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.
The definition of "biodiversity" is more complicated than a Dictionary.com entry. Generally there are multiple types of biodiversity; Genetic or species biodiversity, as well as ecologic or ecosystem biodiversity.
I've lived in both areas (Florida and the Carolinas/Washington) and I get what you're saying about some of the forests in the south having a large number of species represented in one area, but the silly jabs at the PacNW are kind of amusing. The number of different ecological zones out here is staggering, so it's hard to take your generalization seriously. Which types of forest bore you? Temperate rainforest, ponderosa stands, old growth fir and cedar? And how is the area overrated for nature? Take Highway 20 near me. You can easily go from kayking and whale watching in Puget Sound to snowshoeing near glaciers in North Cascades National Park to wine tasting in the desert- in a 3 to 4 hour drive. Hardly overrated in my book...
Please, the white-bread nature of the PNW is drab and boring compared to the colorful ecosystems and life you will find in the Southeast. All those rainforests, ponderosa stands, old growth forests, etc in the PNW are all comprised of the same few basic tree/plant species; food chains/webs also aren't very complex. Organism are just too typical.
Meanwhile, in the Southeast, an acre of forest will contain more species of organism than can be found in the entire Washington State; the ecology is also far more complex, with more intricate/dynamic food webs. Organisms from the Southeast tend to be more alien-looking/exotic appearing compared to those elsewhere in the country.
The more I hike the forests of the Deep South, the more I realize just how much more exciting the forests of the region are compared to those of the PNW. The PNW forests are very boring and quite low in biodiversity; just your typical "Touching Spirit Bear" style wilderness. That region is overrated for nature. Meanwhile, the forests of the Deep South look alive, colorful, and exciting, filled with all sorts of exotic organisms; unlike the PNW forests, the ecosystem of the Deep South is alive and active year-round.
Are you serious? You've never been to the Northwest, have you? The coastal PNW forests are known for being green, alive, and active all year round. Remember, it rarely freezes in winter near the water. The higher elevations and interior areas get snowfall, of course, but the lower elevations remain green and lush.
I'm not sure what "Touching Spirit Bear" wilderness even means, but the forests in the Northwest range from temperate rainforest, with cedars, redwoods, douglas firs, and hanging moss, to dry pine forests that are vastly different in character. There are also areas of deciduous forest (aspens, big-leaf maples, for example). So, no they are not all alike, and only someone who'd never seen them would ever think so.
Please, the white-bread nature of the PNW is drab and boring compared to the colorful ecosystems and life you will find in the Southeast. All those rainforests, ponderosa stands, old growth forests, etc in the PNW are all comprised of the same few basic tree/plant species; food chains/webs also aren't very complex. Organism are just too typical.
Meanwhile, in the Southeast, an acre of forest will contain more species of organism than can be found in the entire Washington State; the ecology is also far more complex, with more intricate/dynamic food webs. Organisms from the Southeast tend to be more alien-looking/exotic appearing compared to those elsewhere in the country.
Gotta laugh at this one. While the population around here may be lacking a bit in ethnic diversity and the weather in some areas remarkably predictable, the scenery is certainly far from boring.
Again, I lived in the Southeast for most of my life, so I can easily compare my experiences. Currently, I can walk from my house down to Bellingham Bay on the Salish Sea, where I can see numerous mountain ranges, as well as seals, otters, and a pack of transient killer whales were photographed last week. I frequently see bald eagles and other interesting birds of prey, including a recent sighting of a Great Horned Owl. I can then walk on a trail from the water that looks like some type of prehistoric hobbit land to exotic old growth forest stands on several ridges of the Chuckanut Mountains (which are technically Cascade Foothills but are as large as typical eastern mountains), where coyotes, cougars and black bears live. If I drive just thirty miles east, I can go on a hike from a lush rain forest to alpine scenery and literally walk out onto a glacier on the side of a volcano in a wilderness and next to one of the least visited national parks in the country, with mountain views that rival anything in the lower 48 states. Along the way, abundant flora and fauna exist, including (luckily, not often) grizzly bears and grey wolves. As to your comment about year-round nature being limited to the southeast, I can only assume that you're not really familiar with this region and the moderating effect of the Pacific Ocean on the climate.
While I understand what you're saying about certain zones having limited diversity- like Ponderosa stands- A) It doesn't apply to all type of forest- lowland and foothill forests, for example, have a tremendous amount of diversity and B) even the landscapes with limited diversity are literally right next to completely different biomes that frequently feature completely different plant and animal life. So again, a relatively short hike or drive can take you to completely different scenery and wildlife.
As much as I liked the change in scenery driving from the NC Piedmont to the mountains or the beach, 100 miles as the crow flies from the coast to lowland rain forest through glaciated alpine peaks and back down through into shrub-steppe landscapes and into the desert is hard to beat.
It sounds like you've never really done much exploring in the area. If you're ever interested in visiting, I'll be glad to give you sample itineraries that will display the diversity in the region!
I grew up in New Orleans area and left after college and have lived in PNW more or less the last 20+ years. I prefer the PNW overall but you can have a nice life in either depending on your preferences. I do miss the food and the warmer culture that is part of living in the South. I appreciate the natural beauty, better job opportunities, lower crime, and better schools (when my children were young) that are advantages of the PNW. About the climate, I would prefer Atlanta climate over the PNW except for southern Oregon. To me Seattle versus New Orleans on climate is a toss up, they both have their pros and cons.
The more I hike the forests of the Deep South, the more I realize just how much more exciting the forests of the region are compared to those of the PNW. The PNW forests are very boring and quite low in biodiversity; just your typical "Touching Spirit Bear" style wilderness. That region is overrated for nature. Meanwhile, the forests of the Deep South look alive, colorful, and exciting, filled with all sorts of exotic organisms; unlike the PNW forests, the ecosystem of the Deep South is alive and active year-round.
Much of the Deep South's forests look dead and dormant in winter. Brown, barren, no leaves, etc... compared to the lush, green evergreens of the PNW. And have fun trying to enjoy those forests in the summer with that oppressive heat and humidity that is unlivable w/o indoor AC and all the violent/deadly weather there.
The Northwest has almost infinitely more biodiversity. Everything from year-round glaciers to rainforests to deserts. Some places have a fraction of the precipitation as the driest part of the South, and others have more than the wettest part. Snow ranges from about zero to literally the snowiest place on earth. You can sunbathe and snow ski on the same summer day. Forests come in many varieties in the Northwest. To say nothing of sand dunes, sagebrush, wine regions, wheat field regions, the Puget Lowlands, and so on.
You sure about that?
Top ten states for Biodiversity.
1. California
2. Texas
3. Arizona
4. New Mexico
5. Alabama
6. Georgia
7. Florida
8. Oregon
9. North Carolina
10. Utah
Where's Washington and Oregon? hmm.
I know this thread is old, but a lot people underestimated the Deep South's biodiversity, and urbanity. New Orleans, Charleston, Savannah, Birmingham and etc.
1. California
2. Texas
3. Arizona
4. New Mexico
5. Alabama
6. Georgia
7. Florida
8. Oregon
9. North Carolina
10. Utah
Where's Washington and Oregon? hmm.
I know this thread is old, but a lot people underestimated the Deep South's biodiversity, and urbanity. New Orleans, Charleston, Savannah, Birmingham and etc.
"Where's Washington and Oregon?" - Oregon was ranked 8th on the list that you posted just above your own comment...
What is with this silly argument about biodiversity? People bored at work?
Wait- don't most city vs. city arguments involve people that are bored at work? But yes, the term "biodiversity" has been drastically overused in this conversation...
Last edited by bartonizer; 05-18-2016 at 05:08 PM..
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.
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.
