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.
True but people keep bringing up Colorado and Nevada, where you can say the same thing.Seems like there are two different ways to measure:
Have you people claiming Nevada is covered with vast swaths of plains or plateaus like Colorado or Washington actually looked at a topographic map of Nevada? Take a look at this map of Nevada and show me where you find the same sort of flatlands you find in Washington or Colorado? It's like people see pictures of Vegas (from vantage points that don't show the mountains in the background) and imagine half of Nevada looks like that.
Have you people claiming Nevada is covered with vast swaths of plains or plateaus like Colorado or Washington actually looked at a topographic map of Nevada? Take a look at this map of Nevada and show me where you find the same sort of flatlands you find in Washington or Colorado? It's like people see pictures of Vegas (from vantage points that don't show the mountains in the background) and imagine half of Nevada looks like that.
Not only looked at the map, but driven through it numerous times. My dad lives in Mesquite, NV.
No, it's not like CO or MT where the eastern sides are flat. But when you zoom in on the map (and visit in person), there are huge, flat areas in between the mountains. I give NV plenty of credit for having the most number of separate big ranges and is probably my pick for "most mountainous in the west" (see my post earlier), but I also associate it with long stretches of extremely flat ground (think Burning Man/Flat Rock Desert, Carson Sink, and the almost uncountable other desert valley floors) which is the weird nature of the Basin and Range region. The geography is such that you rarely actually spend any time in the mountains unless you're going up and over the numerous but isolated passes.
Overall, I'll still stick to WV as my choice. Keep on zooming in on the map- there are literally no major flat areas whatsoever.
Last edited by bartonizer; 02-19-2015 at 08:33 PM..
I have read that thread. I thought the nitpicking of the name was a bit too much. I don't care much for "reduced spire measure" either. As for WV, haven't been there. It has similar elevations to Vermont, but it appears to have deeper river valleys while Vermont has one long mountain spine and can be a bit of a pleateau in parts, so West Virginia is probably more impressive. Vermont is definitely more consistently mountainous than New Hampshire, the southern half of New Hampshire has a lot of low plains or rolling scenery.
Also depends on what you value. Spire measure rewards very steep peaks, especially on all side. Colorado mountains appear big and bulky and picturesque, but don't have particularly steep sides. This peak has higher spire measure than any in Colorado. It rises 7000 feet above where I took that view.
a more distant view (both photos I took):
Few Colorado peaks rise that steeply in that short of a distance (that mountain rises 6600 feet in less than 2 miles in one direction). Pikes Peak rises a bit more but over much more distance. Not naming the mountain, can you guess it?
Other issue is that the best peaks of Washington aren't that accessible by car. Other than the North Cascades highway and Mt. Rainier, viewing them takes more work. The Colorado Rockies appears to have more of a road network and more mountain towns. I think most people think of Mt. Rainier when they think of Washington peaks. From what I've seen, Bellingham appears to be near the most mountains of any populated spot in Washington. As for Florida, I met a bunch of college aged guys about to backpack the Olympics when I visited Washington. They were happy to escape flatness.
nei, I agree with just about everything you're saying. And I'll bet those FL boys were excited to get out of the hot and that flat!
A couple things I might add- There are more mountain towns in CO, but I'll give the state a lot of credit- there are a lot of areas that are difficult to access, as well. I've spent a ton of time exploring CO and while access improved markedly when we purchased a 4x4 with fairly high clearance, there are a lot of areas that were only accessible by foot, if at all. I think that the most impressive peaks (and steepest, in general) in CO are in the San Juans, where most of the most amazing scenery is at least a modest hike in. Anyway, there's a lot of CO that is worth exploring and not commonly seen by the average visitor.
Of course, another one of the major differences between CO and (western) WA is the size of the trees out here, as well as the foothills. In CO you could see certain peaks, unobscured from many miles away, but here in Bellingham I'm at sea level and Mt. Baker is at 10,700+ a mere 30 miles east. Due to giant Douglas Firs and random mountains all over the place, it only peaks it's glowing head out at certain views throughout the city, whereas it would dominate the skyline in some other areas!
Anyway, you're right about it being about what you value. CO mountains are often massive and photogenic, but lack the seriously big, steep faces. But there are a few exceptions, and the one that comes to mind is Mt. Sopris, which rises 6400'+ in 2.7 miles (summit is just short of 13k above a 6k valley). It's a massive mountain that dominates the horizon from just outside Glenwood Springs, about 20 miles north. In fact, the side profile of Sopris on CO 133 coming north from Redstone looks very similar to the bridge shot! It may be the most impressive solo mountain in CO, though high ridges behind the peak connect it to substantially higher peaks in the Elk Range. Anyway, I uploaded a picture I took in fall of 2013 and posted it below. It's a really impressive mountain over the town of Carbondale and the Roaring Fork Valley.
Speaking of your pics, it took me a while, and at first I thought it may be Baker Lake or Ross Lake, but I'm going to guess that must be the northernmost part of Lake Chelan from the Stehekin dock, and the other picture is of Harlequin Bridge further up on the Stehekin River, with McGregor Mountain in the back. Right? We actually haven't been that far up the lake, but plan to go as soon as this summer...
Note: Height is 100% excluded. This is just an estimation of how much of the land is non-flat.
Tier 1: (Extremely Mountainous - Near 100% mountain Covered) West Virginia Most Mountainous
Vermont
Tier 2: (Very Mountainous - Over 80% mountain Covered) Washington
Pennsylvania
New York
Utah
Oregon
New Hampshire
Nevada
Hawaii
Idaho
California
Alaska
Tier 3: (Somewhat Mountainous - Over 50% mountain Covered) Wyoming
Virginia
Tennessee
North Carolina
New Mexico
Montana
Massachusetts
Maryland
Maine
Kentucky
Colorado - I Know I'll get crap for this, but 40% of the eastern part of the state IS flat
Tier 4: (Somewhat Flat - Over 50% non-mountainous) Wisconsin
South Carolina
Ohio
New Jersey
Missouri
Connecticut
Arkansas
Arizona
Tier 5: (Very Flat - More than 80% non-mountainous)
Texas
South Dakota
Michigan
Alabama
Georgia
Tier 6: (Extremely Flat - Near 100% non-mountainous) Rhode Island
Oklahoma
North Dakota
Nebraska
Mississippi
Minnesota
Kansas
Louisiana
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Delaware Florida Flattest.
Have you people claiming Nevada is covered with vast swaths of plains or plateaus like Colorado or Washington actually looked at a topographic map of Nevada? Take a look at this map of Nevada and show me where you find the same sort of flatlands you find in Washington or Colorado? It's like people see pictures of Vegas (from vantage points that don't show the mountains in the background) and imagine half of Nevada looks like that.
I've been to Nevada, and while it has lots of mountain ranges, there are also large swaths of relatively flat land in between them. The most mountainous state is West Virginia. Its mountains aren't as tall as any you'd find out west, but there's virtually no flat land to speak of.
The two "mountain states", West Virginia and Vermont, are mostly mountains. Have lived in both.
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.
