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 think it depends on what part of Alaska. However, for the majority of Alaska, I'd vote Montana, because Montana has flat, cold plains (most similar to the tundra without being the tundra) and large mountains and forests in the West, which is the more picturesque Alaska we think of. However, if Montana had an area similar to coastal Washington, it would take the cake in all areas, because Sitka/Juneau are pretty much in the same climate as Seattle, just colder.
Washington because it has the largest number of glaciers in the lower 48. Has volcanoes, temperate rainforest and the Puget Sound. Lots of cedar trees, sitka spruce, and douglas firs. Most of western Washington looks very similar to coastal alaska. Culturally the two places are linked as well.
NW Idaho and NW Montana a close second. Minnesota looks nothing like Alaska, just wait to flat and too much farm land.
Lots of films portraying Alaska are either shot in BC or WA.
Last edited by skihikeclimb; 06-15-2014 at 06:37 PM..
NW Idaho and NW Montana a close second. Minnesota looks nothing like Alaska, just wait to flat and too much farm land.
Actually, there are lots of areas of Alaska and Minnesota that look virtually identical. The Knik Arm region near Anchorage and also the Fairbanks area look just like northern Minnesota, and have almost identical climates (although cooler summers in Alaska). If it weren't for the mountains on the horizon, both of those areas could easily be mistaken for Minnesota's Arrowhead (which you might be surprised is quite rugged and hilly).
Here are some Google Street View scenes in northern Minnesota that remind me of Alaska:
Alaska is really a combination of them all. Washington is the most like southern/coastal/mountainous Alaska, Montana and Idaho are like central mountainous Alaska, Maine is like central coastal and some of central Alaska, and Minnesota is like central coastal, central, and northern Alaska.
Montana is the only state that's big enough and cold enough to compare IMO. But really there is no state that is like Alaska. It is like its own country. Just like Hawaii has no state like it.
Alaska is like California in that it is extremely diverse. Areas along the Gulf of Alaska are similar to Coastal Washington, some of the flatter parts of the interior reminds me of Minnesota. Much of Alaska is pretty unique.
I'd still stick with Washington State over all of the others.
Mainly for the following reasons:
1) Active Strato-Volcanoes covered in glaciers.
2) Largest concentration of glaciers in the lower 48 (north Cascades and Olympics)
3) Temperate Rain Forest (the only other places are BC and SE Alaska)
4) Puget Sound (basically the start of the inside passage)
5) Large areas of actual tundra (in northeastern WA).
6) Similar wildlife and vegetation.
7) Shared lingustic and cultural history (PNW tribes stretched from WA to SE Alaska).
Of course if we were to include Canada.... British Columbia would take the cake. But for the Lower 48, Washington State is the best fit. NW Idaho, and NW Montana a close second.
I see some of the similiarties with the North Shore of Minnesota, and coastal Maine. But in terms of diversity of topography, those areas lack.
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.
