Chicago Recreation

December 6, 2011 10:08 AM

Is it totally nuts for an outdoor loving backpacking tree hugger to move to Chicago for work?

I have visions of Chicago recreation being sitting at a baseball game eating a hotdog. Is there some reasonably good outdoor recreation around there? To stay sane I need at least a couple days out in the woods at least a couple times a year.

posted by H. Roark to Health & Fitness (16 answers total)

Chicago is a great city, but there isn't a ton of green space in the city. There's lots within a short drive up into wisconsin though.
posted by Oktober at 10:09 AM on December 6, 2011

You could go to Wisconsin or take the train to the Indiana dunes.
posted by runningwithscissors at 10:16 AM on December 6, 2011

Chicago does have some nice green space in various places, though you're not going to find something like DC's Rock Creek Park.

oh god I almost just said "you're not going to find a giant lake" but O HAI LAKE MICHIGAN

There are a number of in-between places and activities that you might enjoy. Lincoln Park, for example, is very similar to Central Park in that it has a lot of different areas. There's a prairie, tons of baseball/softball/frisbee fields, etc.

It's very easy to get from Chicago out to other places. You're only 1.5 hours from a place like Starved Rock State Park, and of course there's Wisconsin.

The greater Chicagoland area also has a number of nature preserves, so even if you can only spare an afternoon, you can take a stroll and not see buildings.
posted by Madamina at 10:26 AM on December 6, 2011 [2 favorites]

We're not far from Starved Rock; the Fox River and a couple forest preserves.

The city itself is a city--there's some parks and the lakefront; still, it's not all bars and watching tv. The Park District maintains golf courses/putting ranges in the City (if that's your thing) and there's kayaking in the river, sailing on the lake and kayaking in the Skokie lagoons. We have a thriving cycling community and a lot of running events, but unfortunately no skiing.
posted by crush-onastick at 10:27 AM on December 6, 2011

There are billions of Chicagoans that drive up to Wisconsin every year. You probably want to head to the central part of the state, about a 6 hour drive. Upper Michigan is pretty wild.
posted by desjardins at 10:28 AM on December 6, 2011

I disagree with the first comment. The nature surrounding Chicago is just plain boring compared to the Pacific NW, or California, or lots of other places. Lots of corn.

But the city itself actually has tons of greenspace and great parks. If you like running or cycling, it might work. It's actually a really active city, and especially near the lakefront there are always people doing activities that you might consider outdoor sports or might consider outdoor exercise, depending on your perspective.

But hiking and camping is really never going to be as exciting as in the West, because things are pretty flat and there's not much real wilderness nearby. As people above have pointed out, Wisconsin is the closest promising, pretty place.
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 10:32 AM on December 6, 2011 [3 favorites]

I also forgot, there's a migratory bird shelter up around Belmont Harbor--we see birds of prey in our back yard on the way to and from it from time to time. Apparently, people organize "hikes" around spotting the birds.
posted by crush-onastick at 10:33 AM on December 6, 2011

Closer to Chicago, there are also the Forest Preserves (big-ass PDF map) for day activities. Nobody would mistake them for unspoiled wilderness, but there are some nice hikes & canoeing available there.
posted by Johnny Assay at 10:33 AM on December 6, 2011

I remember driving through Chicago from south to north on a Sunday while on a road trip and I was surprised by how quickly it got very rural as you drove north. There is a lot of green north of the city.
posted by zzazazz at 10:37 AM on December 6, 2011

Do you need to be alone in those days in the woods? Many of the closest places for hiking/camping get very crowded-- tour groups of elementary school children crowded.
I've seen paved "hiking" trails at Starved Rock and Devil's Lake in Wisconsin.

It's a far cry from the Appalachians I used to live near. That level of solitude is available about 6 hours away (try Kentucky or the Shawnee forest downstate.) I love the city but do lament its lack of woods camping
posted by travertina at 10:42 AM on December 6, 2011

Urbs in Horto! (City in a Garden) Chicago has an impressive number of parks, which were part of the Burnham city plan.

I believe Cook County (in which Chicago is located) has the most green space of any urban county in the U.S., largely due to the Cook County Forest Preserve that rings the county.

Chicago is one of the greenest major cities in the U.S., in part because Daley was mayor since God made the world so he could just decide Chicago was going green and do it, starting with rooftop gardens and green roofs (2.5 million square feet of living roofs!).

There's a great deal of "nature" around Lake Michigan (Indiana Dunes, for example). Wisconsin and the U.P. have tons of backwoods to enjoy. Downstate there are some fantastic parks, including Starved Rock but also city-managed places like Forest Park. I live in urban Peoria; bald eagles fly over my house during their winter nesting along the Illinois River. (Those MFers are ENORMOUS.) I watch hawks pick off rabbits from my kitchen window. (I love you hawks! You are saving my garden!)

There's a robust local food culture; because it is a state with a lot of agriculture, you can eat local reasonably easily. There are great farmers' markets and CSAs in Chicago.

There aren't a lot of huge continuous parks, but there are a lot of "rail-to-trail" grants currently converting disused rail lines and trying to connect them up to create longer, intercity hiking or biking trails. Chicago is also pretty bike-friendly.

Also you can go to baseball games and eat hot dogs. Without ketchup, please.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 10:54 AM on December 6, 2011 [1 favorite]

Depends if you are the weekend warrior type or a spur-of-the-moment walk in the woods type. If you are the former, you will be fine. There is plenty of lovely nature in the Upper Midwest and Great Lakes region for a weekend getaway. If you are the latter, then it's a bad idea.
posted by Foam Pants at 11:14 AM on December 6, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'd say you'd be better off moving to Minneapolis/St. Paul than Chicago. There are tons more parks and trails up here than down there.

and +1 to Foam Pants' comment
posted by zombieApoc at 11:33 AM on December 6, 2011

I did the opposite and moved from Chicago to Oregon and then to Montana. It now takes me 30 minutes to get to a National Park and get on a trail whereas in the city it took me 30 minutes to get to a different part of the city. I wouldn't go back. BUT I love Chicago and it's an incredibly active city; sailing, kayaking, triathlons, races all the freakin' time (year round), biking, and it's way easier to be "green" there than it is in MT. In the winter, you can skate or join an indoor league for basketball or soccer or something like that, or head to a forest preserve to cross country ski.

If you care about being active outdoors, you're fine, if you care about being alone and "lost".. eh. (Unless you take up sailing.. there are great places along the Michigan and Wisconsin coasts and if you sail, getting there is also part of the adventure).
posted by adorap0621 at 12:20 PM on December 6, 2011

Exactly what adorapo0621 said: think carefully about how much you want outdoors versus how much you want wilderness, and also about how okay you are with being surrounded most of the time by a ton of people and miles and miles and miles of city and suburbs.

I used to live in the Chicago burbs and felt miserable and trapped by the mass of humanity and, well, stuff on every side.

Then I moved to a tiny town in Wyoming and it was lovely. Then I moved back to a medium sized city in Iowa to be closer to family, and it's tolerable because it's not so insanely huge as Chicagoland, but it's not the West and never will be.
posted by newrambler at 3:55 PM on December 6, 2011

There is nice hiking around Chicago, especially in the state parks, although it's not exactly adventurous or rugged. There's nothing really for backpacking. Camping here is mostly car camping--where you drive to a state park and set up your tent in your reserved lot 10 feet from another lot, and hope your neighbors didn't come there to party. If you want solitude you need to camp in the off season (although you'll still be among the RVers.)

There are people here who bike to a state park to camp (starting with a ride on the Metra train). Every year we try to head up to Wisconsin for a canoe-camping trip.
posted by hydrophonic at 6:08 PM on December 6, 2011