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.
Couer Delane lake is one the 5th most scenic lakes in the world...it wins, hands down, also cause it is surrounded by mountains and nature galore, 2nd would be Burington VT, then the lake in Sandpoint Idaho.
It appears that not very many people have been to Burlington. It and Minneapolis are my top two choices. The Great Lakes are cool but I think more traditional lakes are more user friendly when it comes to recreation.
It appears that not very many people have been to Burlington. It and Minneapolis are my top two choices. The Great Lakes are cool but I think more traditional lakes are more user friendly when it comes to recreation.
Are you kidding? The Great Lakes give you so many options for recreation, and they're many times more beautiful than small lakes. Yes, the Great Lakes can be treacherous at times, but that's part of what makes them interesting. On any given day in the summer there are countless boaters, sailers, fisherman, swimmers, kayakers, even surfers. Not to mention the many great islands that are on all of the Great Lakes.
But the densest parts of the city are all basically along or very near the lakeshore. I know a lot of people that spend tons of free time along the lake. I myself am there on average 4 times a week exercising or just enjoying all the park space and I live many miles away from the Gold Coast. There are so many festivals and sailing and beach activities along the lake, and the shoreline encompasses the entire eastern (and partial northern) border or the city. In my opinion, I think you are selling Chicago short on this one.
Spare me, seriously! I have a TON of relatives and friends in the Chicago area and I know that the lake culture there is overrated, to say the least. It is an afterthought, period. I'm glad you have some friends who go to the lake, and it's definitely a well-regarded perk of Chicagoland, but it's not holy and central to the people of Chicagoland and to say otherwise is a total BS.
The access of the far flung exurbs to lakeshore wasn't even part of the original criteria. Still, I think you are selling many, many people short in Chicagoland, given that, of the MSA, the suburbs from Kenosha all the way through Gary (and the densest and most populous parts of Chicago with the lakeshore path used by thousands and thousands on a daily basis) are bordered directly by the lake. That's several million people within easy access right there. Several of the inner ring burbs are either on CTA or Metra lines, making the lake accessible via public transit to people further to the W/SW. Also, most of the biggest festivals in Chicago and a ton of the big events either occur on or directly adjacent to the lakeshore. People visit the Indiana dunes in droves. Plus there is the entire Chain O' Lakes region with small lakes the serves a lot of the NW burbs. I don't think people in Chicagoland are at much of a difficulty to access lakeshore if they desire.
In any event, I would take Lake Michigan as lake access over any of the small lakes in the Twin Cities any day. The winners here, in my opinion, are Chicago, Toronto and Mke for Great Lakes cities; for small lake cities, it would be Madison and the Twin Cities.
You can't divorce a city from its suburbs. Chicago and Chicagoland are inextricably linked, for better or for worse, and anyway I don't know that I'd call Joliet or Bolingbrook "far flung exurbs." The lake suburbs northwest of Chicago are fantastic, but they are mostly not as densely populated as other suburbs, and what you have to understand is that every single suburb of the Twin Cities (not to mention Minneapolis and St. Paul proper) has as many or more lakes of all different sizes as the towns in northwest Chicagoland. It's the whole city, not just portions of it.
You are also extremely underestimating the ubiquity of lake recreation in Minneapolis if you think access in Chicago as a whole comes even close to what it's like in the Twin Cities. Obviously public transit in Chicago is far, far superior to public transit in Minneapolis, however that's still quite a substantial undertaking if you live in Naperville. Whereas every suburb of the Twin Cities, far flung or inner ring.
I'm not interested in putting down Chicago because goodness knows enough of that happens on this forum, and because it's one of my favorite cities in the world, and because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the lake culture that does exist there, but no city in the US can compete with the Twin Cities in this category.
As for Lake Michigan, obviously there's nothing like that in Minnesota south of Duluth (the closest would be Mille Lacs Lake an hour and a half north of the Twin Cities). But I think most people in this thread seem to agree that the Great Lakes are a whole different category. They're not used the same way, they don't look the same, etc. They are inland seas, and their shoreline is coastline for all practical purposes. You'd never be able to tell the difference between Lake Erie and the Pacific Ocean just by glancing at a photo of the open water. I am guessing that's what is skewing this poll in favor of Chicago (not that it doesn't deserve votes, I voted for it): open water is impressive to look at and easier to imagine given coastal bias in all media.
The access of the far flung exurbs to lakeshore wasn't even part of the original criteria. Still, I think you are selling many, many people short in Chicagoland, given that, of the MSA, the suburbs from Kenosha all the way through Gary (and the densest and most populous parts of Chicago with the lakeshore path used by thousands and thousands on a daily basis) are bordered directly by the lake. That's several million people within easy access right there. Several of the inner ring burbs are either on CTA or Metra lines, making the lake accessible via public transit to people further to the W/SW. Also, most of the biggest festivals in Chicago and a ton of the big events either occur on or directly adjacent to the lakeshore. People visit the Indiana dunes in droves. Plus there is the entire Chain O' Lakes region with small lakes the serves a lot of the NW burbs. I don't think people in Chicagoland are at much of a difficulty to access lakeshore if they desire.
In any event, I would take Lake Michigan as lake access over any of the small lakes in the Twin Cities any day. The winners here, in my opinion, are Chicago, Toronto and Mke for Great Lakes cities; for small lake cities, it would be Madison and the Twin Cities.
You don't know what you're talking about, and now it's clearly apparent.
Couer Delane lake is one the 5th most scenic lakes in the world...it wins, hands down, also cause it is surrounded by mountains and nature galore, 2nd would be Burington VT, then the lake in Sandpoint Idaho.
It really is a beautiful city! I fell in love with it the moment I landed there -- 20 years ago!
I have to say I'm surprised Toronto doesn't have more votes. Do people just not know about it? The Toronto Islands are one of the coolest urban parks I know about, the main waterfront area downtown is exploding, there are tons of beaches and parks, the Scarborough Bluffs are right there, etc.
Are you kidding? The Great Lakes give you so many options for recreation, and they're many times more beautiful than small lakes. Yes, the Great Lakes can be treacherous at times, but that's part of what makes them interesting. On any given day in the summer there are countless boaters, sailers, fisherman, swimmers, kayakers, even surfers. Not to mention the many great islands that are on all of the Great Lakes.
No, we're not kidding.
Again, I have lived in Chicago and Cleveland, and neither city holds a candle to cities like Minneapolis when it comes to having a lake culture. It's not even close! I know you lived around the Northfield area of MN and that makes you feel like you're entitled to judge the Twin Cities or the rest of MN, but you're wrong, and we remind you of that continuously!
Let me give some credit where credit is due, to show that I'm trying to be an unbiased observer: there are no beaches in the Twin Cities that can compare to Mentor Headlands in the Cleveland area (or even Huntington Beach), and there are no lakes the size of Lake Erie in the area either. Cleveland, however, simply is not that infatuated with the water like Minneapolis is, and it's so night-and-day and obvious to me that I can't believe you're trying to make the argument for CLE. There are arguments to be made for CLE, but it cannot compete with Mpls in this regard. It is one of the biggest losses I have experienced by moving to CLE from MPLS. I miss going to the lake to take the kids for a stroll. I miss having easy access to go to the beach if we decide we don't want to do the (boring) pool on Saturday or Sunday -- it's a 30 mile hike to Mentor OR Huntington beaches, and it was a 10 minute drive to one of several beaches when we lived in Mpls.
I'd prefer to see an objective study of the % of boat licences per capita, % of fishing licences per capita, % lakegoers per capita (if that's even measurable), etc.....
Again, I have lived in Chicago and Cleveland, and neither city holds a candle to cities like Minneapolis when it comes to having a lake culture. It's not even close! I know you lived around the Northfield area of MN and that makes you feel like you're entitled to judge the Twin Cities or the rest of MN, but you're wrong, and we remind you of that continuously!
Let me give some credit where credit is due, to show that I'm trying to be an unbiased observer: there are no beaches in the Twin Cities that can compare to Mentor Headlands in the Cleveland area (or even Huntington Beach), and there are no lakes the size of Lake Erie in the area either. Cleveland, however, simply is not that infatuated with the water like Minneapolis is, and it's so night-and-day and obvious to me that I can't believe you're trying to make the argument for CLE. There are arguments to be made for CLE, but it cannot compete with Mpls in this regard. It is one of the biggest losses I have experienced by moving to CLE from MPLS. I miss going to the lake to take the kids for a stroll. I miss having easy access to go to the beach if we decide we don't want to do the (boring) pool on Saturday or Sunday -- it's a 30 mile hike to Mentor OR Huntington beaches, and it was a 10 minute drive to one of several beaches when we lived in Mpls.
I'd prefer to see an objective study of the % of boat licences per capita, % of fishing licences per capita, % lakegoers per capita (if that's even measurable), etc.....
Minnesota has had the highest number of "vessel" registrations (and it ain't even close) and have held the top spot ever since the Vikings first made their way across the Great Lakes and left giant stone business cards underneath trees throughout the state.
I doubt you'd find these USCG stats for a particular city. However, I saw that Dade Co. FL had a 2009 registration rate of 41.3%
2010 StateVessels Rank Vessels (number)PopulationPer Capita %Per Capita Rank
1) 15.3% Minnesota (813,976)
2) 10.8% Wisconsin (615,335)
3) _9.4% South Carolina (435,491)
4) _8.4% Maine (111,873)
5) _8.3% North Dakota (56,128)
6) _8.2% Michigan (812,066)
7) _7.2% New Hampshire (94,773)
8) _7.1% Arkansas (205,925)
9) _7.0% Delaware (62,983)
10) 7.0% South Dakota (56,624)
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.
