Having grown up in North Dakota, I am deeply confused why tourists would want to visit any part of it (#5). I'm shocked it shares a list with Barcelona and Carribean islands.
Haven't been to North Dakota, but a few years ago I went to Montana (parts look very similar to the picture they included). It was almost by chance I went, didn't really have a hand in planning the trip but-
It was absolutely breath-taking, and I won't forget how it felt to stand in those hilly fields for a long time. Being at the exact same spot as the Battle of Little Big Horn, walking in quiet with no cell phone signal... It was all wonderful.
Oh yeah, Montana is absolutely beautiful. When I moved to California for school I drove through and was absolutely amazed. Western ND is like eastern Montana, which is much different than western Montana. Then ND gets incredibly flat like the picture in the article as you go east. Most people from Montana really don't like eastern Montana.
I'm interpreting the list as "52 places you might not have considered" because in each of their categories (national park, metro, attractions, etc.) many obvious - and IMO better - choices are avoided, at least for the US.
Agreed - it would likely be trivial to come up with a list of 52 tourist meccas that everyone's heard of. Washington, DC, London, Moscow, etc - I mean you could probably visit the 52 largest national capitals and have a great tourist experience.
It's nice to see a list with places I never would have considered, even if it is odd to see ND and St. John on the same list.
The national parks are beautiful in ND. It would be like me saying I'm confused why the Caribbean is on the list because I grew up on the ocean. I'm in and around the ocean almost everyday still, so taking a vacation to see more ocean isn't that exciting.
