4 ms·
Sure, yeah, but you say "Alberta Rockies" and I think "Ah, yes, because the US is notably lacking good scenic parks in the Rocky Mountains."
by saalweachter 8mo ago
Sure, yeah, but you say "Alberta Rockies" and I think "Ah, yes, because the US is notably lacking good scenic parks in the Rocky Mountains."
- badc0ffee 8mo agoI'm saying this after having seen the Rockies in both countries.
- fakedang 8mo agoBanff is much better than Vail or Jackson Hole though. I would even say better than Tahoe, if not for the lake.
- saalweachter 8mo agoIt's not so much what's better as whether it's different enough to attract a significant tourist group from areas with similar attractions nearby. Like, if you want to see a rain forest or a thousand year old Buddhist temple or a pyramid, there's not really a substitute in the continental US. But if you've two options, where you can go to the pretty good option domestically or drive past it and continue on to the much better option in another country ... most people will be happy with the closer option, even if there's some small number of people who want the best or have seen all the closer options before and want something different or just whimsically like the idea of going to the further-away one none of their friends have been to.
- trogdor 8mo ago> if you want to see a rain forest or a thousand year old Buddhist temple or a pyramid, there's not really a substitute in the continental US Minor nitpick, but there are temperate rain forests in the continental United States. What we don’t have are tropical rain forests.