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 voted Miami. As other posters said, there's so much options for swimming, fishing, boating and other types of water recreation. Not just the ocean but also the Everglades. Also, a lot of people own swimming pools. Miami's water culture is just one of those iconic things that define it. There's even a fun video game centered around it Play Miami Shark Flash Game
But other cities that deserve some mention in my opinion are Boston, which may be more well known for other things, but its still a major port city and the hub of New England, which has a strong maritime/nautical culture and Minneapolis, which has so many lakes in and around the city plus the Mississippi River. Boating and fishing are king up there.
Well I voted for Miami myself so I don't disagree on that, I'm just saying its not the only aspect for water culture and should not be the only metric. Whether you're swimming, boating, sailing, fishing, diving, surfing, water skiing, wake boarding, jet skiing or skinny dipping, its all part of water culture. Los Angeles I think is being unfairly accused of "lacking water culture on here" but it has a strong surf culture, even if it doesn't have as strong a swimming culture.
Though I would say we shouldn't estimate the ability to actually get into and interact with water. I can get on a boat on the East River. That's not close to being the same thing as being able to float in a lagoon in Ocho Rios.
Los Angeles I think is being unfairly accused of "lacking water culture on here" but it has a strong surf culture, even if it doesn't have as strong a swimming culture.
I think the argument is that Los Angeles is so large that the water is not conveniently accessible to most people. There is some merit to that. According to the LA Times, many Angelenos simply can't afford to go the beach due to the costs of transportation and parking.
Even if you go to a place with easy ocean access, I find that most of the locals don't actually go down to the water that often. Most Caribbean islands are tiny, so you would think people would be on a beach all the time, but many people will tell you it's been a year or longer since they actually set foot in the ocean. It's sort of easy to forget about the ocean since it all just sort of fades into the background scenery. It's not much different from a New Yorker going years without visiting Central Park. I don't think it's much different for long time Miamians.
Quote:
The novelty of living in Vacationland has worn off, but you still see the city through pastelito-colored glasses. Sure, the club promoter/model you dated turned out to be living with his parents (or was he an escort?), and you’re confused as to why people who say they’re 15 minutes away never show up. But the weather is still great and the beach is still RIGHT THERE. Although you haven’t gone in -- wait, when was the last time you went?
In Miami, though, I think newcomers are genuinely geeked at the possibility of being able to make daily beach visits. I've known people who've moved to both New Orleans and Seattle, but neither expressed any real enthusiasm about being close to water since they were moving from coastal cities that had an abundance of water.
If you say so. According to the poll, Miami is much more connected to water than Seattle has. Take it or leave it. :-)
I never said it wasn't. I was simply talking about Seattle being famous for it's rainy climate, you're the only person I've seen that wasn't aware of that.
How many people in Miami do you think have a dock and boat in their backyard? The most I've known are people with the Miami canal in their yard lol. Most people do NOT have the luxury of having seafront or lagoonfront property. However, that being said, it doesn't make the city less connected to the water. I have strong connection to water, particularly the ocean, and I never lived anywhere near a beach in the 18 years I lived in South Florida. You don't have to own a house with direct boat access to have a "water culture" so that doesn't disqualify Seattle. I'm sure the people that can afford to have that access anyway can find it in Seattle just as well as Miami.
A lot more than Seattle. I never claimed most people are waterfront in Miami nor did I disqualify Seattle for anything.
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.
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 was simply talking about Seattle being famous for it's rainy climate, you're the only person I've seen that wasn't aware of that.
