Washington State VS Colorado ??? (Seattle, Rainier: cabinet, to live, vs.)

[cocaseco]

Last year I moved from the Front range of Colorado to Western Washington. First, both states have two separate areas with different economies and climates. The Front Range of Colorado is very different than the Western Slope, just as Western WA is very different than Eastern WA. You didn't say which interested you, but keep that in mind so that you are really comparing 4 locations. Lots of people have covered most of the main differences, but for me Colorado has become too hot, too dry and too brown. It is brown for 9 or 10 months of the year. It doesn't rain like it used too, it doesn't snow like it used too and it is overall much hotter. Where AC was rare 20 years ago, now it is required. Where it used to be the rare 90 degree days, now you can count on a few 100+ days, and a long stream of 40+ 90 degree days each year. whereas WA is green all year. The rain here is nowhere as bad as the stories i heard. Yes it rains, but rarely is it a down pour that changes your plans.

Besides weather the economies are different too. Seattle is a bigger city with many more companies and much more hiring. The Colorado market is fairly stagnant. Of course it costs more in WA, but the salaries reflect that.

Oh and don't forget the mega forest fires which are becoming the norm, and the beetle kill which will leave the forests dead in 10 years, and in many areas much sooner. Also floods and hail damage seem more common now.

[PS90]

Originally Posted by cocaseco

The Front Range of Colorado is very different than the Western Slope, just as Western WA is very different than Eastern WA. You didn't say which interested you, but keep that in mind so that you are really comparing 4 locations.

whereas WA is green all year. The rain here is nowhere as bad as the stories i heard. Yes it rains, but rarely is it a down pour that changes your plans.

While I agree with your post, I feel the need to point-out that you start-off by saying that WA is like two separate states, but then comment that "WA is green all year". Much of Eastern WA is most certainly NOT green all year, because (thankfully) we don't get nearly the amount of rain that Western WA does.

[cocaseco]

Originally Posted by PS90

While I agree with your post, I feel the need to point-out that you start-off by saying that WA is like two separate states, but then comment that "WA is green all year". Much of Eastern WA is most certainly NOT green all year, because (thankfully) we don't get nearly the amount of rain that Western WA does.

You're right, I should have been clearer.

[Olympian2]

Originally Posted by RodFarlee

But I am a bit cautious of the males during fall rut, and of the females during spring calving, seasons. They can be unpredictable then, and I do cross paths with them most every week.

As an aside, thanks for mentioning that. It's not the black bears or unseen cougars you want to be afraid of, it's the Roosevelt Elk. Even if the herd is bolting in fear, that's dangerous too.

[RotseCherut]

Better too move to Coloardo, Washington is getting way too crowded.

[M3 Mitch]

Surprised no one has mentioned that Colorado is mostly at high altitude, 4-5K ft, while Washington is lower. In Colorado you get real mountains, WA has mountains but not as impressive.

As pointed out, you have to look at your own situation to determine tax burden, but WA has no income tax, CO does or at least did when I lived there.

In my experience CO has "wilder" weather - freak snowstorms in April that shut down traffic, hail, etc. But in my experience CO is sunnier, particularly in winter.

First class outdoor recreation in both states.

[RotseCherut]

Originally Posted by M3 Mitch

Surprised no one has mentioned that Colorado is mostly at high altitude, 4-5K ft, while Washington is lower. In Colorado you get real mountains, WA has mountains but not as impressive.

Washington has mountains but not as impressive!!??? BS!! The Northern Cascade range is every bit as majestic, high and rugged as the San Juans or any of Colorado's large rugged ranges. And, Washington's mountains are probably more majestic, because they rise high from sea-level, like the Olympics, Mt Rainier, Baker and Adams. In Colorado, you are already at a high elevation and the rise of the mountains are much lower.. In this effect, Colorado's mountains are probably less impressive. Seriously, is there anywhere in Colorado where you can see a 14,500 ft mountain rising out from sea level which is viewable for 100s of miles?? Also, Washington's mountains are surrounded by water and thick forests and greenery.

[StealthRabbit]

Originally Posted by RotseCherut

...Washington's mountains are surrounded by water and thick forests and greenery.

Yeah... That can be a problem for this Colorado Prairie kid with 30+ yrs in We_tside WA... (Living at crest of Cascade range... lots of 80 mph & freezing rain.)

As my 8 yr old said on a WA hike vs, Colorado hike... "If you cut some of these trees down... you could see something."

All a matter of perspective, and different strokes for different folks (thank goodness).

I will take a bit of both... but WA mtns are OK, certainly not among the best I enjoy, but probably look good pretty to a 'Sounder' who endures traffic all week and enroute to the mtns.

CO vs. WA... kind of a toss up. 'depends'. Maybe you should try each for a few decades . I just booked another CO trip for under $100!!! Can't beat that for a winter sunbreak!. WA was nice to me during my INCOME yrs but is killing me in my early retirement. (Property Taxes and Healthcare alone are < $3000/ month)

[RotseCherut]

There is such a thing of East of the Cascades where there is plenty of vistas and not as many trees.. At least you have some variety.. Lot of the mountains around Wenatchee are brown and open , if that is your thing.

WA mountains are amazing.. And, this is coming from a person who has hiked all through Oregon, Idaho and Montana. Although, I have never been to Colorado, I have done several street views driving through mountain ranges and looked at various pictures. Also, I have talked to many people who tell me the Northern Rockies are much more scenic than the Southern Rockies.

I will have to say that Glacier National Park and the Montana/Alberta Rockies probably rival the Cascades of Washington and British Columbia. But, I don't think Colorado's dry and low-rising mountains can compare with the majesty and diversity you have in the Washington mountain ranges.

[StealthRabbit]

Originally Posted by RotseCherut

... Although, I have never been to Colorado, ....

nuff said.. (on a CO vs. WA thread...)

I will stick with the rockies in Mtn States and Canada. (If I'm not in South America enjoying those Mountains (as in HIGH and spectacular). Back country WY, ID is one of my favorites for mtns. (with no people on them)

If you are an avid biker (bicycle touring ... as per OP question / comment) .. Colorado and Canada is very tough to beat.

WA mtns are OK if you can escape to your car for a warm and dry ride there and back. But, you will see mostly trees, slugs, moss, ferns, and mud. Very little wildlife or spectacular clouds and stars.

YMMV