|
03-18-2013, 07:22 AM
|
|
|
|
318 posts, read 543,706 times
Reputation: 286
|
|
|
What metro area has the least trees (natural and planted) per square mile?
I was going to state Phoenix but after visiting there recently I found that the area was just full of trees and landscaping everywhere. Of course all planted. So I am going with Oklahoma City.
What do you think? Which metro area has the least amount of trees per square mile?
|
|
03-18-2013, 08:19 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: West Michigan
3,120 posts, read 6,253,894 times
Reputation: 4534
|
|
|
Vegas?
|
|
03-18-2013, 09:25 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,345 posts, read 22,156,595 times
Reputation: 13733
|
|
|
Albuquerque has plenty of trees like the bosque forest of cottonwoods along the Rio Grande and mature neighborhoods on the east side. The newer neighborhoods on the west side and Rio Rancho hardly have any trees at all.
|
|
03-18-2013, 03:54 PM
|
|
|
|
318 posts, read 543,706 times
Reputation: 286
|
|
|
How about towns in MT or WY?
|
|
03-18-2013, 04:12 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 31,528,745 times
Reputation: 7725
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Spock
How about towns in MT or WY?
|
Those were what I had in mind. Or somewhere in Alaska.
But I guess the OP was looking for a larger 500,000K plus metro |
|
03-18-2013, 04:41 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: SF Bay Area
18,507 posts, read 30,448,022 times
Reputation: 12728
|
|
|
Probably Vegas and Phoenix. OKC seems to have way more trees than either of them.
|
|
03-18-2013, 04:50 PM
|
|
|
|
9,965 posts, read 16,708,060 times
Reputation: 9193
|
|
|
Vegas seems to have a lot of palm trees, though it gets pretty sparse in some of the newer areas on the edges. Tuscon seemed pretty barren in terms of trees in a lot of places--it also seemed like they were more likely to use more natural desert shrubs or cacti in landscaping than the imported greenery of Phoenix of Vegas. Older areas will have cottonwoods or other trees planted in much of the Southwestern cities but when you get out to edge of the metro the desert terrain is very evident.
|
|
03-18-2013, 05:00 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Charlotte, NC (in my mind)
7,946 posts, read 16,604,002 times
Reputation: 4662
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Spock
What metro area has the least trees (natural and planted) per square mile?
I was going to state Phoenix but after visiting there recently I found that the area was just full of trees and landscaping everywhere. Of course all planted. So I am going with Oklahoma City.
What do you think? Which metro area has the least amount of trees per square mile?
|
Oklahoma City has plenty of trees, just not tall ones.
I would probably say El Paso. |
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.
