Myer

My wife and I may be in the area with a few other people during the last half of July and the suggestion of spending 2-3 days in Banff has come up.

Some are not hikers and have little interest in doing so but for some reason are interested in the scenery. Sounds almost contradictory to me.

Is it possible to enjoy the famous scenery without doing more than several half hour walks?

tovarich

You can see a lot just driving and making half hour hikes.When visiting Lake Louise dont forget to drive a bit further to lake Moraine.Much nicer.A lake surrounded by 10 mountain peaks.Paul

Aramis

Goodness gracious - YES!

Sulphur Mountain Gondola is a short walk to the edge of town. Bow Falls are a nice short walk from the centre of town. You can either see them from the east side of the river from a road, or from the west side via the Banff Springs Hotel.

Borealis

You won't have to do much hiking for the scenery. You will be IN the scenery!!! Many of the viewpoints are a short walk indeed.

NWWanderer

i'm in banff now and as has been noted, the amount of gorgeous scenery you can see with little to no effort is truly astonishing.

there are also a number of short walks (1 km or so each way) to even better scenery, such as the lakeshore path at moraine lake.

Myer

We're trying to decide between three or four days and whether we can stay in Banff and drive around or spend two night in Banfff and one or two in Lake Louise.

Obviously staying in one place is easier but how much of a disadvantage?

How long a drive to Lake Louise area?

Thanks. A big help.

Orcas

Banff is not in the mountains. It is south of the park, and you would have to go driving into it daily. Lake Louise is right there in the middle of things. I would definitely suggest you stay at Lake Louise. It is gorgeous and a very good base for other outings.

Aramis

Orcas - Banff is most definitely "in the mountains" and, not surprisingly, it is also "in" Banff National Park. "in". I don't know where you are getting your information - are you thinking of Canmore? Even that is "in the mountains" but it is a few miles south of the park gates.

You are really off base on that response. Try an image search or Google maps and switch to satellite view.

Scotia

We have just returned from spending two nights in Banff and two nights in Jasper. The setting of the Banff Springs Hotel is spectacular and is a 15 minute walk from town of Banff. We are not hikers but found enough sightseeing to keep us busy for two days. Lake Louise is about a 40 minute drive away but we are glad we did not stay there. The Lake is stunning but we didn't think there was enough for us to do. From there we drove to Jasper about 3 hours away on the Icefield Parkway. As NWWanderer said, the gorgeous scenery is astonishing. One thing that surprised us was there is a Park fee of $9.00 per person per day, less if you are a senior, even if you are staying at a hotel and not doing any hiking or camping. You have to drive through the Park gates to get to the hotels or Icefield Parkway. Small price to pay to enjoy the beauty of the Rockies.

Aramis

Sorry Myer - I got so thrown off by Orcas response I didn't answer your question.

Lake Louise is about 45-40 minutes of easy driving - all highway except for a little bit of approach to Lake Louise.

Banff is a "town".with much more to do than Lake Louise - shopping, etc.., but that means it is more developed. You will find many more accommodation options in Banff, but Lake Louise

krp329

Orcas, have a look at this Banff webcam - it's right in the town of Banff and there are definitely mountains visible.
http://www.bestofbanff.com/webcam/

Orcas

I have stayed at both Lake Louise and Banff and much preferred Lake Louise. (We stayed at Deer Lodge at L. Louise.) Lake Louise is more central in the park and right in the mountains. The lake is surrounded by steep cliffs on three sides with a glacier right in your face, reflected on the lake. Look for images of Lake Louise on the internet and compare them with images of the town of Banff, and the difference will be obvious.

Also, look at a map of the park. Lake Louise is in the middle and much closer to other sites (beautiful lakes and steep mountains, plus the glaciers along the icefields parkway). Banff is on the southern end. I didn't realize it was in the park because it is just a town, a tourist town. You will be driving by Lake Louise nearly every day, if you stay in Banff and want to see the park.

It is really a matter of choice. If you want to be in a town with lots of shops and restaurants, then Banff would be a good choice. If you want to see the sites and be in the mountains, then Lake Louise is a better choice.

sf7307

The OP can see for herself by googling the word "Banff" and clicking on "Images" -- on the second page, there's a picture of downtown Banff that clarifies Banff's relationship to the mountains. Likewise Lake Louise.

Myer

I can see where banff and Lake Louise are situated. They both seem to have their good points.

This trip is getting more complicated as time goes on. Actually, maybe it's getting less complicated.

It appears I'll be going with my wife (two of us alone). We do a lot of walking on our trips but she doesn't view herself as a hiker. I guess the difference is changes in elevation and distance/time between other things.

I imagine in banff when she's had enough of the walking I could leave her to explore the town while I do something longer.

Lake Louise might be an issue as we can stop to view sights and do relatively short walks. But I get the feeling Lake Louise isn't much of a town.

The remainder of the trip is also causing issues. This started as a Vancouver, Victoria, Seattle trip. Then Banff got dropped in.

I'm trying to do most of the flying on air miles. American Airlines is doing their best to get my miles back as cheaply as possible and I'll trying to use them efficiently.

I see no reason to use double the miles and fly first class on a domestic flight of only a few hours.

My original plan was to fly from Calgary to vancouver and make our way to Victoria and Seattle and fly home to Ft Lauderdale.

The best I can do on American is to fly back from Vancouver to Miami (actually a better arrival time of 8PM vs 11:10PM).

We could fly from Calgary to Seattle but that's almost double the price as to Vancouver.

I'm tempted to drop Seattle and see if we can use the extra days we have in or around Vancouver/Victoria.

Maybe we'll get adventurous (not like us) and drive from Banff to Vancouver.

Anybody know what the drive is like. I don't like hanging over cliffs. Is the drive worth the effort. Good stops along the way. Scenic, etc.

Thanks. This info is very helpful.

sf7307

<<<But I get the feeling Lake Louise isn't much of a town>>>.

Lake Louise doesn't have a town so to speak. It has some commercial venues, but they're scattered about ---- there's no main street or concentrated commercial area like there is in Banff.

Orcas

I know the problem getting decent ff mileage. We use United miles a lot and it becoming a bigger and bigger challenge - different miles, different phone calls, different days. Very difficult. My plans flex with available routing, to a point. I've even supplemented wtih paying for legs of trips to make things work (like I could NOT spend 9 hrs in LAX, as my ff miles scheduled me. I sprung for a couple hundred bucks to escape as quickly as possible).

There are lots of "walks" in Banff that I would not call hikes -lots of paths, incluing to the Tea House at L. Louise - a fabulous walk.

We drove between Vancouver and Banff and it was an interesting drive. We went through the Frasier River valley. While you drive along the canyon, I don't recall it being scary - only scenic. It is a long day drive, if I recall.

Vancouver is great and is worth the time, so you might save Seattle for another trip. There are easily accessible islands, as well as Victoria. You can't go wrong with making it an all Canadian vacation.

Myer

I definitely wouldn't do the drive in a day.

If it's a matter of getting the drive out of the way, then we'd fly.

If we can make it part of the trip with scenery and a few interesting stops, then maybe.

Aramis

Orcas - that is a pretty weak attempt at defending a gross misdirection of the reality.

For your information, the "Lake Louise" you are describing is the physical "lake", not the town. There are 3 or 4 hotels/lodges up there and nothing else. It is not the town, which is 2-3 miles away. There is nothing to do at the actual lake but sit, hike, or canoe and the OP wasn't looking for that.

The Lake Louise town site isn't much of a town as sf7307 points out. It's not much more than some chalets and lodges a few stores.

Orcas

Aramis, Wow! What is your problem? What are you talking about? Did you even read my post? With your attitude, you should be posting in the lounge where people enjoy taking pot shots at each other and being rude, not on the actual travel area of the website where we try to help each other make choices.

I was never referring to a town called "Lake Louise." I was talking about the lake. I said we stayed at Deer Lodge. It is right behind the Chateau Lake Louise, which is right on Lake Louise. It is right near the lake. It is not in a town. I said I did not like staying in the town of Banff - that I preferred staying at Lake Louise. I said I was not interested in shopping or restaurants, but in seeing the sites. Now expain to me what your problem is and why you think I was referring to the town of Lake Louise. We didn't even go to a town called "Lake Louise" while we were there, or if we did, we did not notice it and just passed through. We stayed at LAKE LOUISE, which is the lake close to which Deer Lodge is located. Gross misdirection of reality indeed. Go have a drink. I think I will. This is why I left the lounge.

sf7307

Orcas, in aramis' defense, you have to admit that saying that Banff is not in the mountains was at least a stretch