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 11-10-2018, 11:12 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by PosadasJ View Post
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>
Still, Re 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. Elbert isn't even considered metro Denver, it's considered "the eastern plains" of Colorado.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-10-2018, 04:53 PM
 
7 posts, read 2,005 times
Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by CookieSkoon View Post
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.

If itís ecoregions then my point still stands. Boston is not similar ecologically to Northern New England or Upstate NY areas highlighted.

Boston also peaks in the fall the same time as New York and Philadelphia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2018, 10:01 AM
 
Location: Texoma / Atlanta
19 posts, read 9,817 times
Reputation: 71
Default Re: Denver, Austin, and Dallas-Fort Worth

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
Still, Re 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. Elbert isn't even considered metro Denver, it's considered "the eastern plains" of Colorado.
Hi Katarina, OP here:
(1) I used the Census Bureau's definitions of metro area boundaries, because they are a nationally-consistent set of criteria, and Elbert is part of the Census-defined Denver metro area.

(2) One of my rules is that all of the counties of a Census-defined metro area must be placed in the same region. So Adams, Arapahoe, Broomfield, Denver, Elbert, Douglas, Jefferson, Clear Creek, Park, and Gilpin all have to be assigned together, since they all together comprise the Denver metro area.

(3) Another rule I followed for metro areas that are right on the border of two of my regions is to assign them to the region for which they play a more significant economic role. Denver plays a much more significant economic role for my Mountain West region than it does for my Great Plains region. (This rule is also why, for example, Dallas-Fort Worth was assigned to Great Plains rather than either Deep South or Appohzarka, and Pittsburgh and Cincinatti were assigned to Appohzarka rather than Great Lakes or Heartland.)


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. [...] 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.
Hi Dialgatime:
(1) I appreciate your perspective. But the ecoregions taxonomy (see link below) clearly places both the Austin and Dallas-Fort Worth metro areas in the Great Plains ecoregion. Moreover, see my explanation in my reply to Katarina Witt about how I handled metros on the border of two of my regions.

(2) As user Bus Man has already pointed out, my goal is very different from Woodard's. Whereas he focused on "culture" (which he defined in very vague ways, and completely ignored the role of non-white people in defining the "culture" of a region), I focused on ecology and economics. All of the arguments you've made regarding Austin and Dallas-Fort Worth make perfect sense if one is using Woodard's criteria ó they just aren't the criteria I used.

Link to ecoregions taxonomy: https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/ecoregions

Last edited by PosadasJ; 11-11-2018 at 10:03 AM.. Reason: Mis-identified earlier posters; clearer title
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2018, 10:12 AM
 
Location: Texoma / Atlanta
19 posts, read 9,817 times
Reputation: 71
Default Why New England Was Kept Whole

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.
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.
Hi Desert_SW_77 & majorsystemerror: OP here. While you are quite right that there are clear differences, topographically and vegetation-wise, between Northern New England and Southern New England, three different rules of mine required they be kept together:

(1) My rule of parsimony: I wanted no more than 20 regions, ideally 15, and a region couldn't be separately delineated if it's population wasn't approximately 1/20th of the whole US population. Northern New England clearly doesn't belong in Great Lakes, but it is too small population-wise to stand on its own.

(2) My rule of rural gravity: metro areas must be assigned to the same region as the adjacent rural areas for which they are hubs. All of the metros in Southern New England are the hubs for rural areas in Northern New England.

(3) My rule of local recognizability: The number of New Englanders who would have shared your concerns would be VASTLY drowned out by the number of New Englanders (both Northern and Southern NE) who would have howled had I put Boston/Providence/Hartford in with New York/Philly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2018, 12:52 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,633 posts, read 27,060,365 times
Reputation: 9577
I guess I can understand DC in the Mid Atlantic South but I still don't see the reasons for separating DC and Baltimore even if it is economic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2018, 12:57 PM
 
5,460 posts, read 2,298,642 times
Reputation: 16440
Atlanta and upstate South Carolina and Charlotte should not be Deep South.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2018, 06:25 PM
 
Location: New Mexico
6,567 posts, read 3,664,491 times
Reputation: 12354
I like that you adjusted the Missouri River counties in Missouri.
I still think the counties west of Albuquerque and extending partly across northern Arizona should be southwestern and not mountain west. One doesn't notice a significant change going west from Albuquerque except for an increase in lava flows and volcanic relics mixed in with the usual desert landscpes. Volcanism plays a key role in much of that area along with SW desert canyons and mesas clear up to Canyon de Chelly, Monument Valley and the Little Colorado. It's a hard boundary to call.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2018, 06:38 PM
 
Location: Debatable
427 posts, read 186,784 times
Reputation: 759
Excellent map. One of the only good ones I've seen. Well done!

Question, I am unfamiliar with the deep south: why does it jut out into Appalachia like that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2018, 07:51 PM
 
5,859 posts, read 14,049,839 times
Reputation: 3485
Quote:
Originally Posted by sad_hotline View Post
Excellent map. One of the only good ones I've seen. Well done!

Question, I am unfamiliar with the deep south: why does it jut out into Appalachia like that?
Not my map, but if I may answer, the Deep South-jutting area is the Mississippi Delta, which is quintessentially Deep South.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2018, 08:11 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,002 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059
Quote:
Originally Posted by PosadasJ View Post
Hi Katarina, OP here:
(1) I used the Census Bureau's definitions of metro area boundaries, because they are a nationally-consistent set of criteria, and Elbert is part of the Census-defined Denver metro area.

(2) One of my rules is that all of the counties of a Census-defined metro area must be placed in the same region. So Adams, Arapahoe, Broomfield, Denver, Elbert, Douglas, Jefferson, Clear Creek, Park, and Gilpin all have to be assigned together, since they all together comprise the Denver metro area.

(3) Another rule I followed for metro areas that are right on the border of two of my regions is to assign them to the region for which they play a more significant economic role. Denver plays a much more significant economic role for my Mountain West region than it does for my Great Plains region. (This rule is also why, for example, Dallas-Fort Worth was assigned to Great Plains rather than either Deep South or Appohzarka, and Pittsburgh and Cincinatti were assigned to Appohzarka rather than Great Lakes or Heartland.)

<snip>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denver_metropolitan_area
Denver MSA:
"The central part of the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) includes Denver and three immediately adjacent counties: Jefferson County to the west, Adams County to the north and east, and Arapahoe County to the south and east. The continuously urbanized area extends northwest into the City and County of Broomfield, bordering Jefferson and Adams counties, and south into Douglas County, adjoining Arapahoe County. Also included in the federally defined MSA are four rural counties: Elbert County on the southeastern prairie and Clear Creek, Gilpin, and Park counties in the Rocky Mountains."

I don't know why they do that. Elbert is really, really rural. The other three are more "wildland" than rural. But thanks for the explanation.

Having grown up in Pittsburgh, you got that one right!
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