Alaska or Yellowstone in June?
Jan 26th, 2000, 09:37 AM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Alaska or Yellowstone in June?
Need help in deciding whether our family of four(two adults and two teenagers) should go to Yellowstone/Grand Tetons in mid-June or try to go to Alaska? We would try to use frequent flier miles and are interested in seeing sights at both places. If Alaska,would probably rent a car and drive to sights.Thanks for any suggestions! Debbie
Jan 26th, 2000, 09:58 AM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hi, Debbie,
Tough call, I think it depends largely on the time you have.
Yellowstone is pretty amazing - I first went there myself as a teenager and was knocked out by all the thermal stuff (mud pots, geysers..), wandering elk and bison and (less now) bears. The park is do-able in a few days, the Tetons a day trip if you like. The park is very popular and it will take some doing to get away from the throngs.
Alaska is another story. The scale and diversity of the place has no comparison in the lower 48, and in my experience it's a real eye-opener to people who are maybe expecting something more consistent with the rest of the country. If your family is interested in the wilderness, and if you have time to get into the bush in Alaska, then there's no choice IMO. If time is shorter and you want a quick introduction to some pretty amazing natural history, then Yellowstone is your best bet.
Tough call, I think it depends largely on the time you have.
Yellowstone is pretty amazing - I first went there myself as a teenager and was knocked out by all the thermal stuff (mud pots, geysers..), wandering elk and bison and (less now) bears. The park is do-able in a few days, the Tetons a day trip if you like. The park is very popular and it will take some doing to get away from the throngs.
Alaska is another story. The scale and diversity of the place has no comparison in the lower 48, and in my experience it's a real eye-opener to people who are maybe expecting something more consistent with the rest of the country. If your family is interested in the wilderness, and if you have time to get into the bush in Alaska, then there's no choice IMO. If time is shorter and you want a quick introduction to some pretty amazing natural history, then Yellowstone is your best bet.
Jan 26th, 2000, 01:04 PM
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
That question is like asking, "Should I go to Paris or Rome?" Both, I'm sure would be memorable trips.
However, at this stage, your sole determining factor may be: Which tickets can you get using ff miles. It may already be too late for either! I would check immediately on ff ticket availability before doing anything else.
However, at this stage, your sole determining factor may be: Which tickets can you get using ff miles. It may already be too late for either! I would check immediately on ff ticket availability before doing anything else.
Jan 26th, 2000, 03:00 PM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've been to both and, as noted above, EITHER place will be wonderful to visit. Some thoughts to help you decide.
1) Yellowstone/Tetons could be well handled in about one week; Alaska requires no LESS than two weeks. If you have no MORE than a week for your visit, leave Alaska for another time.
2) Distances in Alaska are huge. If your family can't handle driving in a car together for hours on end, with not a lot of civilization along the way, Alaska is NOT for you.
3) Alaska is so expensive that camping (at least some of the time) is almost a necessity. If you don't want to camp together as a family, skip Alaska or be prepared to pay outrageous prices for lodging.
4) Alaska has much less in the way of organized tourism and entertainment. For me, that was a major plus; for others, the fewer places for guidance in fun in Alaska would be a big minus.
Once again; I would LOVE to have your "dilemma" -- either choice you make will be great!
1) Yellowstone/Tetons could be well handled in about one week; Alaska requires no LESS than two weeks. If you have no MORE than a week for your visit, leave Alaska for another time.
2) Distances in Alaska are huge. If your family can't handle driving in a car together for hours on end, with not a lot of civilization along the way, Alaska is NOT for you.
3) Alaska is so expensive that camping (at least some of the time) is almost a necessity. If you don't want to camp together as a family, skip Alaska or be prepared to pay outrageous prices for lodging.
4) Alaska has much less in the way of organized tourism and entertainment. For me, that was a major plus; for others, the fewer places for guidance in fun in Alaska would be a big minus.
Once again; I would LOVE to have your "dilemma" -- either choice you make will be great!
Jan 26th, 2000, 08:29 PM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sorry to disagree, Paul, but I went to Alaska last summer and had only 4 days to "see the basics", and had a thoroughly enjoyable time. Granted, it was a sampling of many different things....Seward, Kenai, fjord cruise, hiking, Denali, Anchorage......but it was a great overview and I definitely got a solid feel for the amazing uniqueness of Alaska.
And while costs are high, a trip to Chicago/SF/NYC will run the same for (slightly better quality) lodging. I didn't find food to be too inflated.
Driving times definitely add up, though. As everyone has noted, Debbie, you'll have a great time at either one.
And while costs are high, a trip to Chicago/SF/NYC will run the same for (slightly better quality) lodging. I didn't find food to be too inflated.
Driving times definitely add up, though. As everyone has noted, Debbie, you'll have a great time at either one.
