Is the Mississippi Delta the most rural area in the south (Forest: houses, live)

[Rpadams]

I'm from drew ms and I think in my opinion the delta is the most rural area in the south eastern united states. Aside from swamp lands in LA and mountains in the Ozarks I feel the delta is the most rural practically livable area in the south?

[viverlibre]

There are areas in GA and TN that are very rural once you get outside of the major populations centers, Toomsboro, GA is one such place. Since the delta is flat and you can see forever and drive on roads that are straight shots from one town to the next, I never feel isolated there.

[An Einnseanair]

If you define "rural" as "few people and towns", then no it is not. The most rural areas in the south would be various areas in the Appalachians. Western part of Virginia, eastern Kentucky, western North Carolina, etc.

And these areas don't even come close to the ruralness of the western USA.

[Rpadams]

I was talking about strictly vastness of basically nothin Ness. I feel the mountains are different kind of rural I'm talking about farm lands just nothing but farm as far as the eyes can see. And I'm talking strictly southeastern

[annie_himself]

I would cal it very rural, all of the MS delta.

[Ivory Lee Spurlock]

I bet the Mississippi Delta region is one of the flattest and least populated regions in the Southeast. Outside of the Appalachian region of TN, KY, VA, NC, WV and the swamp region in South Florida around Lake Okeechobee is extremely flat and very sparsely populated. After those two regions, I'd say Mississippi Delta region is the 3rd most rural area of the Southeast.

[An Einnseanair]

Originally Posted by Rpadams

I was talking about strictly vastness of basically nothin Ness. I feel the mountains are different kind of rural I'm talking about farm lands just nothing but farm as far as the eyes can see. And I'm talking strictly southeastern

That's just it. A farm isn't "nothing"; it's a farm. Yes, the Delta region is very rural. But there are roads everywhere, houses everywhere (spread out, but there), small towns, churches, stores, etc.

I have traveled a lot for work all over the country, and there are much more rural areas than the MS Delta. But if you want to limit it to the south-east, then as already mentioned there are the Appalachians (for what it's worth, eastern TN can't really be considered "rural" because it's mostly National Forest/National Park land). But you changed the definition to include "flat". Then comes the swampland of Florida, except that's also mostly protected public land so really can't count. What should count is the Cajun-country swampland around the Atchafalaya river in Louisiana... little to no development whatsoever, but people do live there. And we haven't even mentioned Texas yes, which is technically part of the "southeastern United States". Several Texas counties are included on lists of Counties with the Least Population Density, with densities as low as 0.12 person / square mile for Loving County, Texas. By comparison Mississippi's least dense county, Issaquena, comes in at a relatively urban 3.4 people/square mile.

Honestly, you could keep changing the definition of "rural" to eventually eliminate everywhere else and finally elevate the MS Delta to "most rural". You also seem to be implying that you consider a lack of trees to be a requirement for being "rural", which definitely puts the Delta at or near the top in the Southeast.

But the reality is that, while the MS Delta is one of the most desolate and economically hopeless regions in the US, is it not the worst.

[Mr.Garcia]

I know this is off-subject but I must say the MS-delta area has some of the best blues.

[annie_himself]

Originally Posted by Mr.Garcia

I know this is off-subject but I must say the MS-delta area has some of the best blues.

Mississippi and blues is like New Orleans and jazz.