If I were to choose one means of traveling from New York City to the gold fields of California in 1849, I would choose the route that traveled around South America by boat. Although this is the longest journey, spanning anywhere from four to eight months and spanning a total of about 15,000 months. This trip, however, did not include most of the other risks that the other routes included. Traveling via the Oregon Trail was the shortest trip, however, taking this route put you at risk of Native American attacks, as well as deadly diseases such as cholera, mountain fever, pneumonia, and diphtheria. This trip was relatively safe as long as people traveled in large groups, prepared well, and took safety precautions along the way. The other option of taking the short cut through Panama is easily the shortest of the options, lasting only two to three months. However, in my opinion, this is the most dangerous. Taking this route does cut off a large portion of the sea route, also avoiding the horn of South America, where the seas are extremely rough. However, passing through the jungle in Panama is extremely risky; the jungle is filled with diseases like malaria, yellow fever, and cholera. It is also bad because getting across the Panama jungle is expensive, and it is likely that one would have to pay off their debt to whoever helped them across by working for months at a time, which extends the journey by a significant amount. The final option, and my optimal choice, is, in my opinion, the safest and easiest. The trip is long and difficult, but is without a doubt worth it. Traveling all the way around South America gives you the opportunity of stopping along the way at ports to refuel and rest. On the ship itself, there is little comfort: living in a small room for four to eight months, rats on the ship, and rocky seas. However, there is little risk of disease, and if you time the trip right, there could be times of smooth sailing along the way, which would be excellent times for recovery. This route also appeals to me because I have grown up sailing all my life. I spend every summer on Martha’s Vineyard, where I sail in a program competitively, which I have done since I was six. I feel confident in a sailboat, and feel that I could be a contributing factor to the safety of the ship, and the process of reaching California. For all of these reasons, I would take the long journey around the horn of South America via sailboat to reach the gold regions of California in 1849.
If I had to choose a way to get from New York City to the California gold fields, I would choose the Oregon Trail. This trail begins in Missouri and ends at Oregon City in Oregon. Although a long and strenuous trail, the development of prairie schooners made the wagon trip easier. They were approximately half the size of the larger Conestoga wagons and could easily be pulled by four to six oxen or six to ten mules. The cotton canvas that covered the wagon were doubled and treated with linseed oil to help keep out the rain, dust, and wind. Their wooden wheels could easily move over rough ground and rocks. Food was kept in watertight containers. Also, the amount of food was less if beef cattle, calves, or sheep were taken as a walking food supply. In addition, there were many buffalo herds, antelope, sage hens, and trout to hunt along the trail. Some Native American tribes traded vegetables with the travelers. The food was cooked over campfires. The other land option is the Santa Fe Trail. Though shorter than the Oregon Trail, the Santa Fe Trail was more prone to Native American attacks, as neither the Comanche nor the Apaches of the southern high plains tolerated trespassers. The third option and the longest option is sailing from New York City, around Cape Horn in South America, to California. I would not want to travel around Cape Horn because the long four to seven month sailing trip was very dangerous and expensive. Although I am not particularly prone to seasickness, other ship members are. There would be varying weather conditions and many rats and disease. If the ship ran out of food, there would be no way to get any more food. Also, not many families were permitted to take this route, as it was very risky. I would not want to go anywhere without my family. The last option is the Panama route. It is the shortest, but the most dangerous. After taking a boat and landing in Panama, travelers would stay there for a couple days until they can get a second boat to get to California. Everything the travellers brought with them was stolen and there were a lot of other crimes. In addition, it was very easy to catch a fatal disease. The Oregon Trail is not the shortest, but it is, however, the safest. I am capable of bringing my family along with me. My dad lives for the outdoors and can hunt. He would be capable of finding food and water if we were to run out. There would be no need to deal with seasickness and outside threats like Native Americans and diseases because they were not as common on the Oregon Trail compared to other routes.
If I were to travel to California during the Gold Rush of 1849, I would choose to go by ship down the coast of South America and back up. This option, although long, would allow me to plan my ventures near Sacramento and dodge any obstacles such as harmful natives, dry deserts or harsh mountains. The obvious difficult leg of this trip would be Cape Horn itself, but I would invest in the leadership of an experienced captain. I would additionally prepare at multiple moments to stop for any trade, food, water or shelter in South America. This route is optimal because of the minimal amount of risk associated with a pure sea-based voyage. On the Oregon Trail, there was the great possibility of Native American attack and running out of resources. The Santa Fe Trail was even less developed, increasing those same risks. Travelling though Panama was just a horrible idea because after you trek through the jungle and hopefully escape marauding Columbians, you’re only halfway there. The two largest problems are the time and treachery. Cape Horn may be unforgiving, but in a big enough ship and a competent captain, it can be managed. Time is one problem that I don’t see important. As long as the trip is planned early, I would make it to California in the eighteen months its population was exploding. I prefer this conservative path; there was much money to be made and I would want as much of my settlement-building supplies, as well as myself, intact for California. In this state I would want to start a business selling mining supplies and make enough profit in material to start a farm in the valley. There I would grow corn or whatever other cash crop while the state continues to boom.
If I was to travel to California in 1849 for the Gold Rush, my choice of transportation to California would be to go along the Oregon Trail, as it took much less time to reach California than if I would go by boat. With all the people scrambling to get to California first for the gold rush, I would be among that group and choose one of the shorter routes. Even though the Santa Fe Trail might have been a shorter route, the chances of coming upon Native Americans were quite likely to occur. The Oregon Trail also incorporated the risk of running into Native Americans; it was less likely to happen. I would choose going along the Oregon Trail to California because the wagons available during these times were ones covered in cotton canvas and linseed oil, which help keep the rain, wind and dust out. Along with me on the journey, I would make sure to have men that knew how to hunt and kill because along the trail were herds of buffalo, bison, antelope and trout that could be hunted for food. Even though there was a risk at acquiring some of the worst diseases, such as cholera, mountain fever, pneumonia, and diphtheria, traveling by boat still didn't prevent some of these diseases. Acquiring these diseases traveling by boat is just as likely if not more because you are at risk for a much longer time. Choosing to take the Oregon trail as my route would also mean I would not need a lot of people to accompany me on the trip, therefore we would not need as many supplies as traveling by boat would. I would definitely not choose traveling by boat around Cape Horn because who knows when a storm could hit and ruin your whole expedition just like that. Also traveling by boat would mean you almost have to be a wealthy person because you would need to hire a crew to go with you and along the way, you would need to stop at certain areas for supplies. Choosing to sail to Panama Canal and cutting through the jungle was possibly one of the more dangerous options and hard to come by. For this you would need to be wealthy, again to by supplies and for the payment of someone leading you through the jungle. Also you would be at risk of acquiring other diseases such as, malaria, yellow fever, and cholera as you go through the jungle. Lastly, the Santa Fe Trail was a very dangerous trail because the trail ran right through Native American territory, where they didn't accept trespassers. I believe I would have the best chance of survival if I would go along the Oregon Trail with suitable crew members due to how much faster it was, and the necessary food sources available within parts of the trail.
In the year of 1849, as a man from New York City traveling to California, roughly over 2,000 miles, I must make a decision about my travel plans. I have a few options to choose between in order to get to the west coast in hopes of finding gold. After careful thought and deliberation I ruled out traveling by sea for multiple reasons. Traveling by sea meant either passing through Cuba where all of my belongings would be taken and I would be left with nothing for the west coast. If I chose to take the route around South America my crew and I would face the most dangerous waters and would risk the loss of our own lives and our ship. With that I decided the Oregon Trail was the safest and had the highest probability of reaching the west coast. The Oregon Trail was first taken in the year of 1832 and now 17 years later the trail is well blazed providing a clear path for my travels. There is always a possibility that I will face danger but the trail has safer soundings in the event that I do find danger. If for example my wagon broke an axle there would be somebody else on the trail that I could barter with. Or if I ran low on food there is an outpost along the way that will provide extra supplies. The vast variety of natural resources provided both food and water along the trail. An additional danger that I could face includes being attacked by Native Americans along the way. Even though this posses a threat I plan to travel with my own weapons along with a group of other men to fend off the Native Americans. I chose to take this route most importantly because it was most traveled and clear-cut route.
If I were to go to the Gold Rush in California in 1849, I would take the route that goes all the way around South America. Since the journey is longer than any other route, I would have to prepare and make a plan for things such as: trade, shelter, water, etc. Other options/routes I could take are more dangerous. If I took the route around South America I could avoid any difficulties that I would encounter on another route. Dangerous obstacles I could face would be native attacks, rough regions to get through, pneumonia, and other diseases, etc. The trip all the way around South America would take longer, but it would be safer and I would be in better condition than others when I arrived in California. Another route that is possible that makes the route faster would be going through the Panama Canal. Cape Horn would be cruel to get through, and would have to try to avoid yellow fever, etc. – That route is too dangerous. If you plan accordingly, you could make it around South America calmly. Going around South America, personally, I think is the best route. Although the ships are not as clean and even though it would take a very long time, it's worth it. It's worth it because it will be better for your condition when you arrive. Personally, I think I would like being on a boat with others and dealing with the hardships together. I also am not the type of person that would want to truck myself through the Oregon Trail. Going around South America appeals to me more and seems the safest.
If I were traveling to California during the Gold Rush in 1849, I would go by boat around South America. Growing up by the water, sailing has always been something I’ve enjoyed. I understand however that taking a large boat to California would be an incredibly different experience than an afternoon out in the bay sailing in a two person Sunfish. I would be accompanied by tons of other people, all going to California for the same reason as me. It would be tight and not very clean. In addition, the unpredictable weather could cause for rough sailing. Despite the hardships of this trip, I feel like this may be the easiest way for my family and I to get to our final destination. Besides going around South America, there were a few other possible routes to take such as the Oregon Trail, the Santa Fe Trail, and the boat to Panama. Those options did not appeal to me because of the threats of Indian attacks, diseases, geographical obstacles and food shortages. Preparing to go on this journey, I would plan out what to do in every possible situation I could think of. While aboard, everyone of us would have to contribute and work together to keep things moving smoothly. Sailing around South America seems like the easiest and most ideal way for my family and I to get to California. -Emily Walsh
If I was one of the voyager travels to San Francisco during gold rush, I will take the Santa Fe Trail. I have a higher chance of living and get to San Francisco if I take this route. Although I might get killed by starvation and Indians, I am safe from the sea, diseases and coldness. Santa Fe Trail is a trail which runs through central North America linking Missouri and New Mexico. Compare to the two water routes and Oregon Trail, this route is relatively easier and warmer, since it goes around the Rockies and crosses the southern part of the America. The disadvantages of this route are Native Americans might attack voyages along the trail, and lack of food. As most of the land was uncivilized along the route, voyagers could not get food easily along the way. Cattles which haul the wagons died because of starvation. It took voyager extra time to get to San Francisco due to reasons above. Some of them lost their lives on their way. The Oregon Trail is a trail connected the Missouri river and Oregon. Compare to the Santa Fe Trail, which started from Missouri too, the Trail travels more northward and crosses the Rockies. The advantages of this route are that this is an established route and there is army protection along the Trail. If one’s cattle were dead or one’s wagon was broken, someone along the way could help one out. Also, voyager could also buy food in an outpost along the way. Voyagers only need to follow the dirt track in order not to get lost. There are some disadvantages for the Oregon Trail. Although there were armies to protect the voyagers, however, voyages might experience attack by the Indians between military forts. On the other hand, since the route is pretty northward, the Trail was not passable in the winter due to the cumulate of snow. People might get sick too because of the cold night. The biggest disadvantage of the Oregon Trail is the spread of diseases. A large number of travelers might help with fighting off Indians; however, diseases were spread among the travels. Many travelers were killed by the spread of dysentery, Pneumonia and other popular diseases due to the lack of rest and cold nights. The last way to travel to San Francisco is by boat. There were two routes, one all the way around South America, and one across the Panama. Both routes had a huge disadvantage. The route around Cape Horn was not passable all year long. The sea current becomes very strong during sometime of the year. As a result, voyages might lose their lives if the sailors risked passing through the rough current. On the other hand, Panama government requires voyages to pay taxes when they travel through Panamas. As most of the voyagers were poor, the government made them leave everything they had to the government, which made the voyages broke. After looking all three options, choosing the Santa Fe is a wise choice as it stayed away from the rough sea, coldness and diseases. However, I might have a chance of getting killed by Indians and starvation.
Traveling in the year of 1849 would be difficult due to the lack of paved roads and methods of transportation. The Gold Rush in California was a very advantageous discovery that could help any single person or family establish themselves whilst making a living. Not only was there an advantage of the gold itself, but the ample space of fertile land as well. After looking at the three possible routes to California from New York City; I would have to choose The Oregon Trail. The path seems to be the fastest and most practical while taking into consideration the other routes (Water Routes/ Santa Fe Trail) and the hardships one would face. One such hardship could be falling ill, of which there is a high risk because of the cramped area on the ships. In addition, there very well might be a lack of food and very poor sanitation on those ships. The jungles of Panama are home to a very wide variety of venomous animals, by which you could be bitten when walking through it. It is for all of these reasons, that The Oregon Trail is the best route. Along The Oregon Trail are many spots to fish and hunt; which guarantees an abundance of food and reliable water supply. This route would also be more efficient, getting you there faster because it is approximately 2456.1 miles, the shortest distance of all three routes. There was a rush to get to California to seize the advantages of the land where growing crops, salvaging gold, and opening small businesses were attainable. It was a matter of getting there and establishing a living. I would have travelled in a large group for safety reasons and it would have increased the chances of survival with possible Native American threats. In conclusion, I feel that this route would be most advantageous for me and get me to California in a fast manner.
If I were travelling 2000 miles to California for the Gold Rush in 1849, I would take the Oregon Trail. Of the three options, I believe that this is the most efficient and most safe. If I were to go around cape horn, I would be on this ship for 4-8 months! As a young and able bodied person I think that there are more efficient ways of getting to California without wasting so much time and letting other men get there before me and take all the gold. In addition to the lengthy travel, it may also be incredibly dangerous. Around cape horn is some of the most dangerous waters in the world. With high winds and tumultuous waves, it is hard to trust even the most skilled sailor. A spot on the boat would also be very costly, anywhere from a hundred to even a thousand dollars. As I am going all the way to California to sift for tiny nuggets of gold, I clearly don’t have this type of money. My other option would be to take the shortcut through Panama. This would decrease the price, time, and danger in comparison to going all the way around cape horn. It would be the quickest of all the routes to take, but the likelihood that I would make it out alive is slim. Diseases such as Malaria, yellow fever and Cholera are common in this area. Even if I were to survive these diseases, the savages of the land would take all my possessions and maybe even kill me. I can’t afford these types of risks. My only option left is the Oregon Trail. Shorter than Cape Horn but longer than Panama, this trail poses the least threats in my opinion. It is definitely the least expensive; I would just need to buy enough food and water to fair me during the long stretches away from civilization. The only conceivable danger is a Native American attack, but it would be highly unlikely and if I were to come across Native Americans I wouldn’t provoke them. As long as I stay sterile and careful, I can most likely avoid contracting cholera, mountain fever, pneumonia or diphtheria. The biggest risks of the Oregon Trail seem less daunting than either of the risks Panama or Cape Horn pose. Overall, the Oregon Trail seems to be the cheapest, safest and most secure route that I could take.
If I were to travel from New York to California in 1849 due to the promise of gold, I would take the Oregon Trail. Each trail has its own risks but I personally believe that the Oregon Trail is the safest route to get to California. Firstly, the around the horn route, where the travelers would sail around South America, was extremely dangerous because of the strong currents. The trip also took about 9 months and families were generally not permitted, as the currents were too dangerous for women and children. The currents also made people very sick, and the trip was very pricey. I personally would not want to travel alone to new place and ideally would prefer to travel with loved ones. That is one of the largest reasons I chose the Oregon Trial. To travel the Oregon Trail, large groups of families commuted together in wagons. Native American tribes were attacking the largest threat to the families that travelled on the Oregon Trail, however if you traveled in large enough groups and had protection, it became more unlikely to be attacked. Another benefit of the Oregon Trail was the ability to get water from streams and lakes, as well as harvest crops as the group past. Unfortunately the trail was also long and took roughly 100 days. The other main alternative would be crossing through the Panama by boat. Not only would the trip cost a fortune, due to the unfair and unregulated fines at the crossing, but also there were many easily captured diseases such a malaria and cholera. The trip was dangerous and would leave them in debt to whoever helped them crossed. Again, for me the best solution would be to take the Oregon Trail but to help our chances of making it to California safety, I would make sure that I travelled in a large group and I would prepare myself with the right supplies such as hunting equipment, containers to hold my water and living supplies. I think this is the best method to maximize my chances of survival and the best way to guarantee that I have some savings to use once I arrive.
If I was traveling from New York City all the way to California in the quest to get rich quick I would take the Oregon Trail. Besides the Oregon Trail there are many different options including sea routes. If I were to take any one of the sea routes I would be throwing up the whole way there and in 1849 there is a lack of medicine and the chances of me dying from a disease while at sea is very high. If I were to take the sea route that stops at Panama and cuts across the country would be a faster way than going around Cape Horn, but in order to leave Panama the natives will force me to give up everything I own and to arrive in California with nothing but the clothes on my back. Also I still have the chance of dying at sea because of disease and the certainty that I will lose all my possessions. If I was to take the Santa Fe trail I would have to pass through the Great American Desert and have to deal with lack of food and water and the intense heat. On top I would be going through Apache and Comanche territory who are two of the most ruthless and violent tribes in America. If I were to take the Oregon Trail I would still have to deal with Indians but not as violent as the ones along the Santa Fe Trail. Also these Indians are more accustomed to travelers coming along. As far as the climate goes it is much more bearable than the Santa Fe trail. None of the options are easy and safe but I'm going to have to choose the lesser of two evils and in this case the Oregon Trail would have to be that option.
If I were traveling from the Midwest to California for the great gold rush of 1849, I would choose the route that would get me there the most efficiently. For that reason, I would choose to travel along the Oregon Trail. Not only is this one of the fastest routes, but it is also a lot less dangerous and costly than other routes. If I decided to buy a ticket on a steamship and travel all the way around Cape Horn, I would be cramped in a tiny ship for 4-8 long months with people I have never met before. In addition, the living conditions on these ships were less than ideal; I would have to face seasickness every day and risk the possibility of catching a disease from one of the other people on board. Finally, the seas off the coast of Cape horn are known to be some of the roughest wat4ers in the world, which would put me in great danger. The Panama Canal route, though shorter and less costly, still has me on a tiny boat with strangers and rats for a long period of time. In addition, the stop in Panama holds many dangers. Walking through the Panamanian jungle would put me at risk of catching a disease such as Malaria. I would also run the risk of being robbed, or killed by the indigenous people. If I spent most or all of my money on a ticket on a steamship to California, the last thing I would want is to be held up by the natives of Panama. It is for these reasons that the Oregon Trail seems most appealing to me. The only expense to pay would be for a wagon and supplies for the trip. I could hunt for food along the way to save even more money. If I found a good group of physically able people to travel along the trail with I would make great time, and the journey wouldn’t seem as tough. The only great danger along the Oregon Trail would be the possibility of a Native American attack. However, if I traveled with a larger group and we did not bother the natives we could try to avoid conflict, and even if they did attack we would have a chance to defend ourselves. The likeliness of me catching a disease along the Oregon Trail is far less than on the other routes. All of these reasons bring me to the conclusion that the Oregon Trail is the best choice. Not only was it cheaper and safer than the overseas routes, but it was faster than any other land route if I was starting in the Midwest.
If i were a traveler in search of gold to become rich i would take the route through the Caribbean, through the panama canal, and around the pacific coast to San Fransisco. Now Although many people could argue land would be the solution, i think other wise. For example, Many could argue the Oregon trail was a better route. This route from Missouri to Oregon was a shorter route, was not to strenuous your items and bottom were potentially in wagons being pulled by bison or mules. There is a problem though, When traveling on these trails you are always at risk of attacks by native Americans who if they could would try to kill you. Now the Santa Fe Trail another land route was shorter which sounded better, but in all reality you actually had a much higher risk of attacks by the native Americans because they were more friendlily as far as trading and getting along with travelers on the Oregon trail than the Santa Fe Trail. On the Oregon Trail they would trade with some travelers but that did not mean you were safe, they would for the most part try to kill you if they could. Going through the country you also had to deal with stuff like weather. The Trails in some cases were higher up in the country as you got closer and the temperature is colder. Plus the terain is much tougher than if you would sail around the panama and come up through that way. Now the reason i would go around the panama canal way and not the way around south America is because of the mear distance of the trip. The risks of the sea are the risks of the sea, there is no difference, your on the sea your on the sea. But To half to travel almost around a whole extra CONTINENT in the Roughly 1850's area by steamboat is absolute insanity. Think about that distance today, who wants to travel that today. The Route through the Panama canal would have been the most productive because the temperature for the most part would be relatively nice and not to freezing, The risk of getting physically killed by native Americans or the rocky mountain cold is much greater than perhaps a sea disease. Also i have been on boats my whole life and ive traveled on them since i was young so i have a lot. of experience on ships. I learned survival skills from some of my friends who are X navy seals. It really depends on what route you felt the most comfortable. certain people have certain skill sets that make them more comfortable traveling their route.The route through the all and all ould have been the safest route to have taken because of its lack of death risk and feasible conditions. Most could argue against it but for someone like me who travels on the sea for most of the summer in the 1840's 1850's era i would have chosen the route that i thought i would keep my family the safest. Traveling through the nation would have been rough Teriann, perhaps starvation. Also risk of dieing from temperature and most importantly the native Americans. I would defiantly at this time chosen the shorter sea route through the panama canal because the risk as far as death was not as steep, i have experience, and its the safest and lowest possible risk for my potential family that i would have had at this time in 1849.
California God Rush began when gold was found in California. People started moving to California to seek gold and better life. Most of those people were Americans even though there were some Latin Americans, Asians and Europeans. Those people traveled different ways; some of them traveled by sailing ship across the ocean while some others took The Santa Fe Trail and the Oregon Trail.
If I had to pick one way to go from New York City to California, I would choose to sail around South America by boat. Even though, this is the longest way to get to California, it was the safest one. There were not a lot of diseases in this route like the Oregon Trail, and also you were safe from Native Americans attack. Passing through Panama was much shorter that going all the way across South America, but it was safer than going through the Panama jungles and dying from diseases like malaria.
Travelling with group of people and experienced captain at the right time of the year, this rout is the safest way I could get to California. Even though there are a lot things that could go wrong by sailing on the water this long, with enough preparation, you at least don’t have to worry attacks from Native Americans and deadly diseases.
If I were living in 1859 and were headed to the gold field of California from New York City, I would travel by boat around the tip of South America. Although some may disagree as this is by far the longest mean of transportation, it is the safest. There is no easy way to get from one side of the country to another, however even though this trip could span from four to eight months, there are the smallest number of encounters via South American route. When traveling from New York to Panama and then Panama to California there are a number of risks at hand when choosing this route. This out of three would be one of the shortest routes, but to cross through Panama the possibility of acquiring disease is highly likely, for example yellow fever, cholera, etc. Not only is disease a danger in this route, but also it is expensive and the chance of encountering native attacks and robbing is highly like. Shortly following these attacks, one must make their way from Panama to California and after encountering all of these hardships; you are only halfway there. The second option would be traveling on the Oregon Trail. Although it seems to be the easiest route, first one must get from New York to Oregon, as well as encounter the difficulties once on the trail. Not only is the trail rugged and steep, but also on the trail to California many run the risk of being raided by Native Americans and running out of resources along the way. Overall choosing to travel down the coast of South America and back up the coast of North America is my safest bet. Although many believe that going around Cape Horn is a death wish, with a good caption and a large boat it shouldn’t be difficult at all. Although going around Cape Horn is the longest route, at the end of the day, choosing the safest root with the greatest chance in arriving is my main priority.
If I were to travel to California during the gold rush of 1849, I would go on a ship along South America and around Cape Horn. Since I would be coming from New York City, it would be the easiest means of transportation to get to. Although it would take about five to eight months and the Horn had some of the hardest seas to sail in, an experienced captain would make the voyage easier. The other sea route, to Panama then through the jungle to catch another ship, would be the most dangerous, in my opinion. Although shorter than going around Cape Horn, I would have to make it through 60 miles of jungle before I reached the other side of the Isthmus. During this time, the native people would take my luggage and leave me with nothing. The two other routes were land routes. The Oregon Trail was very popular during this time. However, I would have to first travel from New York to Missouri before I even got on the trail. On the trail, there was a danger of Native Americans attacking me if I crossed into their territory or contracting Cholera during the trip. With these dangers, I might not even make it to California. The Santa Fe Trail was similar to the Oregon Trail but more South. It had a higher population of hostile Native Americans living near it though, so it would be very dangerous to travel on. Overall, the ship along South America and around Cape Horn offers the most benefits and least dangers, which will help me make it to California in time to find a lot of gold.
If I were one of the many men traveling out west from New York City in 1849, I would take the Oregon Trail. This path is the least expensive and the safest; I wouldn’t hit the rugged waters around Cape Horn or have to make it through the unfamiliar jungle in Panama. The price of the ticket on the boat around Cape Horn can cost up to one thousand dollars but my wagon across the country would be much less expensive. The Oregon Trail is also the most efficient journey also because instead of going all the way around South America for eight months, it will only take me four months on the Oregon Trail to get to the gold coast. Avoiding Panama would also reduce the risk of catching a disease such as cholera, diphtheria, and pneumonia. Also on the Oregon Trail I would be traveling in a group with other 49ers so that would be a form of protection specifically against the Native Americans. As long as we were civil to them and didn’t irritate them they would be the same way towards us. The Oregon Trail is the most efficient, cheapest, and least dangerous path to take from New York City to California in the search for gold.
If I was a family in the time period of the Gold Rush, I would choose one of the water routes as my way over to California. I would choose the water passage around South America. This passage seems to me to be the best and safest way for my family to get over to the Manifest Destiny. The other water route is much more dangerous. I would have to go through Panama and I would lose everything I had. Going into California with nothing does not sound like a very good thing to me. If you tried to fight it, you would never leave Panama. There are only two slight problems to the trip around South America. One of them is that the ship is not very good at all. It is not a comfy ship at all and I would have to make sure there was enough food for me and my family as well. The only other slight reason that the trip around South America is dangerous is because of the Cape of Horn. It is a very windy and choppy place which would be dangerous for my family and the ship. Once through that part though, it would probably and most likely be easy and straight sailing till California where I could get gold. The other two ideas to get to California would be the two trails. The Oregon Trail would be land instead of water and short but I would first have to travel from New York to Missouri and then also on the trail there is a danger of Indians. If I accidentally crossed into there territory, they would easily attack me. The Santa Fe trail is more south and has a higher population of Indians so it would be more dangerous than the Oregon trail. These are the reasons why I would choose the trail around South America to get to my Manifest Destiny in California. -Cody Lucey
If I was to travel westward, I would take a boat around Cape Horn. This trip would take much longer than any other route but it is the safest. Wind and waves would be the only danger for you on this journey. If you had a good ship captain you would avoid the possibility of hitting the rocky shores. If you were to take the Oregon Trail, you ran the possibility of getting really sick with cholera or pneumonia. This was the shortest route but it tested the physical ability of the travelers. Another bad route to take is the Santa Fe Trail. There are quite a few things that trail that could kill you. First thing that could kill you is the fact you have to cross a desert. The second is trying to avoid the Native-Americans that will try and harm you. All of these routes are bad, but the worst route to take was the Panama shortcut. This was the shortcut to avoid going around Cape Horn but it made you life difficult with the natives in Panama. For this route you had to get off the first boat on the Gulf of Mexico side and walk across Panama to get on another boat. Unfortunately, people were often robbed as a price for passage. The little people had to begin with would often be taken away from them. If you too the Cape Horn route you would have the highest possible chance for survival, without being robbed.
If I were to journey from New York City to the gold fields of California in 1849, I would take the route around Cape Horn. I enjoy fishing and sailing very much, so I would definitely like to take the Cape Horn Route or the route through Panama. Though the route on the Oregon Trail would be much shorter than the routes taken by ship, many troubles could arise on the journey. Bears and other beasts of Western America would threaten the success of the journey. The vicious terrain of the mountain ranges along the way would also be very difficult to maneuver around. I also personally do not enjoy hiking, and I have a severe fear of heights, so there is no way I would be able to take the Oregon Trail.
The other option to get to California from New York would be to go through Panama. A much shorter voyage, the crew and myself would stop at the east coast of Panama, hike across an unforgiving jungle, and be picked up on the other side and taken to California. This route was very dangerous. Native Panamanians would often loot or demand money from their travelers, even taking all the crew’s belongings if they liked. This could leave the crew and myself poor and maybe even sick from the exotic Panamanian jungles when I reached California. In this case, if I made it to California, I wouldn’t have much going for me at that time. There would simply be far too many risks involved in taking the route through Panama.
If I were to take the Cape Horn route, the crew of my ship would obviously have to be experienced in navigation, fishing, and even possibly languages other than English if we encountered any foreign peoples along the way. Though the length of the trip could result in the spoiling of some foods such as meat, if the crew and I were careful to salt and carefully preserve these foods, we would be just fine. Many Europeans preferred to take this route after landing in New York or Boston because it was similar to their journey to America. Therefore, I would be able to study the cultures of the people I lived with on the ship, and maybe even learn part of a second language. The Cape Horn route would most certainly be my choice of the route to go from New York City to California.
If I were to travel to California from New York City during the Gold Rush I would definitely travel by land on the Oregon Trail. Living on a boat for months with rats, no bathrooms, and other inconveniences would not be ideal. Living on a wagon, however, I feel would be more manageable. You could get off whenever you need to stretch your legs, control where you were going, and also had fellow wagons around incase something happened to yours. Also, the wagons traveled in large groups, so they were less likely to be attacked by Native Americans. The dangers at sea seem to be superior to those of land. For example, traveling around Cape Horn is tricky, as there are strong currents. The Panama Canal is another option, however there is still the issue of sailing through tough seas and the diseases that come along with that. Both of these routes are also very expensive. On the Oregon Trail, families traveled together, they were able to farm the lands they were passing through, and drink from the freshwater lakes and streams they were passing. Although the Oregon Trail took longer to get across, it was far safer than going by water and is also far less expensive. I would choose the Oregon Trail because it seems to be the safest route to go from New York City to California. Sophia Peluso
If I were to travel to California during the Gold Rush of 1849, I would have taken the Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail is the best route for a number of reasons. First of all, it is the cheapest route. Going around cape horn or through Panama would be extremely costly, and as a poor young man I wouldn’t want to waste money on my transportation when I could easily take the Oregon Trail for a cheap price. Not only would I be cutting down on cost, but I would also be cutting down on time. The Panama route would take 2 to 3 months, and going around cape horn would take 4 to 8 months. As it is called the gold RUSH, I would want to rush there as soon as possible in order to get as much gold as possible. One other main downside of going around Cape horn would be the discomfort. I would have to endure rough conditions in a tiny room for 4 to 8 months on a tiny, rocky boat. Not to mention the disease that would spread all throughout the boat. I would be sick and uncomfortable for up to eight months! I would much rather endure three to seven months in the comfort of the land rather than the rough sea. The other option, the Panama shortcut, would be extremely difficult as well due to the diseases such as Malaria and yellow fever. Weed-whacking through the jungle in Panama would be taxing and dangerous. The Santa Fe Trail, the other option over land, was more dangerous and strenuous than the Oregon trail due to the huge mountains in that region. All of these numerous difficulties that the three other options present make the Oregon trail the best option for me. -Annie Hubbard
From 1848 - 1850, thousands of Americans made the journey from east coast to the west coast due to the profound amount of gold that was available in California. The Gold Rush of 1849 was not located in California because of the amount of gold but rather because it was so easy to obtain. Although it was easy to obtain in California, it was not easy to make the trip across the United States. If I were to make the long journey known as the Gold Rush of 1849, I would take the long route overseas around Cape Horn to get to California. Although this route takes 4-8 months on a cramped steamboat and can be expensive, I still believe it would be a lot more successful than taking the Panama route or the overland routes. The Cape Horn route can be dangerous due to the very rough and unpredictable waters between Cape Horn and Antarctica. Also being stuck on a boat for long periods of time with very little comfort and complete strangers is not the ideal situation. Now even though the Cape Horn does not seem like a luxury vacation, the Panama route and the overland routes would be even worse. Traveling the overland routes such as the Oregon Trail and the Santa Fe Trail is a lot more dangerous and strenuous. Most people on these trail take with them a typical wagon but traveling through deserts, forests, and mountains would make it very difficult to hull along a big wagon carrying all your possessions. Also taking into account that thousands of people were sick with cholera because of the unsafe drinking water makes overland travel that much more miserable. Traveling overland also has the downside of Native Americans raiding your wagons and possibly killing you much like what happened on the Santa Fe trail with the Apaches. Now if not the overland routes, many people would decide to take the Panama route because it seems like the shortest route. Although it may look like the shortest travel, it takes almost just as long if not longer taking this route. When traveling the Panama route you would start from the east coast of the U.S. all the way down to present-day Panama Canal. Once you arrive present-day Panama Canal you would have to unboard and travel across through dangerous jungle. While carrying all your possessions through the jungle, you could raise the chance of predators attacking as well as attracting disease. After struggling for almost sixty miles across Panama and if you made it to the ports in Panama City, you would then have to find a boat that would take you the rest of the way to California, if you’re lucky. Now if you do eventually make it to California, most travelers would think that they successfully arrived and were ready to search for gold but instead would then have another 150 miles to go until they reached the gold regions. Now after including all these possibilities that could occur on the overland routes and the Panama route, it would seem that the Cape Horn route is the safest, and most efficient route even though it may not seem like it. Concluding that I would take the Cape Horn route overseas rather then any other route that were available during the Gold Rush of 1849.
If I had to travel from New York City to California in 1849, I would travel on the Oregon Trail. Although there are advantages and disadvantages of both the Oregon Trail and the and the Santa Fe Trail, the Gold Fields in California were rich with gold which was very important to obtain as a peasant. Even if someone who is not poor comes across this, it is a win-win situation. An advantage of the Oregon Trail was that it was an official route that many pioneers have taken before. If something happened to your wagon or there was a shortage on food or something else you were in dire need of, there were always other people on the trail that could lend you a hand. Another advantage of traveling on the Oregon Trail is that there was army protection. Missionaries would travel to Oregon and be stationed all along the trail to protect the pioneers that were passing through. This would be come useful because of one of the disadvantages which was the Native Americans. The Oregon Trail passes through many Native American territories. The other disadvantage is that there was a high risk of disease living in such close quarters with other people throughout an overall 6 month journey and traveling over 2,000 miles. However, the road to riches in the gold fields of California would drive me to take the Oregon trail, despite the disadvantages and risks, because I would hope to someday arrive there and the Oregon Trail would lead me there. It is also shorter than the Santa Fe trail and easier to hike through because you don't have to worry about the rugged terrains.
If I where a young man traveling to California in hopes of finding gold in 1849, I believe I would take the boat around the South America. This journey, although long and probably rough sailing, seems to be the safest option. If I was to go through Panama I might not make it at all to the other side of the isthmus and if I did make it, Columbian’s would have taken everything I had by the time I made it to the other ship. I would have to pay for the initial trip to Panama, and then I would have to “pay” for my travel through the country with everything I own. Then if I didn’t have enough of what the Columbian’s wanted, they might keep me there for months as their slave till they thought I had paid my “debt.” I would arrive in California with nothing. If I where to take one of the overland trails, I could be killed by Indians, or starve from food and water shortages. On my journey by boat, I could keep track of my belongings, and I would only have to pay once for my voyage. Even though there are negatives to the sail around the bottom of South America, such as it would be crowded, long, and some bad sailing spots, I believe it would be the safest way for me to get to California still with my belongings. As a young man in 1849, in deciding how I am going to get to California, I would sail around South America.
If I had to travel from New York to California in 1849 because of the promise of finding gold I would take the Oregon Trail. There are many reasons as to why this would be my option instead of going around the horn of Africa and the Santa Fe Trail. Each trail has its difficulties and safety issues. I would choose the safest route to me, which would be the Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail is also the shortest which may be the best option. This I see would be the safest route out of all three even though the Oregon Trail ran the risk of running into Indians. The pros about the Oregon trail was that families were able to travel together and not split up like many did when taking the voyage around South America and the horn of Africa as the seas were considered very rough and hard to handle for women and children. Traveling on the other routes would put families at risk and groups of people at risk more than the Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail would also be safer if it was traveled by in a bigger group of people because the bigger group of people meant that the Indians would have less of an idea to attack a larger group of people. Even though there are Indians on the Santa Fe Trail as well, the Indians along that trail and route have had the tendency to be more aggressive and want to attack people that are unknown to them. Another reason for taking the Oregon Trail was that it would be the quickest way to get California where all the Gold was. Getting there in the least amount of time meant that you would have a better chance at getting in on the Gold that was being found in California in 1849. Overall the quickest and safest way to me would be the Oregon Trail rather than taking the sea routes, which would run more risk of getting lost and getting sick and possibly catching diseases that couldn’t be cured at the time. The Oregon trial was the easiest and most accessibly Trail for people if traveled in a large group. Along with it being the quickest and safest route it is also considered to be the least costly of all three routes. This would be why I would choose the Oregon Trail.
If I was a young man in living in New York in 1849, and I desired riches, the first place that I would go would be the gold fields of California during the gold rush. To get there, I would have to choose one of three routs. Both of the trails would incorporate many challenges along the way, but the lesser of two evils would be going through the Oregon Trail. This would be the safest way of the two routs even though you would run the risk of running into Native Americans along the way. While traveling on the Oregon Trail, I would be able to travel with my entire family and not split up as many had when they chose to go around South America because of how rough the currants were. Children and Women were not allowed to go on the route that went around South America. I would want to go on the journey with my family and have them with me along the way. I would not like being alone in a new place and would much rather live with my loved ones. I would not like being without my family and not having any contact with them for extended periods of time. Traveling the Oregon Trail was also much safer because you would travel in a big group of people. Traveling with a big group of people lessened the chances of being attacked by either animals or Indian tribes. The trail would provide multiple resources that would be crucial for going on such a long and dangerous trip. You could easily get water from streams and lakes on the way. You could also hunt for food, where as if you were on a boat, you could not drink any of the water around you, and would be hard to get food other than fish. Though the trip would be long (100 days), it would be better then traveling on the Panama Canal, which would bring on multiple diseases such as malaria and cholera. However not only would you have a very high chance of collecting a disease, the trip was also very expensive due to unregulated fines at crossings, and would leave me in a great deal of debt. If I had to choose a route to go on, I would choose the Oregon Trail because it was the safest and I would be able to bring my family along with me.
Hello After much consideration, I have decided to take the Oregon Trail to California. My three options were: around the Cape Horn, through Panama, and the Oregon trail. I have completely ruled out going through the ocean because of illness, time, and danger. Illness does not only refer to sea sickness but also common illnesses found of boats carried by other passengers or through food. On land, food and water is significantly easier than it is on a boat in the middle of the water. Yes, the Oregon trail does pose the issue of an Indian attack, but going out to sea poses an equal amount of life threatening scenarios. There are more disease that could kill me from either the boat or the forests of Panama than there are Indian attacks. With this in mind, I would definitely take the Oregon Trail because Indian attacks are the only thing making me hesitant. On top of that, it is significantly more comfortable, cleaner, cheaper, and I also get to keep my belongings. Being at sea is fun, but after many months in those conditions, I would go crazy. I prefer changing landscape over endless water.
If I had to choose a route to take to California during the gold rush, between the Oregon Trail, around cape horn, or the panama shortcut, I would choose to take the Oregon Trail. Although people on all three of the routes encountered difficulties while on their Journey to California, I believe that this route was most effective. Native Americans were thought of as the greatest threat to the northern immigrants and adventurers who traveled along the Oregon Trail, but really the main cause of death was by diseases and sicknesses such as cholera, mountain fever, and pneumonia. Being only four to six months, this route was shorter than going around cape horn but longer than the panama shortcut. It was also the most feasible and the least expensive. Even though it wasn’t the fastest, a spot on a ship could cost up to a thousand dollars, which someone searching for gold doesn’t have. A big concern throughout all three of the routes was the weather conditions. If I were to take any route by sea the weather would be my main concern. Sea storms create large waves and swells that are very dangerous and a possible threat of filling the ships with water. While on the Oregon trail, although the travelers did combat with thunder and lightening storms during the summer and snow storms in the winter, it was much easier to prepare for and manage through the weather, especially while living in wagons topped with cotton covers treated with linseed oil to keep the rain out. Overall, there are many risks on all three possible roots from New York to the gold fields in California during 1849, but personally, my first option would be to travel by wagon 3,000 miles across the country. This way I have a better chance of survival and will arrive with more money and many acquaintances made throughout the long journey.
If I were a man traveling to California in 1849 from New York City, I would most likely be a teenager going off trying to make money for myself and start a new life in a new land. I would not have much with me because I would not be very wealthy so I would try to go to California as soon as I could and safely. Trying to choose which route would be very hard because all ways of getting there are fairly long and dangerous, but I would rather take the water route on boat from New York City to Panama to San Francisco. It would take 5,200 miles, but would be very long and worth it. Panama was Colombian territory and when passing through the territory there would be some sort of toll that I would have to pay off, before walking through the jungle to get on another boat that will take me to San Francisco finally. Being poor I would not have much money to pay the toll to continue my journey, but the Colombian native men there would take all of my belongings and I would be able to pass through the jungle. Scared out of mind in this new country and in the jungle that is infested with different wildlife and with people that do not speak the same language as myself could be pretty scary to a teen all alone with no adult to help. Getting scared and backing down was not an option because getting gold was way too easy and being able to live a really good lifestyle in California would attract more people to travel to the west coast. This route is very dangerous, but as a teen seeing the world would be very exciting especially if your destination is where you will gain all of your riches. I think that taking the water route through the Panamanian jungles are very dangerous, but has a very good chance of making it to San Francisco.
If I was to make the journey to California during the 1849 Gold Rush, I would choose to go by the Oregon Trail. I believe that it would be the best way to get to the West coast because not only is it safer than traversing the treacherous Cape Horn, but it is also more practical because many people were crammed into these boats, and this mass clog of people makes disease spread quickly. However, there are also drawbacks to this route. One of these would be the threat of Native American attack, which was a serious issue throughout the Western territories. Also, a family hoping to make it across the continent would have to adequately prepare for the journey, which would take an unprecedented amount of time. This means packing sufficiently in order to have enough food, for running out of food during the long journey would be an unfortunate consequence. The Oregon trail route is, in my opinion, the easiest and most practical way to cross the continent in search of Gold.
If I was going to pick one route to go, I would choose going around Cape Horn in South America. A lot of my classmates want to go this route so we could join up an all get on one big vessel, which would allow for a safer and more enjoyable trip. We would need a big ship and having a big ship would allow for better control on the sea. Also, on the seas you get rid of the risk of being attacked by Indians, which is a risk if you were to go by land. The ship needs a good captain on board and I could help because I am comfortable around the water and have experience sailing pretty big boats.
The other sea route through Panama is a bad choice because at the time there was no Panama canal and because of this you would have to get off your ship and travel by land across Panama. Traveling by land in Central America, you could acquire diseases like malaria which you would not get traveling by ship. Also you run the risk of losing your place on a ship when trying to get to California. Even though it could be months shorter than going around Cape Horn, the trip through Panama runs more risk than traveling only by sea.
In my opinion, the worst option would be trying to travel by land across the continent. By doing this, you would have to travel by wagon, which runs a great risk of breaking down mid- journey. My classmates all wanted to travel by boat, so if I don’t have a big enough crowd, the risk of getting attacked by indians is greater because I would be more vulnerable with less people on board. Plus as a 16 year old, I have no experience driving a wagon and I know that I would get wagon sick if I tried. The Oregon trail is great in my opinion but I live In New York so how am I supposed to get from NY to St. Louis safely?
The route around Cape Horn offers the least amount of risk and with the safely of my classmates on the line it is the route I want to take.
If I was traveling from New York City to the Gold Fields of California I would have three different routes available. The first route I could take would be to travel around the coast of south America. This would ultimately be a poor decision due to manny different reasons. Firstly the weather condition’s around cape horn would be extremely dangerous. Their would be a very high chance that my ship may sink due to big waves and fast winds. If this happened their would be no way of surviving. Also, if my Journey was taking longer than expected due to weather conditions slowing my ship down I may run out of food and clean water. If this happened their would be no food source around me and I could die or become weak due to hunger. The second route I could take would be to go through the Panama. Although this route is only 5,000 miles it is one which involves great Risk and danger. In 1849 their was no Panama Canal so you would have to leave your boat and walk through Panama. This was an extremely risky decision because Panamanians would often hurt and rob Americans of all their belongings. The third route available for Americans traveling from New York City to California would be to go through America via the Oregon trail. As “Frick” Said this would be the safest route available for travels for a number of reasons. Firstly if your wagon broke down you always ride along with other travels or worst case scenario walk. If you were traveling by boat and your vessel broke you would be dead. Secondly you would be able to travel light and move quickly due to the natural resources available to you. If you ran out of food you could always hunt and eat the food around you. Yes, their is a chance of native americans ambushing you but if your traveled in large groups and kept quiet you would be safe and and reach California without a problem.
As a young man traveling to California during the 1849 Gold Rush, I would go by land and take the Oregon Trail. This seems to be the safest and shortest option compared to the two water routes and it is the most travelled of the land routes making it the most known and most mapped. Other than seasickness on the water routes, there are many illnesses and a higher chance of food shortages. There is the problem of food shortages on land but it is much easier to find food if you don’t have enough. The Oregon Trail would also be more comfortable. You would have most of your belongings and be able to do what you wanted when you wanted without it being really crowded. Being on a boat would be crowded and you wouldn’t have a lot of belongings with you. Taking the Panama route would be the most dangerous. The Columbian’s would take everything you owned as “payment” when you walked across the land, and you would be left with the bare minimum. You would also be exposed to yellow fever and malaria almost guaranteeing your death soon. Going around Cape Horn would be very expensive and the water is very rough. It also takes the longest and I would want to get to California as fast as I could. The Santa Fe Trail is the other land option. It is harder compared to the Oregon Trail because of its mountain regions, which would make it take longer. I would take the Oregon Trail because it is the fastest, cheapest and safest choice for me.
If I were a a young man in 1849 looking for westward expansion to the gold fields in California to the rush for the riches, I would have taken to Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail began in Missouri and spanned about 2,000 miles ending in “Oregon Country”. I feel like the Oregon Trail is the safest and lowest risk of danger. In addition, I will not be the first person traveling this trail, therefore I will have guidelines throughout my journey. The Oregon Trail is safer than the Santa Fe Trail because the Santa Fe Trail runs directly through Native American territory, and the Native Americans do not enjoy white travelers, or what people in general for that matter. As for the sea options, traveling around Cape Horn is not a safe option. Cape Horn has some of the roughest seas in the world and is very dangerous. Diseases are prevalent onboard the ships and it is very easy to wreck your ship, run out of food, or run into pirates. In addition, traveling across Panama is very expensive and time consuming. The environment in Panama is hostile and there is a lot of crime. Before I embark on the Oregon Trail, I would be sure to have more than enough food, medical supplies, and whatever else I may need to aid my journey to the Oregon Country.
If I was traveling to the Gold Fields of California during the rush to riches in 1849 from New York City, I would have chosen the Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail is much shorter than the two water routes and the Santa Fe Trail meaning I would have a better chance of finding more gold if I was there before other travelers. As Caroline said, it would take around 4-8 months traveling around cape horn. Moreover, the route by sea that goes around South America is not the way to go because I would be risking not only my life but my ship as well due to the world’s roughest waters. Furthermore, the other water route that goes through Panama would be a lot quicker than traveling around cape horn however the people on land would most likely take my belongings and possibly kill me. This uncertainty is not worth the attempt to get to California because there are other safer ways to get there. Also once I arrive on land near Cuba, I would have to leave my ship behind and walk on land to get on another ship. This could be costly and I would not know for sure if another ship would be available. The Santa Fe Trail is another option however it is more likely to be attacked by Native Americans and I would not want to put my family and I in that position. It is also longer than the Oregon Trail and I would want to get to California as fast as I can. This leaves the Oregon Trail as my last option. The Oregon Trial has many animals around the paths meaning if I was short on food, I could rely on hunting as my back up option. I could also travel with a pack of people as the Oregon Trail because it was the most popular route to go. This trail was less likely to encounter Native Americans making it safer for my family and I to travel through. Traveling by a wagon on the Oregon Trail was not ideal however they were designed to keep out rain, wind and dust with a canvas that surrounded the wagon. The wooden wheels would make it a bumpy ride however getting to California quicker would make it worth it.
If I were a man traveling to California in 1849 from New York City, in search of gold, I would choose the fastest and safest route. With this in mind, I would choose the Oregon Trail. Although one might encounter some Native Americans, it is not as likely as on the Santa Fe trail. Also one won’t have to be traveling by sea for almost nine months and have to battle some tough currents like the people who traveled Around the Horn. On top of that, it cost more money to pay for the tickets of the boat instead of just traveling with your wagon and a large group of people by land. Also it would been easier to catch a disease considering the fact that there are a bunch of people on one boat. This would mean one would have to be sick and uncomfortable for about nine months, and if one took the shortcut, they could also catch Malaria or Yellow Fever. Going by boat would just be a risky thing to do due to all the bad conditions, how long it takes, and how expensive it could be. Now on the Santa Fe trail, it would be tougher than taking the boat because of the huge mountains in that area. It would be tough to get the wagons to go up the mountains especially because the wheels were wooden and could easily brake on those rocky mountains. So the best choice is the Oregon trail, it is cheaper, it is safer, and it is quicker.
If I had to make my way to Oregon, I would’ve chosen to take a ship all the way down the eastern coast of South America, and all the way back up the western coast. Although the trip is extremely long and strenuous, it avoids many of the obstacles the other routes include. As an immigrant, I wouldn’t have much money in the first place. So, I would have to make sure I had enough money for all the water and food that I would need on the trip. One of the major pro’s of taking the South America Route would be that I could avoid encounters with aggressive Native-Americans, or any natives in Panama that would take everything I owned. The Cape Horn portion of the trip is extremely dangerous, but if I time it right, the risk of not making it through that portion of trip is much less than that of me getting attacked by Indians, which I would encounter on the Oregon trail. Another pro to taking this route, is that if I needed to, I could dock anywhere along the coast of South America. The coast would most likely be the most populated area, because of the easy access of transportation, such as ships. So, if for some reason along the trip I needed to stop and get more supplies, or ask for help, I would be much more likely to find people that could help me along the coast, rather than on the Oregon trail. Also, being on a boat avoids the risk of disease that would be extremely high on the Panama Canal route. Overall, the South American route is the most appealing because the obstacles avoided are much greater in importance than the length of the trip.
If I were to travel to California from New York City in 1849, which is about 2,000 miles away, I would have to carefully decide how I would take the journey there. I would have to decide between four routes for my travel west. The first thing I decided was if I wanted to travel by land or sea. I decided that choosing a land route was the better option for me. I decided not to take either sea route for many different reasons. The first route I ruled out was the route where I would have to pass through the Panama Canal. I ruled this route out because if I was to travel by it, I would lose all my belongings I packed for my journey West. On the route of the Panama Canal you go through Cuba first, getting all your belongings stolen. Once you get to land in Central America you must abort your ship to cross the land and travel on another ship to your destination of California. I ruled out the other water route, which was the route around South America for one main reason. The reason being that the waters at the tip of South America are very rough and dangerous. I would not want to risk the rough waters because the possibility of losing the ship and my life. I chose to travel by land and the route I decided to take was the Oregon Trail. I decided to not take the Santa Fe Trail because not many people had taken it and explored it. I also did not want to risk the chance of being killed by Native Americans who lived on the trail. I chose the Oregon Trail because the trail had already been used for 17 years when I decided to start my journey, making the path very well blazed for my travels. I know there would be possibilities of facing danger on the trail but the trail seemed to be the safest compared to the others. The trail was always highly populated with people so if something went wrong with my wagon I could always ask for help. Also if I became low on food or supplies I had the opportunity of stopping at an outpost along the way. Overall I chose the Oregon Trail because I thought it would be the safest and quickest trail for my travels to California.
If I was traveling to Oregon in 1849 from the other side of the States I would choose to take the Oregon Trail. This trail had the lowest risks and did not cost as expensive as other routes. Encounters with Native Americans was the biggest risk and Native Americans rarely attacked big groups of people. If you were in a large group traveling the Oregon Trail you would have minimal problems. Another option would be to take the Santa Fe Trail. This was a worse route than the Oregon Trail because the Native Americans were more present. Another option people traveling to California kept in mind was to take a boat around the Cape Horn (under South America) or through the Panama Canal. The Cape horn was a bad option because it was very long and expensive. The boats also carried diseases, which would spread throughout all the people traveling. The Cape Horn is also home to the roughest seas in the world. This could cause severe sea sickness and a very dangerous ride for the travelers. Another option for traveling by sea was to go through the Panama Canal. This was a shorter ride with easier seas. However, there was a big problem. When the travelers docked their boats at the Canal they would be looted by the Natives of the Panama Canal, leaving the travelers with nothing. The Oregon Trail was quick, cheap, and extremely reliable making it the best route to getting to California in 1849.
If I were a man traveling to California from New York in 1849, the best choice would be to take the Oregon Trail. While people are able to travel faster by sea, the path taken by the ships through Panama and around Cape Horn are twice or three times the distance, therefore being riskier and slower in actuality. These ships also carried disease, despite being cheap, therefore they are a major health hazard to those who board. Also, unless you had nothing to lose, if one went through the Panama route, they would have every possession stripped from them before leaving the Panama area. The Oregon trail stands as a better option than the Santa Fe trail because there was less Native American activity. Even if there was a slight risk of a Native American attack, one could travel in a larger pack, therefore being able to defend themselves. Despite the fact that one would need to travel from Oregon southward towards California after reaching the end of the trail, that last stretch from Oregon to California is safe, since Oregon is inhabited by many others from the USA. For these reasons, I would travel on the Oregon Trail in preference than any other route. -Kevin Xu
In 1849, when rushing west from New York to the California Gold, I would definitely go by land and not by sea. The journey by sea is not only expensive but too risky. Both sea routes, thru panama or around Cape Horn, are filled with dangers, I am not prepared to deal with. The waters and current around Cape Horn are too dangerous and I fear that I would die at sea. Passing through Panama is equally dangerous because once you disembark your boat in panama the chance of getting sick by cholera, malaria or yellow fever is extremely high. And if you can get through the jungle without dying of a disease, you have to worry about getting your possessions stolen while carrying everything you have on your back In addition, its very expensive to hire a guide to help you through the jungle. For these reasons, I choose to go by land.
The Oregon Trail is the best path for me. The biggest risk to traveling the Oregon Trail is dealing with the native Americans since you pass by so many Indian Territories. However, this trail does not pass through as many Indian Territories as does the Santa Fe Trail. The Santa Fe Trail is more dangerous since these Indians don't allow trespassing and often attack trespassers. The Oregon Trail is a bit safer because it is a more popular trail and I could stay close to others. In numbers we could hopefully defeat the Indians if they should attack. The ability to stop for water or hunt for food makes the Oregon Trail most attractive to me. We will never starve and will keep ourselves very healthy to fight any deadly diseases that come our way. At least by land we have a chance. Once a disease hits a ship, there is no escaping and it’s totally out of our controll. At least traveling by wagon, we have some distance between us and other people traveling. The wagons are also safe and serve as a good home while traveling. The 10’ x 81/2’ oil canvas will keep my family warm and offer protection from sun and rain. It would be a rough journey but much safer than the other options.
If I was a man from the mid 1800’s and wanted to travel westward toward California in seek for the “Gold Rush”, I would choose the Oregon trail. I would be one of the 80,000 adventures or immigrants in an 18-month time span to travel to California for the hope to strike gold. With the new news about the adventurers Lewis and Clark just traveling to the west coast of the Americas and finding riches, they discovered and created what was to be known as the Oregon Trail that connected the Middle East to North West of America. This trail was the safest route if you wanted to move westward. There were two other routes “The two water routes” and “The Santa Fe Trail”. The Two Water Routes was known to be a very long journey, you would sail down the east coast of North and South America, around Cape Horn and call the way up the west coast of North and South America, facing some of the harshest seas in the world. The was also a chance that the ship could sink if the weather was bad enough. The problem with the Santa Fe Trail was that I was not as long as the Oregon Trail and also you had to have a boat and a wagon if you wanted to use it from coming from East coast. Over all I would take the Oregon Trail to go from New York to the Gold Fields in California. This trail passed through many states that were populated developed enough that if you needed supplies you could easily stop and resupply. The Oregon Trail was the safest and most reliable trail to take if you wanted to go to the Gold Fields of California coming from New York.
In 1849 during the gold rush,the route that I would have taken from New York City to the Gold Fields of California would have been the Oregon Trail. To me, it is the safest way to travel there. I could get a large group of people together to come along with me, therefore if we ran into any Indians, we would have enough people to protect each other. Also, at nights we could use our wagons as a barricade to keep the Indians away. Plus I would rather run into Indians than be attacked by Columbians who would want to steal everything that you have so you couldn't even make it to California, by attempting to get there through the Santa Fe route. Also, This trip is shorter than going around Cape Horn, and traveling with wagons was safer than attempting to get your boat through the rough conditions of the waves that the Cape Horn route would offer. Traveling by land with many people for protection is just overall safer than traveling by boat where waves can pull it apart, or Columbians can take everything you worked for away from you.
The most efficient sea route to take from New York City in 1849 to get to California, hoping for gold would be through South America by boat. Even though it is the longest journey, lasting four to eight months, taking the easy way out isn’t always the smartest. Not only that, but although the other trips were shorter they entailed many more dangers. For instance, traveling through the panama was the shortest route, taking two to three months and would maybe get you there first, but it involved coming across a jungle full of deadly diseases such as malaria and yellow fever and cholera. Going across the panama jungle wasn’t cheap and therefore would put the travelers in debt, which they would have to pay off through months of working. As a result would lead to a much slower journey. The other option which was the second fastest to through the Oregon Trail was not that safe either. There would be some battles fought considering the territorial Native Americans that lived in the region. There would definitely be numerous surprise attacks, which would be hard to win and ultimately terminate the mission. There were also diseases along the way: cholera, mountain fever, pneumonia, and diphtheria. That leaves me to the South American sea route, which I believed was the smartest route to take because it offered some kind of safety and was the simplest. As an explorer, taking a sea route seemed the most appealing. This route was on a boat, which could get crowded and unhygienic. However, I had traveled long journeys before and been successful which left me confident. Because of this, I also knew its advantages such as being able to stop at ports along the coastline whenever needed and creating many opportunities. I would be able to trade, restock necessities, and discover new places. So if I were to run into a storm or rats in my boat, I could just stop along the way to fix any problem I had. Therefore, all the benefits from the longer journey outweighed the disadvantages of the shorter journeys, which would successfully lead me to the gold in California.
hi
ReplyDeletehi
Deletehi
DeleteIf I were to choose one means of traveling from New York City to the gold fields of California in 1849, I would choose the route that traveled around South America by boat. Although this is the longest journey, spanning anywhere from four to eight months and spanning a total of about 15,000 months. This trip, however, did not include most of the other risks that the other routes included. Traveling via the Oregon Trail was the shortest trip, however, taking this route put you at risk of Native American attacks, as well as deadly diseases such as cholera, mountain fever, pneumonia, and diphtheria. This trip was relatively safe as long as people traveled in large groups, prepared well, and took safety precautions along the way. The other option of taking the short cut through Panama is easily the shortest of the options, lasting only two to three months. However, in my opinion, this is the most dangerous. Taking this route does cut off a large portion of the sea route, also avoiding the horn of South America, where the seas are extremely rough. However, passing through the jungle in Panama is extremely risky; the jungle is filled with diseases like malaria, yellow fever, and cholera. It is also bad because getting across the Panama jungle is expensive, and it is likely that one would have to pay off their debt to whoever helped them across by working for months at a time, which extends the journey by a significant amount. The final option, and my optimal choice, is, in my opinion, the safest and easiest. The trip is long and difficult, but is without a doubt worth it. Traveling all the way around South America gives you the opportunity of stopping along the way at ports to refuel and rest. On the ship itself, there is little comfort: living in a small room for four to eight months, rats on the ship, and rocky seas. However, there is little risk of disease, and if you time the trip right, there could be times of smooth sailing along the way, which would be excellent times for recovery. This route also appeals to me because I have grown up sailing all my life. I spend every summer on Martha’s Vineyard, where I sail in a program competitively, which I have done since I was six. I feel confident in a sailboat, and feel that I could be a contributing factor to the safety of the ship, and the process of reaching California. For all of these reasons, I would take the long journey around the horn of South America via sailboat to reach the gold regions of California in 1849.
ReplyDelete-Rawson Clough
If I had to choose a way to get from New York City to the California gold fields, I would choose the Oregon Trail. This trail begins in Missouri and ends at Oregon City in Oregon. Although a long and strenuous trail, the development of prairie schooners made the wagon trip easier. They were approximately half the size of the larger Conestoga wagons and could easily be pulled by four to six oxen or six to ten mules. The cotton canvas that covered the wagon were doubled and treated with linseed oil to help keep out the rain, dust, and wind. Their wooden wheels could easily move over rough ground and rocks. Food was kept in watertight containers. Also, the amount of food was less if beef cattle, calves, or sheep were taken as a walking food supply. In addition, there were many buffalo herds, antelope, sage hens, and trout to hunt along the trail. Some Native American tribes traded vegetables with the travelers. The food was cooked over campfires.
ReplyDeleteThe other land option is the Santa Fe Trail. Though shorter than the Oregon Trail, the Santa Fe Trail was more prone to Native American attacks, as neither the Comanche nor the Apaches of the southern high plains tolerated trespassers. The third option and the longest option is sailing from New York City, around Cape Horn in South America, to California. I would not want to travel around Cape Horn because the long four to seven month sailing trip was very dangerous and expensive. Although I am not particularly prone to seasickness, other ship members are. There would be varying weather conditions and many rats and disease. If the ship ran out of food, there would be no way to get any more food. Also, not many families were permitted to take this route, as it was very risky. I would not want to go anywhere without my family. The last option is the Panama route. It is the shortest, but the most dangerous. After taking a boat and landing in Panama, travelers would stay there for a couple days until they can get a second boat to get to California. Everything the travellers brought with them was stolen and there were a lot of other crimes. In addition, it was very easy to catch a fatal disease.
The Oregon Trail is not the shortest, but it is, however, the safest. I am capable of bringing my family along with me. My dad lives for the outdoors and can hunt. He would be capable of finding food and water if we were to run out. There would be no need to deal with seasickness and outside threats like Native Americans and diseases because they were not as common on the Oregon Trail compared to other routes.
-Ali Duryea
If I were to travel to California during the Gold Rush of 1849, I would choose to go by ship down the coast of South America and back up. This option, although long, would allow me to plan my ventures near Sacramento and dodge any obstacles such as harmful natives, dry deserts or harsh mountains. The obvious difficult leg of this trip would be Cape Horn itself, but I would invest in the leadership of an experienced captain. I would additionally prepare at multiple moments to stop for any trade, food, water or shelter in South America.
ReplyDeleteThis route is optimal because of the minimal amount of risk associated with a pure sea-based voyage. On the Oregon Trail, there was the great possibility of Native American attack and running out of resources. The Santa Fe Trail was even less developed, increasing those same risks. Travelling though Panama was just a horrible idea because after you trek through the jungle and hopefully escape marauding Columbians, you’re only halfway there.
The two largest problems are the time and treachery. Cape Horn may be unforgiving, but in a big enough ship and a competent captain, it can be managed. Time is one problem that I don’t see important. As long as the trip is planned early, I would make it to California in the eighteen months its population was exploding.
I prefer this conservative path; there was much money to be made and I would want as much of my settlement-building supplies, as well as myself, intact for California. In this state I would want to start a business selling mining supplies and make enough profit in material to start a farm in the valley. There I would grow corn or whatever other cash crop while the state continues to boom.
Go 49rs
-Peter Bahr
If I was to travel to California in 1849 for the Gold Rush, my choice of transportation to California would be to go along the Oregon Trail, as it took much less time to reach California than if I would go by boat. With all the people scrambling to get to California first for the gold rush, I would be among that group and choose one of the shorter routes. Even though the Santa Fe Trail might have been a shorter route, the chances of coming upon Native Americans were quite likely to occur. The Oregon Trail also incorporated the risk of running into Native Americans; it was less likely to happen. I would choose going along the Oregon Trail to California because the wagons available during these times were ones covered in cotton canvas and linseed oil, which help keep the rain, wind and dust out. Along with me on the journey, I would make sure to have men that knew how to hunt and kill because along the trail were herds of buffalo, bison, antelope and trout that could be hunted for food. Even though there was a risk at acquiring some of the worst diseases, such as cholera, mountain fever, pneumonia, and diphtheria, traveling by boat still didn't prevent some of these diseases. Acquiring these diseases traveling by boat is just as likely if not more because you are at risk for a much longer time. Choosing to take the Oregon trail as my route would also mean I would not need a lot of people to accompany me on the trip, therefore we would not need as many supplies as traveling by boat would. I would definitely not choose traveling by boat around Cape Horn because who knows when a storm could hit and ruin your whole expedition just like that. Also traveling by boat would mean you almost have to be a wealthy person because you would need to hire a crew to go with you and along the way, you would need to stop at certain areas for supplies. Choosing to sail to Panama Canal and cutting through the jungle was possibly one of the more dangerous options and hard to come by. For this you would need to be wealthy, again to by supplies and for the payment of someone leading you through the jungle. Also you would be at risk of acquiring other diseases such as, malaria, yellow fever, and cholera as you go through the jungle. Lastly, the Santa Fe Trail was a very dangerous trail because the trail ran right through Native American territory, where they didn't accept trespassers. I believe I would have the best chance of survival if I would go along the Oregon Trail with suitable crew members due to how much faster it was, and the necessary food sources available within parts of the trail.
ReplyDelete-Cam Robinson
In the year of 1849, as a man from New York City traveling to California, roughly over 2,000 miles, I must make a decision about my travel plans. I have a few options to choose between in order to get to the west coast in hopes of finding gold. After careful thought and deliberation I ruled out traveling by sea for multiple reasons. Traveling by sea meant either passing through Cuba where all of my belongings would be taken and I would be left with nothing for the west coast. If I chose to take the route around South America my crew and I would face the most dangerous waters and would risk the loss of our own lives and our ship. With that I decided the Oregon Trail was the safest and had the highest probability of reaching the west coast. The Oregon Trail was first taken in the year of 1832 and now 17 years later the trail is well blazed providing a clear path for my travels. There is always a possibility that I will face danger but the trail has safer soundings in the event that I do find danger. If for example my wagon broke an axle there would be somebody else on the trail that I could barter with. Or if I ran low on food there is an outpost along the way that will provide extra supplies. The vast variety of natural resources provided both food and water along the trail. An additional danger that I could face includes being attacked by Native Americans along the way. Even though this posses a threat I plan to travel with my own weapons along with a group of other men to fend off the Native Americans. I chose to take this route most importantly because it was most traveled and clear-cut route.
ReplyDelete-Katherine Frick
If I were to go to the Gold Rush in California in 1849, I would take the route that goes all the way around South America. Since the journey is longer than any other route, I would have to prepare and make a plan for things such as: trade, shelter, water, etc. Other options/routes I could take are more dangerous. If I took the route around South America I could avoid any difficulties that I would encounter on another route. Dangerous obstacles I could face would be native attacks, rough regions to get through, pneumonia, and other diseases, etc. The trip all the way around South America would take longer, but it would be safer and I would be in better condition than others when I arrived in California. Another route that is possible that makes the route faster would be going through the Panama Canal. Cape Horn would be cruel to get through, and would have to try to avoid yellow fever, etc. – That route is too dangerous. If you plan accordingly, you could make it around South America calmly. Going around South America, personally, I think is the best route. Although the ships are not as clean and even though it would take a very long time, it's worth it. It's worth it because it will be better for your condition when you arrive. Personally, I think I would like being on a boat with others and dealing with the hardships together. I also am not the type of person that would want to truck myself through the Oregon Trail. Going around South America appeals to me more and seems the safest.
ReplyDelete-Hanna Derrig
If I were traveling to California during the Gold Rush in 1849, I would go by boat around South America. Growing up by the water, sailing has always been something I’ve enjoyed. I understand however that taking a large boat to California would be an incredibly different experience than an afternoon out in the bay sailing in a two person Sunfish. I would be accompanied by tons of other people, all going to California for the same reason as me. It would be tight and not very clean. In addition, the unpredictable weather could cause for rough sailing. Despite the hardships of this trip, I feel like this may be the easiest way for my family and I to get to our final destination. Besides going around South America, there were a few other possible routes to take such as the Oregon Trail, the Santa Fe Trail, and the boat to Panama. Those options did not appeal to me because of the threats of Indian attacks, diseases, geographical obstacles and food shortages. Preparing to go on this journey, I would plan out what to do in every possible situation I could think of. While aboard, everyone of us would have to contribute and work together to keep things moving smoothly. Sailing around South America seems like the easiest and most ideal way for my family and I to get to California.
ReplyDelete-Emily Walsh
If I was one of the voyager travels to San Francisco during gold rush, I will take the Santa Fe Trail. I have a higher chance of living and get to San Francisco if I take this route. Although I might get killed by starvation and Indians, I am safe from the sea, diseases and coldness.
ReplyDeleteSanta Fe Trail is a trail which runs through central North America linking Missouri and New Mexico. Compare to the two water routes and Oregon Trail, this route is relatively easier and warmer, since it goes around the Rockies and crosses the southern part of the America. The disadvantages of this route are Native Americans might attack voyages along the trail, and lack of food. As most of the land was uncivilized along the route, voyagers could not get food easily along the way. Cattles which haul the wagons died because of starvation. It took voyager extra time to get to San Francisco due to reasons above. Some of them lost their lives on their way.
The Oregon Trail is a trail connected the Missouri river and Oregon. Compare to the Santa Fe Trail, which started from Missouri too, the Trail travels more northward and crosses the Rockies. The advantages of this route are that this is an established route and there is army protection along the Trail. If one’s cattle were dead or one’s wagon was broken, someone along the way could help one out. Also, voyager could also buy food in an outpost along the way. Voyagers only need to follow the dirt track in order not to get lost. There are some disadvantages for the Oregon Trail. Although there were armies to protect the voyagers, however, voyages might experience attack by the Indians between military forts. On the other hand, since the route is pretty northward, the Trail was not passable in the winter due to the cumulate of snow. People might get sick too because of the cold night. The biggest disadvantage of the Oregon Trail is the spread of diseases. A large number of travelers might help with fighting off Indians; however, diseases were spread among the travels. Many travelers were killed by the spread of dysentery, Pneumonia and other popular diseases due to the lack of rest and cold nights.
The last way to travel to San Francisco is by boat. There were two routes, one all the way around South America, and one across the Panama. Both routes had a huge disadvantage. The route around Cape Horn was not passable all year long. The sea current becomes very strong during sometime of the year. As a result, voyages might lose their lives if the sailors risked passing through the rough current. On the other hand, Panama government requires voyages to pay taxes when they travel through Panamas. As most of the voyagers were poor, the government made them leave everything they had to the government, which made the voyages broke.
After looking all three options, choosing the Santa Fe is a wise choice as it stayed away from the rough sea, coldness and diseases. However, I might have a chance of getting killed by Indians and starvation.
Jason Tao
Traveling in the year of 1849 would be difficult due to the lack of paved roads and methods of transportation. The Gold Rush in California was a very advantageous discovery that could help any single person or family establish themselves whilst making a living. Not only was there an advantage of the gold itself, but the ample space of fertile land as well. After looking at the three possible routes to California from New York City; I would have to choose The Oregon Trail. The path seems to be the fastest and most practical while taking into consideration the other routes (Water Routes/ Santa Fe Trail) and the hardships one would face. One such hardship could be falling ill, of which there is a high risk because of the cramped area on the ships. In addition, there very well might be a lack of food and very poor sanitation on those ships. The jungles of Panama are home to a very wide variety of venomous animals, by which you could be bitten when walking through it. It is for all of these reasons, that The Oregon Trail is the best route. Along The Oregon Trail are many spots to fish and hunt; which guarantees an abundance of food and reliable water supply.
ReplyDeleteThis route would also be more efficient, getting you there faster because it is approximately 2456.1 miles, the shortest distance of all three routes. There was a rush to get to California to seize the advantages of the land where growing crops, salvaging gold, and opening small businesses were attainable. It was a matter of getting there and establishing a living. I would have travelled in a large group for safety reasons and it would have increased the chances of survival with possible Native American threats. In conclusion, I feel that this route would be most advantageous for me and get me to California in a fast manner.
-Taylor Wray
If I were travelling 2000 miles to California for the Gold Rush in 1849, I would take the Oregon Trail. Of the three options, I believe that this is the most efficient and most safe. If I were to go around cape horn, I would be on this ship for 4-8 months! As a young and able bodied person I think that there are more efficient ways of getting to California without wasting so much time and letting other men get there before me and take all the gold. In addition to the lengthy travel, it may also be incredibly dangerous. Around cape horn is some of the most dangerous waters in the world. With high winds and tumultuous waves, it is hard to trust even the most skilled sailor. A spot on the boat would also be very costly, anywhere from a hundred to even a thousand dollars. As I am going all the way to California to sift for tiny nuggets of gold, I clearly don’t have this type of money. My other option would be to take the shortcut through Panama. This would decrease the price, time, and danger in comparison to going all the way around cape horn. It would be the quickest of all the routes to take, but the likelihood that I would make it out alive is slim. Diseases such as Malaria, yellow fever and Cholera are common in this area. Even if I were to survive these diseases, the savages of the land would take all my possessions and maybe even kill me. I can’t afford these types of risks. My only option left is the Oregon Trail. Shorter than Cape Horn but longer than Panama, this trail poses the least threats in my opinion. It is definitely the least expensive; I would just need to buy enough food and water to fair me during the long stretches away from civilization. The only conceivable danger is a Native American attack, but it would be highly unlikely and if I were to come across Native Americans I wouldn’t provoke them. As long as I stay sterile and careful, I can most likely avoid contracting cholera, mountain fever, pneumonia or diphtheria. The biggest risks of the Oregon Trail seem less daunting than either of the risks Panama or Cape Horn pose. Overall, the Oregon Trail seems to be the cheapest, safest and most secure route that I could take.
ReplyDeleteCaroline Skinner
If I were to travel from New York to California in 1849 due to the promise of gold, I would take the Oregon Trail. Each trail has its own risks but I personally believe that the Oregon Trail is the safest route to get to California. Firstly, the around the horn route, where the travelers would sail around South America, was extremely dangerous because of the strong currents. The trip also took about 9 months and families were generally not permitted, as the currents were too dangerous for women and children. The currents also made people very sick, and the trip was very pricey. I personally would not want to travel alone to new place and ideally would prefer to travel with loved ones. That is one of the largest reasons I chose the Oregon Trial. To travel the Oregon Trail, large groups of families commuted together in wagons. Native American tribes were attacking the largest threat to the families that travelled on the Oregon Trail, however if you traveled in large enough groups and had protection, it became more unlikely to be attacked. Another benefit of the Oregon Trail was the ability to get water from streams and lakes, as well as harvest crops as the group past. Unfortunately the trail was also long and took roughly 100 days. The other main alternative would be crossing through the Panama by boat. Not only would the trip cost a fortune, due to the unfair and unregulated fines at the crossing, but also there were many easily captured diseases such a malaria and cholera. The trip was dangerous and would leave them in debt to whoever helped them crossed. Again, for me the best solution would be to take the Oregon Trail but to help our chances of making it to California safety, I would make sure that I travelled in a large group and I would prepare myself with the right supplies such as hunting equipment, containers to hold my water and living supplies. I think this is the best method to maximize my chances of survival and the best way to guarantee that I have some savings to use once I arrive.
ReplyDeleteJamie E
If I was traveling from New York City all the way to California in the quest to get rich quick I would take the Oregon Trail. Besides the Oregon Trail there are many different options including sea routes. If I were to take any one of the sea routes I would be throwing up the whole way there and in 1849 there is a lack of medicine and the chances of me dying from a disease while at sea is very high. If I were to take the sea route that stops at Panama and cuts across the country would be a faster way than going around Cape Horn, but in order to leave Panama the natives will force me to give up everything I own and to arrive in California with nothing but the clothes on my back. Also I still have the chance of dying at sea because of disease and the certainty that I will lose all my possessions. If I was to take the Santa Fe trail I would have to pass through the Great American Desert and have to deal with lack of food and water and the intense heat. On top I would be going through Apache and Comanche territory who are two of the most ruthless and violent tribes in America. If I were to take the Oregon Trail I would still have to deal with Indians but not as violent as the ones along the Santa Fe Trail. Also these Indians are more accustomed to travelers coming along. As far as the climate goes it is much more bearable than the Santa Fe trail. None of the options are easy and safe but I'm going to have to choose the lesser of two evils and in this case the Oregon Trail would have to be that option.
ReplyDeleteJim Streett
If I were traveling from the Midwest to California for the great gold rush of 1849, I would choose the route that would get me there the most efficiently. For that reason, I would choose to travel along the Oregon Trail. Not only is this one of the fastest routes, but it is also a lot less dangerous and costly than other routes. If I decided to buy a ticket on a steamship and travel all the way around Cape Horn, I would be cramped in a tiny ship for 4-8 long months with people I have never met before. In addition, the living conditions on these ships were less than ideal; I would have to face seasickness every day and risk the possibility of catching a disease from one of the other people on board. Finally, the seas off the coast of Cape horn are known to be some of the roughest wat4ers in the world, which would put me in great danger. The Panama Canal route, though shorter and less costly, still has me on a tiny boat with strangers and rats for a long period of time. In addition, the stop in Panama holds many dangers. Walking through the Panamanian jungle would put me at risk of catching a disease such as Malaria. I would also run the risk of being robbed, or killed by the indigenous people. If I spent most or all of my money on a ticket on a steamship to California, the last thing I would want is to be held up by the natives of Panama. It is for these reasons that the Oregon Trail seems most appealing to me. The only expense to pay would be for a wagon and supplies for the trip. I could hunt for food along the way to save even more money. If I found a good group of physically able people to travel along the trail with I would make great time, and the journey wouldn’t seem as tough. The only great danger along the Oregon Trail would be the possibility of a Native American attack. However, if I traveled with a larger group and we did not bother the natives we could try to avoid conflict, and even if they did attack we would have a chance to defend ourselves. The likeliness of me catching a disease along the Oregon Trail is far less than on the other routes. All of these reasons bring me to the conclusion that the Oregon Trail is the best choice. Not only was it cheaper and safer than the overseas routes, but it was faster than any other land route if I was starting in the Midwest.
ReplyDeleteSam Merrill
If i were a traveler in search of gold to become rich i would take the route through the Caribbean, through the panama canal, and around the pacific coast to San Fransisco. Now Although many people could argue land would be the solution, i think other wise. For example, Many could argue the Oregon trail was a better route. This route from Missouri to Oregon was a shorter route, was not to strenuous your items and bottom were potentially in wagons being pulled by bison or mules. There is a problem though, When traveling on these trails you are always at risk of attacks by native Americans who if they could would try to kill you. Now the Santa Fe Trail another land route was shorter which sounded better, but in all reality you actually had a much higher risk of attacks by the native Americans because they were more friendlily as far as trading and getting along with travelers on the Oregon trail than the Santa Fe Trail. On the Oregon Trail they would trade with some travelers but that did not mean you were safe, they would for the most part try to kill you if they could. Going through the country you also had to deal with stuff like weather. The Trails in some cases were higher up in the country as you got closer and the temperature is colder. Plus the terain is much tougher than if you would sail around the panama and come up through that way. Now the reason i would go around the panama canal way and not the way around south America is because of the mear distance of the trip. The risks of the sea are the risks of the sea, there is no difference, your on the sea your on the sea. But To half to travel almost around a whole extra CONTINENT in the Roughly 1850's area by steamboat is absolute insanity. Think about that distance today, who wants to travel that today. The Route through the Panama canal would have been the most productive because the temperature for the most part would be relatively nice and not to freezing, The risk of getting physically killed by native Americans or the rocky mountain cold is much greater than perhaps a sea disease. Also i have been on boats my whole life and ive traveled on them since i was young so i have a lot. of experience on ships. I learned survival skills from some of my friends who are X navy seals. It really depends on what route you felt the most comfortable. certain people have certain skill sets that make them more comfortable traveling their route.The route through the all and all ould have been the safest route to have taken because of its lack of death risk and feasible conditions. Most could argue against it but for someone like me who travels on the sea for most of the summer in the 1840's 1850's era i would have chosen the route that i thought i would keep my family the safest. Traveling through the nation would have been rough Teriann, perhaps starvation. Also risk of dieing from temperature and most importantly the native Americans. I would defiantly at this time chosen the shorter sea route through the panama canal because the risk as far as death was not as steep, i have experience, and its the safest and lowest possible risk for my potential family that i would have had at this time in 1849.
ReplyDeletethe one that ends in 1849 is mine (Brandon Malarney) Sorry i forgot to write my name
ReplyDeleteCalifornia God Rush began when gold was found in California. People started moving to California to seek gold and better life. Most of those people were Americans even though there were some Latin Americans, Asians and Europeans. Those people traveled different ways; some of them traveled by sailing ship across the ocean while some others took The Santa Fe Trail and the Oregon Trail.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to pick one way to go from New York City to California, I would choose to sail around South America by boat. Even though, this is the longest way to get to California, it was the safest one. There were not a lot of diseases in this route like the Oregon Trail, and also you were safe from Native Americans attack. Passing through Panama was much shorter that going all the way across South America, but it was safer than going through the Panama jungles and dying from diseases like malaria.
Travelling with group of people and experienced captain at the right time of the year, this rout is the safest way I could get to California. Even though there are a lot things that could go wrong by sailing on the water this long, with enough preparation, you at least don’t have to worry attacks from Native Americans and deadly diseases.
Maria Ahmed
If I were living in 1859 and were headed to the gold field of California from New York City, I would travel by boat around the tip of South America. Although some may disagree as this is by far the longest mean of transportation, it is the safest. There is no easy way to get from one side of the country to another, however even though this trip could span from four to eight months, there are the smallest number of encounters via South American route. When traveling from New York to Panama and then Panama to California there are a number of risks at hand when choosing this route. This out of three would be one of the shortest routes, but to cross through Panama the possibility of acquiring disease is highly likely, for example yellow fever, cholera, etc. Not only is disease a danger in this route, but also it is expensive and the chance of encountering native attacks and robbing is highly like. Shortly following these attacks, one must make their way from Panama to California and after encountering all of these hardships; you are only halfway there. The second option would be traveling on the Oregon Trail. Although it seems to be the easiest route, first one must get from New York to Oregon, as well as encounter the difficulties once on the trail. Not only is the trail rugged and steep, but also on the trail to California many run the risk of being raided by Native Americans and running out of resources along the way. Overall choosing to travel down the coast of South America and back up the coast of North America is my safest bet. Although many believe that going around Cape Horn is a death wish, with a good caption and a large boat it shouldn’t be difficult at all. Although going around Cape Horn is the longest route, at the end of the day, choosing the safest root with the greatest chance in arriving is my main priority.
ReplyDelete-Lexi Merison
If I were to travel to California during the gold rush of 1849, I would go on a ship along South America and around Cape Horn. Since I would be coming from New York City, it would be the easiest means of transportation to get to. Although it would take about five to eight months and the Horn had some of the hardest seas to sail in, an experienced captain would make the voyage easier. The other sea route, to Panama then through the jungle to catch another ship, would be the most dangerous, in my opinion. Although shorter than going around Cape Horn, I would have to make it through 60 miles of jungle before I reached the other side of the Isthmus. During this time, the native people would take my luggage and leave me with nothing. The two other routes were land routes. The Oregon Trail was very popular during this time. However, I would have to first travel from New York to Missouri before I even got on the trail. On the trail, there was a danger of Native Americans attacking me if I crossed into their territory or contracting Cholera during the trip. With these dangers, I might not even make it to California. The Santa Fe Trail was similar to the Oregon Trail but more South. It had a higher population of hostile Native Americans living near it though, so it would be very dangerous to travel on. Overall, the ship along South America and around Cape Horn offers the most benefits and least dangers, which will help me make it to California in time to find a lot of gold.
ReplyDeleteKate Klimaszewski
If I were one of the many men traveling out west from New York City in 1849, I would take the Oregon Trail. This path is the least expensive and the safest; I wouldn’t hit the rugged waters around Cape Horn or have to make it through the unfamiliar jungle in Panama. The price of the ticket on the boat around Cape Horn can cost up to one thousand dollars but my wagon across the country would be much less expensive. The Oregon Trail is also the most efficient journey also because instead of going all the way around South America for eight months, it will only take me four months on the Oregon Trail to get to the gold coast. Avoiding Panama would also reduce the risk of catching a disease such as cholera, diphtheria, and pneumonia. Also on the Oregon Trail I would be traveling in a group with other 49ers so that would be a form of protection specifically against the Native Americans. As long as we were civil to them and didn’t irritate them they would be the same way towards us. The Oregon Trail is the most efficient, cheapest, and least dangerous path to take from New York City to California in the search for gold.
ReplyDeleteLane Mayher
If I was a family in the time period of the Gold Rush, I would choose one of the water routes as my way over to California. I would choose the water passage around South America. This passage seems to me to be the best and safest way for my family to get over to the Manifest Destiny. The other water route is much more dangerous. I would have to go through Panama and I would lose everything I had. Going into California with nothing does not sound like a very good thing to me. If you tried to fight it, you would never leave Panama. There are only two slight problems to the trip around South America. One of them is that the ship is not very good at all. It is not a comfy ship at all and I would have to make sure there was enough food for me and my family as well. The only other slight reason that the trip around South America is dangerous is because of the Cape of Horn. It is a very windy and choppy place which would be dangerous for my family and the ship. Once through that part though, it would probably and most likely be easy and straight sailing till California where I could get gold. The other two ideas to get to California would be the two trails. The Oregon Trail would be land instead of water and short but I would first have to travel from New York to Missouri and then also on the trail there is a danger of Indians. If I accidentally crossed into there territory, they would easily attack me. The Santa Fe trail is more south and has a higher population of Indians so it would be more dangerous than the Oregon trail. These are the reasons why I would choose the trail around South America to get to my Manifest Destiny in California.
ReplyDelete-Cody Lucey
If I was to travel westward, I would take a boat around Cape Horn. This trip would take much longer than any other route but it is the safest. Wind and waves would be the only danger for you on this journey. If you had a good ship captain you would avoid the possibility of hitting the rocky shores. If you were to take the Oregon Trail, you ran the possibility of getting really sick with cholera or pneumonia. This was the shortest route but it tested the physical ability of the travelers. Another bad route to take is the Santa Fe Trail. There are quite a few things that trail that could kill you. First thing that could kill you is the fact you have to cross a desert. The second is trying to avoid the Native-Americans that will try and harm you. All of these routes are bad, but the worst route to take was the Panama shortcut. This was the shortcut to avoid going around Cape Horn but it made you life difficult with the natives in Panama. For this route you had to get off the first boat on the Gulf of Mexico side and walk across Panama to get on another boat. Unfortunately, people were often robbed as a price for passage. The little people had to begin with would often be taken away from them. If you too the Cape Horn route you would have the highest possible chance for survival, without being robbed.
ReplyDeleteHunter Borwick
If I were to journey from New York City to the gold fields of California in 1849, I would take the route around Cape Horn. I enjoy fishing and sailing very much, so I would definitely like to take the Cape Horn Route or the route through Panama. Though the route on the Oregon Trail would be much shorter than the routes taken by ship, many troubles could arise on the journey. Bears and other beasts of Western America would threaten the success of the journey. The vicious terrain of the mountain ranges along the way would also be very difficult to maneuver around. I also personally do not enjoy hiking, and I have a severe fear of heights, so there is no way I would be able to take the Oregon Trail.
ReplyDeleteThe other option to get to California from New York would be to go through Panama. A much shorter voyage, the crew and myself would stop at the east coast of Panama, hike across an unforgiving jungle, and be picked up on the other side and taken to California. This route was very dangerous. Native Panamanians would often loot or demand money from their travelers, even taking all the crew’s belongings if they liked. This could leave the crew and myself poor and maybe even sick from the exotic Panamanian jungles when I reached California. In this case, if I made it to California, I wouldn’t have much going for me at that time. There would simply be far too many risks involved in taking the route through Panama.
If I were to take the Cape Horn route, the crew of my ship would obviously have to be experienced in navigation, fishing, and even possibly languages other than English if we encountered any foreign peoples along the way. Though the length of the trip could result in the spoiling of some foods such as meat, if the crew and I were careful to salt and carefully preserve these foods, we would be just fine. Many Europeans preferred to take this route after landing in New York or Boston because it was similar to their journey to America. Therefore, I would be able to study the cultures of the people I lived with on the ship, and maybe even learn part of a second language. The Cape Horn route would most certainly be my choice of the route to go from New York City to California.
Jack Gustavon
If I were to travel to California from New York City during the Gold Rush I would definitely travel by land on the Oregon Trail. Living on a boat for months with rats, no bathrooms, and other inconveniences would not be ideal. Living on a wagon, however, I feel would be more manageable. You could get off whenever you need to stretch your legs, control where you were going, and also had fellow wagons around incase something happened to yours. Also, the wagons traveled in large groups, so they were less likely to be attacked by Native Americans. The dangers at sea seem to be superior to those of land. For example, traveling around Cape Horn is tricky, as there are strong currents. The Panama Canal is another option, however there is still the issue of sailing through tough seas and the diseases that come along with that. Both of these routes are also very expensive. On the Oregon Trail, families traveled together, they were able to farm the lands they were passing through, and drink from the freshwater lakes and streams they were passing. Although the Oregon Trail took longer to get across, it was far safer than going by water and is also far less expensive. I would choose the Oregon Trail because it seems to be the safest route to go from New York City to California.
ReplyDeleteSophia Peluso
If I were to travel to California during the Gold Rush of 1849, I would have taken the Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail is the best route for a number of reasons. First of all, it is the cheapest route. Going around cape horn or through Panama would be extremely costly, and as a poor young man I wouldn’t want to waste money on my transportation when I could easily take the Oregon Trail for a cheap price. Not only would I be cutting down on cost, but I would also be cutting down on time. The Panama route would take 2 to 3 months, and going around cape horn would take 4 to 8 months. As it is called the gold RUSH, I would want to rush there as soon as possible in order to get as much gold as possible. One other main downside of going around Cape horn would be the discomfort. I would have to endure rough conditions in a tiny room for 4 to 8 months on a tiny, rocky boat. Not to mention the disease that would spread all throughout the boat. I would be sick and uncomfortable for up to eight months! I would much rather endure three to seven months in the comfort of the land rather than the rough sea. The other option, the Panama shortcut, would be extremely difficult as well due to the diseases such as Malaria and yellow fever. Weed-whacking through the jungle in Panama would be taxing and dangerous. The Santa Fe Trail, the other option over land, was more dangerous and strenuous than the Oregon trail due to the huge mountains in that region. All of these numerous difficulties that the three other options present make the Oregon trail the best option for me.
ReplyDelete-Annie Hubbard
From 1848 - 1850, thousands of Americans made the journey from east coast to the west coast due to the profound amount of gold that was available in California. The Gold Rush of 1849 was not located in California because of the amount of gold but rather because it was so easy to obtain. Although it was easy to obtain in California, it was not easy to make the trip across the United States. If I were to make the long journey known as the Gold Rush of 1849, I would take the long route overseas around Cape Horn to get to California. Although this route takes 4-8 months on a cramped steamboat and can be expensive, I still believe it would be a lot more successful than taking the Panama route or the overland routes. The Cape Horn route can be dangerous due to the very rough and unpredictable waters between Cape Horn and Antarctica. Also being stuck on a boat for long periods of time with very little comfort and complete strangers is not the ideal situation. Now even though the Cape Horn does not seem like a luxury vacation, the Panama route and the overland routes would be even worse. Traveling the overland routes such as the Oregon Trail and the Santa Fe Trail is a lot more dangerous and strenuous. Most people on these trail take with them a typical wagon but traveling through deserts, forests, and mountains would make it very difficult to hull along a big wagon carrying all your possessions. Also taking into account that thousands of people were sick with cholera because of the unsafe drinking water makes overland travel that much more miserable. Traveling overland also has the downside of Native Americans raiding your wagons and possibly killing you much like what happened on the Santa Fe trail with the Apaches. Now if not the overland routes, many people would decide to take the Panama route because it seems like the shortest route. Although it may look like the shortest travel, it takes almost just as long if not longer taking this route. When traveling the Panama route you would start from the east coast of the U.S. all the way down to present-day Panama Canal. Once you arrive present-day Panama Canal you would have to unboard and travel across through dangerous jungle. While carrying all your possessions through the jungle, you could raise the chance of predators attacking as well as attracting disease. After struggling for almost sixty miles across Panama and if you made it to the ports in Panama City, you would then have to find a boat that would take you the rest of the way to California, if you’re lucky. Now if you do eventually make it to California, most travelers would think that they successfully arrived and were ready to search for gold but instead would then have another 150 miles to go until they reached the gold regions. Now after including all these possibilities that could occur on the overland routes and the Panama route, it would seem that the Cape Horn route is the safest, and most efficient route even though it may not seem like it. Concluding that I would take the Cape Horn route overseas rather then any other route that were available during the Gold Rush of 1849.
ReplyDelete- Harrison Yaste
If I had to travel from New York City to California in 1849, I would travel on the Oregon Trail. Although there are advantages and disadvantages of both the Oregon Trail and the and the Santa Fe Trail, the Gold Fields in California were rich with gold which was very important to obtain as a peasant. Even if someone who is not poor comes across this, it is a win-win situation. An advantage of the Oregon Trail was that it was an official route that many pioneers have taken before. If something happened to your wagon or there was a shortage on food or something else you were in dire need of, there were always other people on the trail that could lend you a hand. Another advantage of traveling on the Oregon Trail is that there was army protection. Missionaries would travel to Oregon and be stationed all along the trail to protect the pioneers that were passing through. This would be come useful because of one of the disadvantages which was the Native Americans. The Oregon Trail passes through many Native American territories. The other disadvantage is that there was a high risk of disease living in such close quarters with other people throughout an overall 6 month journey and traveling over 2,000 miles. However, the road to riches in the gold fields of California would drive me to take the Oregon trail, despite the disadvantages and risks, because I would hope to someday arrive there and the Oregon Trail would lead me there. It is also shorter than the Santa Fe trail and easier to hike through because you don't have to worry about the rugged terrains.
ReplyDelete- Annie Love
If I where a young man traveling to California in hopes of finding gold in 1849, I believe I would take the boat around the South America. This journey, although long and probably rough sailing, seems to be the safest option. If I was to go through Panama I might not make it at all to the other side of the isthmus and if I did make it, Columbian’s would have taken everything I had by the time I made it to the other ship. I would have to pay for the initial trip to Panama, and then I would have to “pay” for my travel through the country with everything I own. Then if I didn’t have enough of what the Columbian’s wanted, they might keep me there for months as their slave till they thought I had paid my “debt.” I would arrive in California with nothing. If I where to take one of the overland trails, I could be killed by Indians, or starve from food and water shortages. On my journey by boat, I could keep track of my belongings, and I would only have to pay once for my voyage. Even though there are negatives to the sail around the bottom of South America, such as it would be crowded, long, and some bad sailing spots, I believe it would be the safest way for me to get to California still with my belongings. As a young man in 1849, in deciding how I am going to get to California, I would sail around South America.
ReplyDelete-Emma Weinstein
If I had to travel from New York to California in 1849 because of the promise of finding gold I would take the Oregon Trail. There are many reasons as to why this would be my option instead of going around the horn of Africa and the Santa Fe Trail. Each trail has its difficulties and safety issues. I would choose the safest route to me, which would be the Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail is also the shortest which may be the best option. This I see would be the safest route out of all three even though the Oregon Trail ran the risk of running into Indians. The pros about the Oregon trail was that families were able to travel together and not split up like many did when taking the voyage around South America and the horn of Africa as the seas were considered very rough and hard to handle for women and children. Traveling on the other routes would put families at risk and groups of people at risk more than the Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail would also be safer if it was traveled by in a bigger group of people because the bigger group of people meant that the Indians would have less of an idea to attack a larger group of people. Even though there are Indians on the Santa Fe Trail as well, the Indians along that trail and route have had the tendency to be more aggressive and want to attack people that are unknown to them. Another reason for taking the Oregon Trail was that it would be the quickest way to get California where all the Gold was. Getting there in the least amount of time meant that you would have a better chance at getting in on the Gold that was being found in California in 1849. Overall the quickest and safest way to me would be the Oregon Trail rather than taking the sea routes, which would run more risk of getting lost and getting sick and possibly catching diseases that couldn’t be cured at the time. The Oregon trial was the easiest and most accessibly Trail for people if traveled in a large group. Along with it being the quickest and safest route it is also considered to be the least costly of all three routes. This would be why I would choose the Oregon Trail.
ReplyDeleteBarclay Gammill
Horn of Africa was a typo.
DeleteIf I was a young man in living in New York in 1849, and I desired riches, the first place that I would go would be the gold fields of California during the gold rush. To get there, I would have to choose one of three routs. Both of the trails would incorporate many challenges along the way, but the lesser of two evils would be going through the Oregon Trail. This would be the safest way of the two routs even though you would run the risk of running into Native Americans along the way. While traveling on the Oregon Trail, I would be able to travel with my entire family and not split up as many had when they chose to go around South America because of how rough the currants were. Children and Women were not allowed to go on the route that went around South America. I would want to go on the journey with my family and have them with me along the way. I would not like being alone in a new place and would much rather live with my loved ones. I would not like being without my family and not having any contact with them for extended periods of time. Traveling the Oregon Trail was also much safer because you would travel in a big group of people. Traveling with a big group of people lessened the chances of being attacked by either animals or Indian tribes. The trail would provide multiple resources that would be crucial for going on such a long and dangerous trip. You could easily get water from streams and lakes on the way. You could also hunt for food, where as if you were on a boat, you could not drink any of the water around you, and would be hard to get food other than fish. Though the trip would be long (100 days), it would be better then traveling on the Panama Canal, which would bring on multiple diseases such as malaria and cholera. However not only would you have a very high chance of collecting a disease, the trip was also very expensive due to unregulated fines at crossings, and would leave me in a great deal of debt. If I had to choose a route to go on, I would choose the Oregon Trail because it was the safest and I would be able to bring my family along with me.
ReplyDeleteThe Hunter Reynolds
Hello
ReplyDeleteAfter much consideration, I have decided to take the Oregon Trail to California. My three options were: around the Cape Horn, through Panama, and the Oregon trail. I have completely ruled out going through the ocean because of illness, time, and danger. Illness does not only refer to sea sickness but also common illnesses found of boats carried by other passengers or through food. On land, food and water is significantly easier than it is on a boat in the middle of the water. Yes, the Oregon trail does pose the issue of an Indian attack, but going out to sea poses an equal amount of life threatening scenarios. There are more disease that could kill me from either the boat or the forests of Panama than there are Indian attacks. With this in mind, I would definitely take the Oregon Trail because Indian attacks are the only thing making me hesitant. On top of that, it is significantly more comfortable, cleaner, cheaper, and I also get to keep my belongings. Being at sea is fun, but after many months in those conditions, I would go crazy. I prefer changing landscape over endless water.
Ben Wolf
If I had to choose a route to take to California during the gold rush, between the Oregon Trail, around cape horn, or the panama shortcut, I would choose to take the Oregon Trail. Although people on all three of the routes encountered difficulties while on their Journey to California, I believe that this route was most effective. Native Americans were thought of as the greatest threat to the northern immigrants and adventurers who traveled along the Oregon Trail, but really the main cause of death was by diseases and sicknesses such as cholera, mountain fever, and pneumonia. Being only four to six months, this route was shorter than going around cape horn but longer than the panama shortcut. It was also the most feasible and the least expensive. Even though it wasn’t the fastest, a spot on a ship could cost up to a thousand dollars, which someone searching for gold doesn’t have. A big concern throughout all three of the routes was the weather conditions. If I were to take any route by sea the weather would be my main concern. Sea storms create large waves and swells that are very dangerous and a possible threat of filling the ships with water. While on the Oregon trail, although the travelers did combat with thunder and lightening storms during the summer and snow storms in the winter, it was much easier to prepare for and manage through the weather, especially while living in wagons topped with cotton covers treated with linseed oil to keep the rain out. Overall, there are many risks on all three possible roots from New York to the gold fields in California during 1849, but personally, my first option would be to travel by wagon 3,000 miles across the country. This way I have a better chance of survival and will arrive with more money and many acquaintances made throughout the long journey.
ReplyDeleteIone Bartlett
If I were a man traveling to California in 1849 from New York City, I would most likely be a teenager going off trying to make money for myself and start a new life in a new land. I would not have much with me because I would not be very wealthy so I would try to go to California as soon as I could and safely. Trying to choose which route would be very hard because all ways of getting there are fairly long and dangerous, but I would rather take the water route on boat from New York City to Panama to San Francisco. It would take 5,200 miles, but would be very long and worth it. Panama was Colombian territory and when passing through the territory there would be some sort of toll that I would have to pay off, before walking through the jungle to get on another boat that will take me to San Francisco finally. Being poor I would not have much money to pay the toll to continue my journey, but the Colombian native men there would take all of my belongings and I would be able to pass through the jungle. Scared out of mind in this new country and in the jungle that is infested with different wildlife and with people that do not speak the same language as myself could be pretty scary to a teen all alone with no adult to help. Getting scared and backing down was not an option because getting gold was way too easy and being able to live a really good lifestyle in California would attract more people to travel to the west coast. This route is very dangerous, but as a teen seeing the world would be very exciting especially if your destination is where you will gain all of your riches. I think that taking the water route through the Panamanian jungles are very dangerous, but has a very good chance of making it to San Francisco.
ReplyDeleteTerryl Wilson
If I was to make the journey to California during the 1849 Gold Rush, I would choose to go by the Oregon Trail. I believe that it would be the best way to get to the West coast because not only is it safer than traversing the treacherous Cape Horn, but it is also more practical because many people were crammed into these boats, and this mass clog of people makes disease spread quickly. However, there are also drawbacks to this route. One of these would be the threat of Native American attack, which was a serious issue throughout the Western territories. Also, a family hoping to make it across the continent would have to adequately prepare for the journey, which would take an unprecedented amount of time. This means packing sufficiently in order to have enough food, for running out of food during the long journey would be an unfortunate consequence. The Oregon trail route is, in my opinion, the easiest and most practical way to cross the continent in search of Gold.
ReplyDelete-Henry Thomas
If I was going to pick one route to go, I would choose going around Cape Horn in South America. A lot of my classmates want to go this route so we could join up an all get on one big vessel, which would allow for a safer and more enjoyable trip. We would need a big ship and having a big ship would allow for better control on the sea. Also, on the seas you get rid of the risk of being attacked by Indians, which is a risk if you were to go by land. The ship needs a good captain on board and I could help because I am comfortable around the water and have experience sailing pretty big boats.
ReplyDeleteThe other sea route through Panama is a bad choice because at the time there was no Panama canal and because of this you would have to get off your ship and travel by land across Panama. Traveling by land in Central America, you could acquire diseases like malaria which you would not get traveling by ship. Also you run the risk of losing your place on a ship when trying to get to California. Even though it could be months shorter than going around Cape Horn, the trip through Panama runs more risk than traveling only by sea.
In my opinion, the worst option would be trying to travel by land across the continent. By doing this, you would have to travel by wagon, which runs a great risk of breaking down mid- journey. My classmates all wanted to travel by boat, so if I don’t have a big enough crowd, the risk of getting attacked by indians is greater because I would be more vulnerable with less people on board. Plus as a 16 year old, I have no experience driving a wagon and I know that I would get wagon sick if I tried. The Oregon trail is great in my opinion but I live In New York so how am I supposed to get from NY to St. Louis safely?
The route around Cape Horn offers the least amount of risk and with the safely of my classmates on the line it is the route I want to take.
Matt Koopman
If I was traveling from New York City to the Gold Fields of California I would have three different routes available. The first route I could take would be to travel around the coast of south America. This would ultimately be a poor decision due to manny different reasons. Firstly the weather condition’s around cape horn would be extremely dangerous. Their would be a very high chance that my ship may sink due to big waves and fast winds. If this happened their would be no way of surviving. Also, if my Journey was taking longer than expected due to weather conditions slowing my ship down I may run out of food and clean water. If this happened their would be no food source around me and I could die or become weak due to hunger. The second route I could take would be to go through the Panama. Although this route is only 5,000 miles it is one which involves great Risk and danger. In 1849 their was no Panama Canal so you would have to leave your boat and walk through Panama. This was an extremely risky decision because Panamanians would often hurt and rob Americans of all their belongings. The third route available for Americans traveling from New York City to California would be to go through America via the Oregon trail. As “Frick” Said this would be the safest route available for travels for a number of reasons. Firstly if your wagon broke down you always ride along with other travels or worst case scenario walk. If you were traveling by boat and your vessel broke you would be dead. Secondly you would be able to travel light and move quickly due to the natural resources available to you. If you ran out of food you could always hunt and eat the food around you. Yes, their is a chance of native americans ambushing you but if your traveled in large groups and kept quiet you would be safe and and reach California without a problem.
ReplyDelete- Noah Abrams
As a young man traveling to California during the 1849 Gold Rush, I would go by land and take the Oregon Trail. This seems to be the safest and shortest option compared to the two water routes and it is the most travelled of the land routes making it the most known and most mapped. Other than seasickness on the water routes, there are many illnesses and a higher chance of food shortages. There is the problem of food shortages on land but it is much easier to find food if you don’t have enough. The Oregon Trail would also be more comfortable. You would have most of your belongings and be able to do what you wanted when you wanted without it being really crowded. Being on a boat would be crowded and you wouldn’t have a lot of belongings with you. Taking the Panama route would be the most dangerous. The Columbian’s would take everything you owned as “payment” when you walked across the land, and you would be left with the bare minimum. You would also be exposed to yellow fever and malaria almost guaranteeing your death soon. Going around Cape Horn would be very expensive and the water is very rough. It also takes the longest and I would want to get to California as fast as I could. The Santa Fe Trail is the other land option. It is harder compared to the Oregon Trail because of its mountain regions, which would make it take longer. I would take the Oregon Trail because it is the fastest, cheapest and safest choice for me.
ReplyDelete-Taylor Rathbun
If I were a a young man in 1849 looking for westward expansion to the gold fields in California to the rush for the riches, I would have taken to Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail began in Missouri and spanned about 2,000 miles ending in “Oregon Country”. I feel like the Oregon Trail is the safest and lowest risk of danger. In addition, I will not be the first person traveling this trail, therefore I will have guidelines throughout my journey. The Oregon Trail is safer than the Santa Fe Trail because the Santa Fe Trail runs directly through Native American territory, and the Native Americans do not enjoy white travelers, or what people in general for that matter. As for the sea options, traveling around Cape Horn is not a safe option. Cape Horn has some of the roughest seas in the world and is very dangerous. Diseases are prevalent onboard the ships and it is very easy to wreck your ship, run out of food, or run into pirates. In addition, traveling across Panama is very expensive and time consuming. The environment in Panama is hostile and there is a lot of crime. Before I embark on the Oregon Trail, I would be sure to have more than enough food, medical supplies, and whatever else I may need to aid my journey to the Oregon Country.
ReplyDelete- Connor Shalleck
If I was traveling to the Gold Fields of California during the rush to riches in 1849 from New York City, I would have chosen the Oregon Trail. The Oregon Trail is much shorter than the two water routes and the Santa Fe Trail meaning I would have a better chance of finding more gold if I was there before other travelers. As Caroline said, it would take around 4-8 months traveling around cape horn. Moreover, the route by sea that goes around South America is not the way to go because I would be risking not only my life but my ship as well due to the world’s roughest waters. Furthermore, the other water route that goes through Panama would be a lot quicker than traveling around cape horn however the people on land would most likely take my belongings and possibly kill me. This uncertainty is not worth the attempt to get to California because there are other safer ways to get there. Also once I arrive on land near Cuba, I would have to leave my ship behind and walk on land to get on another ship. This could be costly and I would not know for sure if another ship would be available. The Santa Fe Trail is another option however it is more likely to be attacked by Native Americans and I would not want to put my family and I in that position. It is also longer than the Oregon Trail and I would want to get to California as fast as I can. This leaves the Oregon Trail as my last option. The Oregon Trial has many animals around the paths meaning if I was short on food, I could rely on hunting as my back up option. I could also travel with a pack of people as the Oregon Trail because it was the most popular route to go. This trail was less likely to encounter Native Americans making it safer for my family and I to travel through. Traveling by a wagon on the Oregon Trail was not ideal however they were designed to keep out rain, wind and dust with a canvas that surrounded the wagon. The wooden wheels would make it a bumpy ride however getting to California quicker would make it worth it.
ReplyDelete-Tatum Boyle
If I were a man traveling to California in 1849 from New York City, in search of gold, I would choose the fastest and safest route. With this in mind, I would choose the Oregon Trail. Although one might encounter some Native Americans, it is not as likely as on the Santa Fe trail. Also one won’t have to be traveling by sea for almost nine months and have to battle some tough currents like the people who traveled Around the Horn. On top of that, it cost more money to pay for the tickets of the boat instead of just traveling with your wagon and a large group of people by land. Also it would been easier to catch a disease considering the fact that there are a bunch of people on one boat. This would mean one would have to be sick and uncomfortable for about nine months, and if one took the shortcut, they could also catch Malaria or Yellow Fever. Going by boat would just be a risky thing to do due to all the bad conditions, how long it takes, and how expensive it could be. Now on the Santa Fe trail, it would be tougher than taking the boat because of the huge mountains in that area. It would be tough to get the wagons to go up the mountains especially because the wheels were wooden and could easily brake on those rocky mountains. So the best choice is the Oregon trail, it is cheaper, it is safer, and it is quicker.
ReplyDeleteB-Rod
If I had to make my way to Oregon, I would’ve chosen to take a ship all the way down the eastern coast of South America, and all the way back up the western coast. Although the trip is extremely long and strenuous, it avoids many of the obstacles the other routes include. As an immigrant, I wouldn’t have much money in the first place. So, I would have to make sure I had enough money for all the water and food that I would need on the trip. One of the major pro’s of taking the South America Route would be that I could avoid encounters with aggressive Native-Americans, or any natives in Panama that would take everything I owned. The Cape Horn portion of the trip is extremely dangerous, but if I time it right, the risk of not making it through that portion of trip is much less than that of me getting attacked by Indians, which I would encounter on the Oregon trail. Another pro to taking this route, is that if I needed to, I could dock anywhere along the coast of South America. The coast would most likely be the most populated area, because of the easy access of transportation, such as ships. So, if for some reason along the trip I needed to stop and get more supplies, or ask for help, I would be much more likely to find people that could help me along the coast, rather than on the Oregon trail. Also, being on a boat avoids the risk of disease that would be extremely high on the Panama Canal route. Overall, the South American route is the most appealing because the obstacles avoided are much greater in importance than the length of the trip.
ReplyDeleteBrooks Hamilton
If I were to travel to California from New York City in 1849, which is about 2,000 miles away, I would have to carefully decide how I would take the journey there. I would have to decide between four routes for my travel west. The first thing I decided was if I wanted to travel by land or sea. I decided that choosing a land route was the better option for me. I decided not to take either sea route for many different reasons. The first route I ruled out was the route where I would have to pass through the Panama Canal. I ruled this route out because if I was to travel by it, I would lose all my belongings I packed for my journey West. On the route of the Panama Canal you go through Cuba first, getting all your belongings stolen. Once you get to land in Central America you must abort your ship to cross the land and travel on another ship to your destination of California. I ruled out the other water route, which was the route around South America for one main reason. The reason being that the waters at the tip of South America are very rough and dangerous. I would not want to risk the rough waters because the possibility of losing the ship and my life. I chose to travel by land and the route I decided to take was the Oregon Trail. I decided to not take the Santa Fe Trail because not many people had taken it and explored it. I also did not want to risk the chance of being killed by Native Americans who lived on the trail. I chose the Oregon Trail because the trail had already been used for 17 years when I decided to start my journey, making the path very well blazed for my travels. I know there would be possibilities of facing danger on the trail but the trail seemed to be the safest compared to the others. The trail was always highly populated with people so if something went wrong with my wagon I could always ask for help. Also if I became low on food or supplies I had the opportunity of stopping at an outpost along the way. Overall I chose the Oregon Trail because I thought it would be the safest and quickest trail for my travels to California.
ReplyDeleteLindsy Dario
If I was traveling to Oregon in 1849 from the other side of the States I would choose to take the Oregon Trail. This trail had the lowest risks and did not cost as expensive as other routes. Encounters with Native Americans was the biggest risk and Native Americans rarely attacked big groups of people. If you were in a large group traveling the Oregon Trail you would have minimal problems. Another option would be to take the Santa Fe Trail. This was a worse route than the Oregon Trail because the Native Americans were more present. Another option people traveling to California kept in mind was to take a boat around the Cape Horn (under South America) or through the Panama Canal. The Cape horn was a bad option because it was very long and expensive. The boats also carried diseases, which would spread throughout all the people traveling. The Cape Horn is also home to the roughest seas in the world. This could cause severe sea sickness and a very dangerous ride for the travelers. Another option for traveling by sea was to go through the Panama Canal. This was a shorter ride with easier seas. However, there was a big problem. When the travelers docked their boats at the Canal they would be looted by the Natives of the Panama Canal, leaving the travelers with nothing. The Oregon Trail was quick, cheap, and extremely reliable making it the best route to getting to California in 1849.
ReplyDelete-Trevor Berry
If I were a man traveling to California from New York in 1849, the best choice would be to take the Oregon Trail. While people are able to travel faster by sea, the path taken by the ships through Panama and around Cape Horn are twice or three times the distance, therefore being riskier and slower in actuality. These ships also carried disease, despite being cheap, therefore they are a major health hazard to those who board. Also, unless you had nothing to lose, if one went through the Panama route, they would have every possession stripped from them before leaving the Panama area. The Oregon trail stands as a better option than the Santa Fe trail because there was less Native American activity. Even if there was a slight risk of a Native American attack, one could travel in a larger pack, therefore being able to defend themselves. Despite the fact that one would need to travel from Oregon southward towards California after reaching the end of the trail, that last stretch from Oregon to California is safe, since Oregon is inhabited by many others from the USA. For these reasons, I would travel on the Oregon Trail in preference than any other route.
ReplyDelete-Kevin Xu
In 1849, when rushing west from New York to the California Gold, I would definitely go by land and not by sea. The journey by sea is not only expensive but too risky. Both sea routes, thru panama or around Cape Horn, are filled with dangers, I am not prepared to deal with. The waters and current around Cape Horn are too dangerous and I fear that I would die at sea. Passing through Panama is equally dangerous because once you disembark your boat in panama the chance of getting sick by cholera, malaria or yellow fever is extremely high. And if you can get through the jungle without dying of a disease, you have to worry about getting your possessions stolen while carrying everything you have on your back In addition, its very expensive to hire a guide to help you through the jungle. For these reasons, I choose to go by land.
ReplyDeleteThe Oregon Trail is the best path for me. The biggest risk to traveling the Oregon Trail is dealing with the native Americans since you pass by so many Indian Territories. However, this trail does not pass through as many Indian Territories as does the Santa Fe Trail. The Santa Fe Trail is more dangerous since these Indians don't allow trespassing and often attack trespassers. The Oregon Trail is a bit safer because it is a more popular trail and I could stay close to others. In numbers we could hopefully defeat the Indians if they should attack. The ability to stop for water or hunt for food makes the Oregon Trail most attractive to me. We will never starve and will keep ourselves very healthy to fight any deadly diseases that come our way. At least by land we have a chance. Once a disease hits a ship, there is no escaping and it’s totally out of our controll. At least traveling by wagon, we have some distance between us and other people traveling. The wagons are also safe and serve as a good home while traveling. The 10’ x 81/2’ oil canvas will keep my family warm and offer protection from sun and rain. It would be a rough journey but much safer than the other options.
- Andrew Koudijs
If I was a man from the mid 1800’s and wanted to travel westward toward California in seek for the “Gold Rush”, I would choose the Oregon trail. I would be one of the 80,000 adventures or immigrants in an 18-month time span to travel to California for the hope to strike gold. With the new news about the adventurers Lewis and Clark just traveling to the west coast of the Americas and finding riches, they discovered and created what was to be known as the Oregon Trail that connected the Middle East to North West of America. This trail was the safest route if you wanted to move westward. There were two other routes “The two water routes” and “The Santa Fe Trail”. The Two Water Routes was known to be a very long journey, you would sail down the east coast of North and South America, around Cape Horn and call the way up the west coast of North and South America, facing some of the harshest seas in the world. The was also a chance that the ship could sink if the weather was bad enough. The problem with the Santa Fe Trail was that I was not as long as the Oregon Trail and also you had to have a boat and a wagon if you wanted to use it from coming from East coast. Over all I would take the Oregon Trail to go from New York to the Gold Fields in California. This trail passed through many states that were populated developed enough that if you needed supplies you could easily stop and resupply. The Oregon Trail was the safest and most reliable trail to take if you wanted to go to the Gold Fields of California coming from New York.
ReplyDelete-Lewis Grassie
In 1849 during the gold rush,the route that I would have taken from New York City to the Gold Fields of California would have been the Oregon Trail. To me, it is the safest way to travel there. I could get a large group of people together to come along with me, therefore if we ran into any Indians, we would have enough people to protect each other. Also, at nights we could use our wagons as a barricade to keep the Indians away. Plus I would rather run into Indians than be attacked by Columbians who would want to steal everything that you have so you couldn't even make it to California, by attempting to get there through the Santa Fe route. Also, This trip is shorter than going around Cape Horn, and traveling with wagons was safer than attempting to get your boat through the rough conditions of the waves that the Cape Horn route would offer. Traveling by land with many people for protection is just overall safer than traveling by boat where waves can pull it apart, or Columbians can take everything you worked for away from you.
ReplyDelete-India coard
The most efficient sea route to take from New York City in 1849 to get to California, hoping for gold would be through South America by boat. Even though it is the longest journey, lasting four to eight months, taking the easy way out isn’t always the smartest. Not only that, but although the other trips were shorter they entailed many more dangers. For instance, traveling through the panama was the shortest route, taking two to three months and would maybe get you there first, but it involved coming across a jungle full of deadly diseases such as malaria and yellow fever and cholera. Going across the panama jungle wasn’t cheap and therefore would put the travelers in debt, which they would have to pay off through months of working. As a result would lead to a much slower journey. The other option which was the second fastest to through the Oregon Trail was not that safe either. There would be some battles fought considering the territorial Native Americans that lived in the region. There would definitely be numerous surprise attacks, which would be hard to win and ultimately terminate the mission. There were also diseases along the way: cholera, mountain fever, pneumonia, and diphtheria. That leaves me to the South American sea route, which I believed was the smartest route to take because it offered some kind of safety and was the simplest. As an explorer, taking a sea route seemed the most appealing. This route was on a boat, which could get crowded and unhygienic. However, I had traveled long journeys before and been successful which left me confident. Because of this, I also knew its advantages such as being able to stop at ports along the coastline whenever needed and creating many opportunities. I would be able to trade, restock necessities, and discover new places. So if I were to run into a storm or rats in my boat, I could just stop along the way to fix any problem I had. Therefore, all the benefits from the longer journey outweighed the disadvantages of the shorter journeys, which would successfully lead me to the gold in California.
ReplyDeleteSophie Roberts