U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-09-2018, 07:34 AM
 
Location: Howard County, Maryland
5,672 posts, read 3,649,479 times
Reputation: 16617

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dialgatime321 View Post
Y'know, as a a resident of Austin, Texas, (specifically Williamson County, a suburb of Austin) I actually feel like it is quite annoying when people try to lump my county in with the "Great Plains" region. I have been to Dallas several times, as well as Houston and Beaumont and feel like Dallas is in more or less the same cultural region as Austin (obviously Austin is unique but, I feel like it mostly just feels that way because it's so blue in a red state. However, Texas is rapidly becoming more blue, and Austin is being filled with new immigration from California and New York, so it doesn't really feel so special to me anymore, honestly). The "Keep Austin Weird" campaign was mostly a failure, Austin is rapidly becoming just like any other city, it's honestly kind of sad, but whatever. My father was from Beamont, and I can definetely tell you he seems more like a southerner than anything. Everyone I know considers Houston and Beamont and Galveston "Deep South".

I lived a few years in Nashville, and I can definetely tell you that geographically and culturally, Austin and Nashville are very similar, except Austin is hotter. I also feel like Dallas belongs in that same cultural region- certainly not "Great Plains"-this area feels nothing like Kansas. I LOVE your Apphozarka region, I feel like it fits the attitudes and cultures of the regions perfectly, with a strong, individualistic attitude throughout the Upland South. Overall, I like Colin Woodard's definitions better https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C...iuITE7sUlbr3M:

I feel like they better represent the region, and his explanations explain Austin culture perfectly, and our similarities with Portland-as Portland was formed from Yankee settlers trying to make a Utopia on the coast mixed with Appalachian individualism and self-expression, and Austin is Yankee hippies trying to make a Utopia in Texas mixed with Appalachian individualism and self-expression.

The OP specifically stated that he was not including cultural considerations in his regional groupings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-09-2018, 07:44 AM
 
Location: Howard County, Maryland
5,672 posts, read 3,649,479 times
Reputation: 16617
Quote:
Once all the preceding criteria are satisfied, the map should be reviewed for "recognizability" (I basically mean plausibility). The heuristic here is when a person looks for a county they've lived in for 5+ years and sees which region it's been assigned to, their immediate reaction should not be "that is definitely not correct."

I've lived in Howard County, MD for 18 years. When I look at this map and see the region in which my county is placed, my immediate reaction is "yeah, this seems correct." So there you go.

I would have put all of southern New Jersey in with the Mid-Atlantic Region, but I may be allowing my subconscious cultural biases to influence that reaction. But certainly in terms of economic connections, that area is tied in much more strongly with Philadelphia and New York than it is with Wilmington or Baltimore or Washington.

I know that you (the OP) have specifically refrained from including political considerations in your map, and I applaud you for that. But honestly, I tend to think that rearranging our state boundaries along the regional lines suggested here (or, more likely, 2 or 3 subregions within each region) would reduce the effect of "blue people in a red state" or vice versa. Grouping like with like in terms of natural land formations and dominant industries will, de facto, tend to group like with like in terms of political persuasion as well. (Yes, I realize that rearranging our state boundaries is not on the table; but it's an interesting thought exercise.)

Good work, OP. Looking forward to seeing the results of this project.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 08:21 AM
 
Location: Mars City
5,091 posts, read 2,145,040 times
Reputation: 7505
More nonsense over lines of division and separation. People who can't exist without boxes to stick others in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 06:01 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,011 posts, read 102,621,396 times
Reputation: 33075
Colorado:
Adams, Arapahoe, Broomfield, Denver and Elbert Counties are not "mountain" counties. Larimer, Boulder, Jefferson, Douglas and El Paso Counties are only "mountain" in their western areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 06:24 PM
 
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
9,433 posts, read 18,339,314 times
Reputation: 11915
Quote:
Originally Posted by PosadasJ View Post
Thanks so much! And I totally hear you re: the boreal forests in northern New England vs. the coastal plains in southern New England. The challenge I faced is where to put those northern forest areas. Obviously they're too small to be their own region. If the map were purely about ecoregions, the least-bad solution would be put them with the Midwestern "North Woods" (northeastern Minnesota, northern Wisconsin, and the UP and northern LP in Michigan) in a combined "North County" region. The problem is, the other major factor in my map was economic links, as these two halves of a proposed "North Country" are much more closely economically linked to other regions than to each other. (The other problem is that no one from either of these halves would think of themselves as being from the region that the other half is part of..
You need to get a bit further north into Canada, like well north of the St. Lawrence river before you start seeing boreal forests. Northern New England has lots of maple and other northern deciduous hardwoods, and white pines in their forests.

Though coastal regions level off in marshy lowlands in southern New England, I would characterize the region as "plains". The Delmarva peninsula is more coastal plains. In Mass, Conn, and RI you don't have to get to far inland before you start seeing a good amount of hills.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2018, 09:13 PM
 
Location: Appalachian New York, Formerly Louisiana
4,101 posts, read 4,737,517 times
Reputation: 5374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert_SW_77 View Post
You need to get a bit further north into Canada, like well north of the St. Lawrence river before you start seeing boreal forests. Northern New England has lots of maple and other northern deciduous hardwoods, and white pines in their forests.

Though coastal regions level off in marshy lowlands in southern New England, I would characterize the region as "plains". The Delmarva peninsula is more coastal plains. In Mass, Conn, and RI you don't have to get to far inland before you start seeing a good amount of hills.
Absolutely true, this. While it never got a name like the Piedmont or Allegheny/Cumberland, most of coastal New England is still an Appalachian runoff with ancient worn foothills gently rolling about. Pretty much nothing in New England is a proper prairie or plain.

Lots of wetland forest though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2018, 06:17 AM
 
Location: Texoma / Atlanta
19 posts, read 9,837 times
Reputation: 71
Default Here's the final version: "United Regions of America"

Here's how the final version ended up! Comments on C-D were very helpful. I know several recent posters would have drawn the boundaries differently, but I did my best to remain consistent with the same principles and, where a county/metro area could go either way, to place it where it would likely evoke the least amount of local un-recognizability.



And see the website: <https://www.jeremyposadas.org/regions>
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2018, 10:41 AM
 
7 posts, read 2,009 times
Reputation: 15
I would stretch the pink region of Mid-Atlantic North up to Hartford, Providence and Boston on there.


Mohawk Valley (Utica to Albany) being lumped in with the Adirondacks and Northern New England is fine, but no way should that be lumped in with Boston and the others. Northern New England is different than Southern New England.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2018, 10:43 AM
 
7 posts, read 2,009 times
Reputation: 15
Also, Hawaii isn't West Coast. It's entirely different than anywhere else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2018, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Appalachian New York, Formerly Louisiana
4,101 posts, read 4,737,517 times
Reputation: 5374
Quote:
Originally Posted by majorsystemerror View Post
I would stretch the pink region of Mid-Atlantic North up to Hartford, Providence and Boston on there.


Mohawk Valley (Utica to Albany) being lumped in with the Adirondacks and Northern New England is fine, but no way should that be lumped in with Boston and the others. Northern New England is different than Southern New England.
Remember, this is primarily based on ecoregion with as little hair splitting as possible. All of New England is geologically related and climatically similar (relatively speaking). It is not primarily based on cultural implications.

I do agree on Hawaii being entirely different though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top