The "tourist trap" quarters list.

Later today, the list of sites to be depicted for the "Beautiful National Park" quarter series beginning Next year will be made public.

I figure that before it does, we can talk here about what should be on them, and later, we can change the conversaion to whether or not the Treasury department picked the right ones.

For example. I think that the three "orphan" national sites, Midway Island, Normandy Beach and the FDR/Campobello sites, which are in none of the 56 "states" should have quarters. what do you think?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I worked in Yellowstone for a bit, spent my days hiking and camping on my days off... great place...great memories of washing dishes and cleaning cabins then getting off to soak under a waterfall with a beer and maybe a smoke with some of the pretty ladies who were very....free and easy... (sigh)....those were the days...few cares or worries...I assume this park will be included...

 

I would like to see

PA: Gettysburg NP
MD: Antietam NP
VA: Shenandoah NP or Manassas NP

Some NP's were covered on the state quarters like Yosemite in California, hopefully CA will do something cool like Muir woods or Lassen Volcano.

edit: Yes Normandy for sure and perhaps Midway should have a quarter of their own.

 

As a Californian, I'm tired of Yosemite representing CA parks. I've never been overly impressed with the place....it's small, over-crowded and looks like any other mountain area. I'd like to see something uniquely California, like the Redwoods.
Guy~

 

Maybe we will have a second quarter to feature Crater Lake.

 

I think Iowa should have the Grant Wood, American Gothic picture on it. I know it's not a state park, but is is a historical place.

 

How is American Gothic a historical place?

 

Yeah, some people think it is Iowa.

 

The following is a list announced by US Mint as per Michael Zielinski's blog.

http://mintnewsblog.blogspot.com/

 

Wow, Mt. Hood National Forrest from Oregon...I'm a bit surprised by that. I understand that they don't want to do Crater Lake National Park because that was on the state quarter..but there are better places in Oregon that Mt. Hood National Forrest.

 

Yep, just as I suspected...not an original idea in the bunch. I think my modern quarter collecting has come to an end. I already have most of that stuff in my state quarter collection.
Guy~

 

Ellis Island for NJ was kinda original.

 

So we get to see alot of trees and rocks for the next several years. Oh yea..

Hey Michigan has the pictured rocks, they should be nice in silver?

 

I elitism in this post is comical but I'm glad there will be one less collector going for this set. Most folks will collect them by default in their proof, mint set purchases. Bring on the designs !!!!!!!!! That will get all the quarter haters blood boiling...woooo hoooo.

 

I found it ironic that the guy lamenting the lack of originality on coins is displaying a coin with a representation of liberty on it...probably the most well worn, least original concept on coins.

 

In all fairness, it was a fairly original design when that coin came out.

 

It might have been original back in Roman times when it was Libertas. By the time it was put on a US coin it was a well worn concept.

 

But for Americans, on American coinage, it was a very new concept. Almost all agree it was the best for the times.

I saw a French 100 francs minted 100 years after America started making coins; it had an image of Liberty. Should one condemn it for being a "well worn concept" ?

 

That was kind of the point I was trying to make. They had been under a monarchy for a very long time and were finally rid of it. What else would they put on their coins. To them, Liberty was a new concept...even if it had been portrayed on coins 2000 years prior.

 

certainly not...it was not my purpose to 'condemn' a coin. If someone wants to recycle concepts on coinage, no problem here. All the same, it was hardly an original concept. That was my only point...to bemoan the lack of originality while displaying a coin with a 'well worn (unoriginal) concept' was ironic to me. My only point.