Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: What is the outdoors crown jewel of the Midwest?
Michigan 98 74.81%
Minnesota 16 12.21%
Wisconsin 14 10.69%
Another Midwest State (specify below) 3 2.29%
Voters: 131. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-26-2020, 09:10 AM
 
2,563 posts, read 3,626,477 times
Reputation: 3434

Advertisements

I'd say Michigan but I think this is a lot closer than the poll indicates. Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota are among the tops in the entire U.S. for outdoor recreation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-26-2020, 09:34 AM
 
Location: Windsor Ontario/Colchester Ontario
1,803 posts, read 2,226,267 times
Reputation: 2304
Michigan for sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2020, 10:46 AM
 
3,733 posts, read 2,887,330 times
Reputation: 4908
I voted for WI, because I live here, and I love it. I do think probably Michigan, though. Wisconsin and Michigan have the most Great Lakes shoreline in the country, both far surpassing Minnesota. As someone mentioned previously, Minnesota has a lot of flat plains, where Wisconsin has a much more interesting topography. I don't think Minnesota can come close to WI, with Door County, Bayfield, and the entire eastern border of the state of WI, being Lake Michigan. Been to all 3, and, IMO, they should be ranked Michigan, Wisconsin, then Minnesota.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2020, 12:51 PM
 
Location: Alabama
13,611 posts, read 7,927,714 times
Reputation: 7098
Michigan for the simple reason that it has everything MN and WI have, while MN and WI lack things Michigan has.

I do believe Wisconsin is a close 2nd though. Minnesota a distant third.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2020, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
1,912 posts, read 2,089,144 times
Reputation: 4048
What does Michigan have that Minnesota and Wisconsin lack?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2020, 01:11 PM
 
3,733 posts, read 2,887,330 times
Reputation: 4908
Quote:
Originally Posted by jennifat View Post
What does Michigan have that Minnesota and Wisconsin lack?
A lot more water...it's really the "crown jewel." No debate, honestly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2020, 01:14 PM
 
Location: In the heights
37,131 posts, read 39,371,920 times
Reputation: 21217
Quote:
Originally Posted by jennifat View Post
What does Michigan have that Minnesota and Wisconsin lack?
Big ol' sand dunes, maybe? I think Michigan also has more and bigger islands including the biggest lake on an island of a lake.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2020, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Alabama
13,611 posts, read 7,927,714 times
Reputation: 7098
Quote:
Originally Posted by jennifat View Post
What does Michigan have that Minnesota and Wisconsin lack?
Rocky topography including what this flatlander would call mountains in the UP, sand dunes, more great lakes...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2020, 04:44 PM
 
Location: Green Country
2,868 posts, read 2,816,527 times
Reputation: 4798
The argument for Wisconsin is that it's uniformly pictureque. It has Door County and Lake Michigan to its east, Lake Superior and the Apostle Islands to the north, lakes all throughout, including in Madison - which has some of the best natural setting for a city in America.

Then you have bucolic farms, rolling hills in the Driftless Area and forests further north. Not to mention all major cities have water access - Milwaukee/Racine/Kenosha/Sheboygan (Lake Michigan), Madison (Lake Mendota/Lake Monona), Oshkosh/Appleton/Fond du Lac (Lake Winnebago), Green Bay (Lake Michigan/Door County), Superior (Lake Superior), La Crosse (Mississippi River), Stevens Point/Wisconsin Rapids (Wisconsin River), Wausau (Lake Wausau), Eau Claire (Lake Wissota).

I don't think any other Midwest state has such a consistently "picturesque" landscape.

Michigan's problem (though I voted for it) is that 95% of the people live in the Lower Mitten, which is quite dull compared to what Minnesota/Wisconsin offer its residents. Nearly all of its major cities are in flat, waterless land. Detroit has maritime access but Belle Isle/Detroit River/Lake Saint Clair isn't as nice as what Minneapolis/Milwaukee have.

Really, the UP pulls 90% of Michigan's weight (the rest a mix of Traverse City and Lake Michigan beach towns).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2020, 05:36 PM
 
255 posts, read 159,738 times
Reputation: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by manitopiaaa View Post
)Michigan's problem (though I voted for it) is that 95% of the people live in the Lower Mitten, which is quite dull compared to what Minnesota/Wisconsin offer its residents. Nearly all of its major cities are in flat, waterless land. Detroit has maritime access but Belle Isle/Detroit River/Lake Saint Clair isn't as nice as what Minneapolis/Milwaukee have.

Really, the UP pulls 90% of Michigan's weight (the rest a mix of Traverse City and Lake Michigan beach towns).
I've refrained from commenting so far but why does the Lower Peninsula seem dull, flat and waterless compared to what Minnesota offers its residents? Most of the Minnesota population lives in the MSP area. I think of the many lakes and trees it offers its residents but also the prairies and agriculture that come up to the edge of the metro area. The Detroit area has many lakes as well, especially the NW suburbs. The MSP area has the Mississippi River as well, but the Detroit area also has the areas you mention as well. To me that is a push between the two.

Then you have the Grand Rapids area which might be flat, but the lake influence is as big there as any city in Minnesota or Wisconsin. The city proper might be on a river, but the metro area contains the Lake Michigan shoreline plus some of the Lake Michigan Beach towns, so certainly not waterless.

I'm probably biased here, but I'm not seeing how the Lower Peninsula is quite dull compared to what Minnesota/Wisconsin offer its residents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top