Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's quite clear that Salt lake city dominates this region since there are no other major cities, however there are a few medium sized cities that are experiencing some serious growth. So how do you think this region will look like in the next 10-20 years? will there be any other new cities that will have metros of 1 million +? what about 30-50 years?
Since this map defines its regions based on natural resources and rangeland, i.e. suitability for economy based on resource extraction/meat production, is your question aimed at the growth or wane of the relevant industries?
With the move towards alternative energy and possibly a decline in demand for cattle products over the next century, or so, I would say that the future of the intermountain region may be bleak as those industries contract into the Great Plains and Texas/Oklahoma regions.
Since this map defines its regions based on natural resources and rangeland, i.e. suitability for economy based on resource extraction/meat production, is your question aimed at the growth or wane of the relevant industries?
With the move towards alternative energy and possibly a decline in demand for cattle products over the next century, or so, I would say that the future of the intermountain region may be bleak as those industries contract into the Great Plains and Texas/Oklahoma regions.
No it doesn't have to do with resources but since you mentioned it that is something that can be discussed, for me personally I'm more interested in population/job growth, that map btw is just a map I found
Denver might be on the Plains but it could have the most influence over this area.
I find it odd to exclude NE Washington and parts of Idaho and Montana. This is a good example of one agency defining areas based on their own criteria, which don't match what other agencies do for their different criteria (in other threads people talk incessantly about "official" boundaries as if someone is in charge of such things).
Do you think that any of the metro areas will combine into one? for instance Spokane and Coeur d'Alene or SLC, Ogden and Provo?
Salt Lake City, Ogden and Provo are already grouped together as "the Wasatch Front," but I think they'll always continue to be separate metro areas. Roughly 2/3 of the population of Utah lives along this 80-mile stretch.
Salt Lake City in and of itself isn't really a huge city, it pales in comparison to Denver and even Portland in a downtown built up environment. Much of what makes the SLC Metro area large and populated are the suburbs.
Boise is smaller compared to SLC, but its downtown has a more urban/walkable and more vibrant vibe to it. If Denver is being excluded, SLC and Boise and Spokane will always be the big cities in the IW.
The cities in this area of the country are isolated and hundreds of miles apart and each is the "big" city for a large area. In many regards, Boise is just as major of a city as SLC is in this lonely area of the country.
I know it doesn't match your map, but I would consider Denver the big city in the Mountain West.
I'm leaving out Denver because it's kind of a given, plus it's on the other side of the mountains, wouldn't Denver have a stronger connection to the plains than with Utah and Nevada? Also intermountain literally means between the mountains, in this case the Rockies and the Cascades/Sierras
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.