spent two years in Sequoia National Park measuring and mapping the Sierra Redwoods. In my eyes, they are much more special and interesting than the coastal redwoods.

Sorry for the spelling. English is my third language. So I not only have a spelling problem, but also one with grammer. Thanks for your help with my English, but given my advanced age it probably is a lost cause.

Well let’s just respect each other. And for your info, I don’t wear panties. Not that sort of fellow.

But here is A very interesting piece of info that might make you want to visit the South Grove of Big Trees SP: while the groves of which you speak contain many magnificent trees the hand of the white man and Indian* has had an effect. Trees have been cut down and feet have trampled. Camps have been lived in. The south grove of Big Trees has never been touched or even occupied by anyone. Indian* or white man. It is a protected reserve and it is way different in character than any other Sierra forest I have seen. I live in the Sierra and forestry is a hobby of mine.

*The local Me Wuk prefer to be called Indians, not Native American which they view as liberal PC term. Actually most tribes feel that way.

[509]

Originally Posted by Mr5150

......... It is a protected reserve and it is way different in character than any other Sierra forest I have seen. I live in the Sierra and forestry is a hobby of mine.

Good for you for choosing Forestry as a hobby!!

I chose it as a profession.

I have not worked in California in over 40 years, but did in the early 70’s in both the coastal and Sierra redwood forests. There is nothing wrong with the Calevares Grove, but the groves in Sequoia National Park are better in my opinion.

It is as shame that the original poster was limited in time.

You might want to take the time to hike into Redwood Meadows Grove off the Mineral King Road.

[Hulsker 1856]

Originally Posted by bloom

Which of the Redwood Forest National & State Parks is the best, most spectacular, & most worthwhile to visit, and which to be skipped? & Why?

I think you will find this very useful:

Redwood Hikes

[Biggerbrain44]

If you are serious about seeing coastal redwoods, dont go anywhere south of humboldt county, they simply dont compare(besides montgomery woods). Humboldt redwoods state park, prairie creek, and jed smith are by far the best.

[NW4me]

As others have mentioned, there are two kinds of redwoods in California, the 'coastal' and the 'mountain.' One grows taller, the other is more massive. And since they occupy different environments, the visitor's experience will be different. Both varieties are impressive trees, of course, but for the most beautiful forest, I'd vote for the coastal redwoods of Humboldt County... because coastal redwood forests have a rich understory of ferns, rhododendrons, etc.

[TheFlats]

Originally Posted by 509

You might want to take the time to hike into Redwood Meadows Grove off the Mineral King Road.

Thanks for this tip 509, the Mineral King area has been on my to-do list for a while now and I had never heard of this particular grove. The long hike in is sure to keep away the un-dedicated.