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.
I guess there is a transition zone between the Upland South and the Great Lakes regions, I just don't think it's that larger, or maybe not large enough to warrant it's own name... probably just the two colors sprinkled together more?
What is that little area in western/north central PA called? Is it just Appalachia and Ohio River Valley combined? It's hard for me to distinguish the colors right now.
So, I made a map of the different regions of the U.S. in Windows paint.
Obviously these are my interpretations of the cultural differences in the United States and yours will surely differ.
Do you agree? If you do not agree, tell me why.
As far as the "Deep South " culturally, South Florida's anomalous characteristical features in comparison took shape in the 1950's while South Louisiana's anomalous characteristical features began taking shape in the 1880's.
NY is mid Atlantic and has never been part of New England.
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland
How is NY mid Atlantic? It's more like the midwest, isn't it? It's not even on the Atlantic.
Both comments are mistaken!
Long story but New York was considered part of New England in the 1600s. At least until 1688, when the New England Confederation broke up. There is a reason why New York and New Jersey have elements of the New England local government structure even today.
The English in fact did not accept Dutch rule of New Netherland. A lot of people do not realize it but the Pilgrims were actually heading for the Hudson River area in 1620 but they ran out of food so they stopped in what is now Massachusetts. If they had continued then they would have beat the arrival of the Dutch settlers and today New York City might well be called Plymouth!
Of course, New York State borders the Atlantic. You must know that LOL. The majority of the population lives in either the 10 counties that border the Atlantic or that are nearby.
I really like how you broke down the Northeast into the Mid-Atlantic and New England. An area for improvement would be the Great Lakes. I don't necessarily consider Central Ohio or the lower portions of the state to be in The Great Lakes region.
I think that Florida, Texas, Hawaii & Alaska should be listed as independent regions. They don't really fall into any of the other categories. They are a region onto themselves. Otherwise it's a pretty good map.
BTW I have always been somewhat interested in what people want to label places like WV. It doesn't fit into the northern mentality, nor are they too southern. Upper south seems fine to me.
I think San Diego should have more Southwest spray on it and the the lower half of the Delmarva should be in the Upland South, but I otherwise agree with it.
I think San Diego should have more Southwest spray on it and the the lower half of the Delmarva should be in the Upland South, but I otherwise agree with it.
I'm guessing you mean Upper South? "Upland" has to do with elevation.
You made too much of Texas the Southwest, It basically should be the Western panhandle. I would say you should have done the same thing to Texas that you did to Florida or just make a color for Texas.
If we're going to divide Texas and see what parts should be labelled SW, I would go by "wherever you naturally see cacti in the countryside.." In my experience, going west on I-20, this starts to happen around Ranger Hill, so... west Texas is what I'd solidly consider Southwest.
Some people think that in order to be in the Southwest, you need full blown desert scenery.. I disagree. The transitional plains area in west Texas where you can see it get drier and drier is more like the Southwest than the Southeast.
Your "Great Plains" region extends far, far too east, and doesn't extend far enough west. Eastern Minnesota, for instance, is absolutely not on the Great Plains, but the Big Woods. Iowa, Missouri, and Illinois all have prairie regions, but they aren't geographically part of the Great Plains. Even Kansas City (which is borderline Great Plains) really isn't a Great Plains city.
Your map should really show the Great Plains extending all the way to the eastern front of the Rockies. Denver is a Great Plains city.
If we're going to divide Texas and see what parts should be labelled SW, I would go by "wherever you naturally see cacti in the countryside.." In my experience, going west on I-20, this starts to happen around Ranger Hill, so... west Texas is what I'd solidly consider Southwest.
Some people think that in order to be in the Southwest, you need full blown desert scenery.. I disagree. The transitional plains area in west Texas where you can see it get drier and drier is more like the Southwest than the Southeast.
You can tell you're entering desert and true Southwest by topography around Ranger Hill true. But I would say Texas transitions well before then. The Metroplex starts the transition from Southeast to the Southwest. The desert and true Southwest topography doesn't begin though until you get around Van Horn, Texas or when 10 and 20 splits off. The Southeast topography really begins in Canton
I would say the Trans-Pecos area of Texas is solidly Southwest
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.
