Hey that's nasty, it's nice road-trip material, redwoods, coast, historical towns; Mendocino to the south, and Oregon to the north. Some people live there by choice.
You know you've been in SV too long when your first association for 'sequoia' is 'VC' or 'portfolio' not 'tree' or 'forest'.
For sure. That drive (or bike) on 101 is priceless. Good attractions, that I remember, are the glass beach and Samoa cookhouse.
Met someone a few weeks ago and found out today he went to Humboldt for college - came up while exchanging phone numbers and I have a 707
Edit: way better driving north from the Bay Area on hwy 101 than south towards SoCal on 5
Certainly nobody chooses to live there for the tourists!
And it’s a fine place; I’ve just driven Seattle-LA on every path imaginable more times than I can count. It happens to be right around the point where you’re really far from absolutely everything, and it all looks the same.
No, it doesn’t. Flying to Vegas is 3 hours all said and done, and $20. For a party of 2 any car under 35mpg would be more expensive, and that’s not counting depreciation. And assuming you even have a car. And you even get unlimited food and drinks at the lounges, if that’s your bag.
Also when you fly to Vegas you end up in Vegas, with about a million things to do. When you drive to Humboldt you end up at a forest, after spending the past 5 hours driving through… forests.
Wait, what? People travel to see things all the time. The original Star Wars sets in Tunisia, hobbiton in New Zealand, the evil dead house in Tennessee, or even Petra because of Indiana Jones. I guarantee you it would be a tourist attraction today if it still existed.
Also, Humboldt is not really that far from anywhere and is a lovely journey through some incredible forests.
You know you've been in SV too long when your first association for 'sequoia' is 'VC' or 'portfolio' not 'tree' or 'forest'.