urbanSTL

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Nov 22, 2021

^I'd been thinking that. Maybe they should put the year the park opened to the public at the top whether it matches 2022 days or not.

1965 matches 2021. 2027 will be next occurrence.

Missouri isn't exactly known for dinosaurs, but a new species has been discovered here, and it's making waves in the paleontology community:

  https://www.yahoo.com/news/skeleton-din ... 00312.html

All the (63) National parks in the USA ranked
Gateway National Park ranked dead last
https://morethanjustparks.com/national-parks-ranked/

chris fuller wrote: ↑

Nov 25, 2021

All the (63) National parks in the USA ranked
Gateway National Park ranked dead last
https://morethanjustparks.com/national-parks-ranked/

Yes, because it’s not an actual national park as they explain. It just shows how much pull senior senators have, Roy and Claire at the time

They could've at least given us a 10/10 on accessibility. Is there some other park I'm not aware of that's easily accessible without a car and near a major airport?

There are other parks that aren't any better than some of our nearby national forests (Congaree, Cuyahoga).

^And there are a fair few state parks worthy of inclusion in the national park system. (Possibly including one here, though I'm not sure I'd want it to happen as the National Park Service is not without issues. For starters, it attracts crowds.) There's a lot of politics involved. And their measurement system is incredibly arbitrary and clearly that of a couple of outdoorsy white dudes. Note that crowds are a mark against a park, not for it. To really help the broadest possible subset of travelers they'd probably need several lists weighing different criteria differently. 

symphonicpoet wrote:^And there are a fair few state parks worthy of inclusion in the national park system. (Possibly including one here, though I'm not sure I'd want it to happen as the National Park Service is not without issues. For starters, it attracts crowds.) There's a lot of politics involved. And their measurement system is incredibly arbitrary and clearly that of a couple of outdoorsy white dudes. Note that crowds are a mark against a park, not for it. To really help the broadest possible subset of travelers they'd probably need several lists weighing different criteria differently. 

Castlewood?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^Cahokia Mounds.

I would love to see Cahokia Mounds become a national park, but once again it's hard to see it becoming a marquee park. It's tiny, flat and would certainly rank among the bottom of that list.

You would have to lump in Horseshoe lake park too, but even that lake is far from picturesque.

^This is one of the great missed opportunities of StL. Had we not destroyed the mound network, we would be one of the premier archaeological destinations in the Americas. 

Didn't St. Louis do that far before its decline or stagnation ever even set in?

National “Parks” is just 63 of like 400+ sites that the NPS operates. There are 85 national monuments like Aztec Ruins National Monument in NM or the Bandelier National Monument which is 33,677-acres

The site could definitely be treated much better than it is today, and I'd like to see it.

Whether it's the state of Illinois or the National Parks Service stepping up to the plate, I'm all for it. 

KansasCitian wrote: ↑

Nov 26, 2021

Didn't St. Louis do that far before its decline or stagnation ever even set in?

What's your point? We also thumbed our noses at the rail roads before our stagnation set in

I'm not diminishing the short-sightedness of destroying the mounds; I'm merely stating that nobody in St. Louis likely saw the downside to not maintaining them or honoring them as the city was rapidly growing. 

Then why did reply to me in the first place? That has no bearing on whether it was a missed opportunity, which it was.

LOL. Because, discussion. 

Destroying the mounds didn't impair St. Louis when they were destroying them, not at least in the same way that the city suffered from destroying Mill Creek Valley or Kosciusko. 

It would be interesting to see what St. Louis would look like if they had honored the mounds and hadn't destroyed them.

KansasCitian wrote:I'm not diminishing the short-sightedness of destroying the mounds; I'm merely stating that nobody in St. Louis likely saw the downside to not maintaining them or honoring them as the city was rapidly growing. 

I think I vaguely remember reading that there was some pushback to demolishing the mound on the near Northside?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Josephine Baker is the first black woman to be inducted to the French Pantheon
https://www.france24.com/en/culture/202 ... nch-heroes

https://time.com/6129859/st-louis-shootings-homicides-decrease/

^ St Louis is being cited in Time for its community lead efforts to curb gun violence this week. Really positive press!

Here's a nice feel good story that puts us up with some top food destinations: Eater: Where to Eat in 2022. There's a related story: The 26 Essential St. Louis Restaurants.

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jan 19, 2022

Here's a nice feel good story that puts us up with some top food destinations: Eater: Where to Eat in 2022. There's a related story: The 26 Essential St. Louis Restaurants.

I was waiting for you to link to the BBC article in one of these!

^I did, but the mods moved it.

I figure if there's a thread that's a good fit for an article, it should go there. Especially if there's a discussion that follows. Otherwise this thread becomes a long one full of everything. And it's annoying when trying to find that link you remember being posted, but can't find it in the obvious thread.
I posted the restaurant list SP posted here in the restaurant thread for that reason.

^Good point. I wonder what it would take to enable cross-posting. I've seen that built in on a few forums. (They even ask you if you want to cross post, or suggest it.) Not sure if TapaT allows it, and even if it does maybe it'd be too much of a headache to enable. But if it's easy . . . ?

(Also, am I the only person that's been reading TapaTalk as Tap Ta Talk?)