How would native Texans divide Texas? (Houston, Dallas: new home, neighborhoods, university)

[jfre81]

WF is one of those cities that could go in multiple regions, like Victoria, which you could put in the South Texas state instead of the Southeast/Houston one.

This is a good point - should this ever happen you'll have some of the smaller cities/towns split over which region/state to be put into.

And they'd have to amend the Texas state pledge once again - *Texas, divisible into five or six.*

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by blueskies49

While we're on the subject, exactly where IS the boundary for East Texas? I always thought it was around Forney which is about a 15-minute drive east of Dallas. My hubby is from there and you couldn't get any more Southern/East Texas than him. A coworker of mine from Mineola in deep East Texas didn't think so. But very recently I heard an auto commercial on the radio inviting customers to "come on down to Mesquite in East Texas!" Mesquite?? It's an eastern suburb of Dallas but I didn't think it would be far enough east.

I guess maybe it depends who the Texan is.

Hmmmm. THAT is a very good question, Miss BlueSkies, and a lot depends, I would guess, on which route one is taking heading east as to where true East Texas begins.

I get out that way quite a bit (we vacation and visit a lot in the Caddo Lake and Jefferson area) and I have taken several different routes over the years.

Anyway, coming out of Dallas, I would say East Texas begins right around Greenville. This is especially noticeable if one cuts off of I-30 to take Hwy 69 down toward Mineola and Tyler. Seems like just the other side of Greenville, the whole "moodscape" begins to change from the sorta of "vibrance" of North Texas into that gentle fatalism of East Texas and the Deep South.

Along U.S. 82, I would say Bonham is about where the two regions merge.

What do the rest of y'all think?

[blueskies49]

Originally Posted by TexasReb

Some great rationale there, JFRE. BUT...I would fight tooth and nail over Wichita Falls being included in with a region that also includes Amarillo, Lubbock, or Abilene. Wichita Falls is more north Texas than west. It really is.

I agree - WF is definitely in North Texas, not West Texas!

Bonham and Greenville, huh? You don't think the line would come straight south from Bonham to maybe include Kaufman, Gun Barrel City and points south? Maybe those would be borderline areas.

[solytaire]

This is an excellent discussion, and one that often gets lost in fodder, as logic simply gives way to an ensuing arguement over which city is better (Houston, Dallas, SA, etc.) But I personally would divide Texas into these geographic subregions:

1) East Texas - Tyler, (my hometown, as its capital lol) to Louisiana, down to around Jasper or a bit further south, over to somewhere around the western reaches of Huntsville, and back up.

2) North Texas - (obviously Capital: Dallas) west of Terrell to include Dallas MSA obviously as its capital, meaning from the red river, down to somewhere just north of Waco back over just east of Abeliene. But does not include Waco.

3) Central Texas - (Capital: Austin) Bryan/CS and west thru Austin up to Killeen, includes Waco, and back down to Bryan/CS


4) Gulf Coast - (Capital: Houston) Houston, down to Corpus Christi would form what is to be referred to as Eastern South Texas (NOT SOUTHEAST TEXAS!) or more broadly, it would be termed the Gulf Coast portion of Texas.

5) South Texas - (Capital: San Antonio) Anything west of Seguin (including SA) and more Southerly than Austin.

6) West Texas - All points West and Northwest of SA = West Texas (Capital: Midland/Odessa. lets face it folx, theres not much going on in El Paso these days for a city its size, and Midland/Odessa is the fastest growing city in West Texas and one of the fastest growing in the state.)

7) Panhandle Texas -All points north of Abeliene and West of Witchita Falls will comprise the panhandle. (Capital: Lubbock. Hey, they have a D1 football team! and one of the more prestigious state universities in TX).

My divisions may be a bit too intricate for the purposes of this discussion. So in the interest of staying within the parameters of the terms originally set forth, I would propose that the Panhandle and West Texas combine into one synonomous state. And the Texas Gulf Coast and South Texas could also unify to become one state.

There. With that provision, it would make 5 different states!..lol

[momof2dfw]

solytaire, you dare put Austin and Bryan/CS in the same "mini state". I don't think that would be a wise idea for some reason.

[solytaire]

ok...sorry...lol, then Bryan/CS would have to come to East Texas...its only 45 minutes from Huntsville.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by blueskies49

I agree - WF is definitely in North Texas, not West Texas!

Bonham and Greenville, huh? You don't think the line would come straight south from Bonham to maybe include Kaufman, Gun Barrel City and points south? Maybe those would be borderline areas.

I am really less familiar with the 82 route as I am the I-30/Hwy 69 route thru Greenville when heading out to Caddo Lake. Next time I take it though, Iwill pay better attention.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by solytaire

ok...sorry...lol, then Bryan/CS would have to come to East Texas...its only 45 minutes from Huntsville.

Solytaire? BlueSkies and I were discussing earlier where one is getting into East Texas. As one from that region, what do you think, as one is headed east out of Dallas or on 82 from Wichita Falls? We both seemed to think that it would be around Greenville on the former route. Not to say, of course, that Greenville is as "East Texas" as is Tyler or Marshall, but just that about there, something seems to change.

Along 82, I was less sure, perhaps because I really don't take that route much. I said Bonham, but actually, just thinking back, I think it might be, as she said, more west of that point. Perhaps about Sherman. There, BlueSky, there's my answer! LOL

Now, let the expert speak! Your turn, Solytaire!

[solytaire]

well TexasReb, thanks for requesting my input. As a native Tylerite, and one who was a frequent transient between Tyler, Longview, and Marshall while living with & visiting my most immediate family (nearly all of whom reside in Longview & Marshall); I am inclined to say that your assessment of the gateway to East Texas is far more accurate than my initial assertion of Terrell being the westernmost extent of East Texas. With the unending urban sprawl so prevalent in the DFW MSA, Terrell will likely become an eastern suburb of Dallas in short order. So...I would like to retract that boundary to right around your Greenville area, down to Maybank and venturing slightly diagonal down through Bryan/CS.and back to the LA border. There thats my story and Im stickin to it...lol..unless someone can convince me otherwise...

Initially, I hadnt included Bryan/College Station in my most gratuitous definition of East Texas. But from observations taken during my visits to the city, it bears striking resemblance to Tyler, in both cultural/demographic aspects & topographical aspects; though perhaps with a few less trees. Its conservative attitude seemed very remniscent of the nanogentrified atmosphere which prevails in Tyler. But Ive never lived in Bryan/CS, so it may have been a misjudgement on my behalf. But for the aformentioned reason it is included in my definition of East Texas proper. Deep East Texas? Far from it. But certainly East Texas moreso than Central. Am I wrong?

[TheHarvester]

Great thread! Three different criteria can be easily used for dividing Texas into separate states:

1. Culture
2. Dominant cities and population distribution
3. Geological and ecological (natural) features

I don't think you can ignore any of these factors when dividing the state. For example, while San Antonio has much more of a "South Texas" feel and Austin is "Central Texas", the problem with separating the 2 cities is that they're rapidly growing into a single entity as development fills in the spaces between the cities.

I'd put SE Texas in its own state, dominated by Houston and including the upper gulf coastal counties, reaching up to College Station, Nacogdoches, Huntsville...

Central Texas would have to include both San Antonio and Austin, up through Killeen/Temple but not including Waco for cultural reasons. It would extend west to include San Angelo and east to the boundary of the Bryan/College Station metro area (but not including that metro!)

Northeast Texas would be dominated by DFW and would include everything from Texarkana to Wichita Falls to Waco.

The Panhandle would be annexed by Oklahoma.

West Texas is everything west of San Angelo, south to Del Rio, north to the Panhandle, with the obvious capital being El Paso.

South Texas would be an international zone that is co-administered by Mexico and the USA. Seriously, when you're south of San Antonio you're basically in Mexico except the laws and labels are different.

But it would be more interesting to divide up ALL the states and change the configuration of the USA. There should be a High Plains state, for example, which would include the Texas Panhandle and parts of eastern New Mexico, Amarillo would be its capital, and it would also include far east Colorado, the Oklahoma panhandle, west Kansas and west Nebraska. New England's tiny states could be merged --- such as Vermont and New Hampshire. I know the locals in those states would hate me for saying it, but they're only separate states because of historical accidents. Each state is the size of a typical Western county. Rhode Island, MA, and CT should all be merged into a single state. Maine can stay as is, it's got enough size and unique geology to make it separate.