Is Northern and Western Maine the most remote part of the US, east of the Mississippi? (Fort Kent: how much, houses)

[papafox]

Is there anywhere in the US, E of the Mississippi River as remote as the North Maine woods? I can't seem to think of anywhere that would come close.

What do you think?

[Submariner]

Any of the Unorganized Townships [UTs] that have no proper name, just a letter and number, are fairly remote. Not just the North Woods region.

UTs make up 52% of Maine.

[kellysmith]

I used to do quite a bit of flying and I'd vote for Northern Maine as you head West. Route 1 is a hot topped highway on the eastern side of the state. Thirty miles west you will see Route 11 running through Ashland to Fort Kent. Next hot topped road you see will be in Quebec. It used to be from Route 11 to Quebec you didn't see much but woodlands. Now it's a checkerboard of gravel logging roads. It wasn't too many years ago that there would be folks lost during hunting season who perished before being found. Now, you never hear of that. Several miles in any direction and you will come out on a road of some sort...just no people living there.

[FreedomThroughAnarchism]

Originally Posted by papafox

Is there anywhere in the US, E of the Mississippi River as remote as the North Maine woods? I can't seem to think of anywhere that would come close.

What do you think?

Maine probably wins the contest for having the largest area of low population in the northwest, though on smaller scale I might also point to Pittsburg, NH as a very worthy runner-up contender behind Maine (also see last paragraph). http://www.noerf.com/irk/nhmaps/New_Hampshire_population_map.png (broken link)

Pittsburg is the largest town (by land mass) in NH (it borders Canada) and though it has a population listed as 869 people, those people are spread out over 290 square miles (the size of the town), making for a population density of 2.98 people per square mile. That's a really low population density (and the population is most likely concentrated in the vicinity of the town-proper and below where the farm houses are. There's like nothing north of the town-proper other than tourist cabins on the various Connecticut Lakes, which are largely seasonal. It's all just dirt logging roads and mountains up there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittsburg,_New_Hampshire

In addition, by way of observation.... my opinion is that the figure listed for residents overestimates the number of people that actually "live" there. That may be the number of people that claim Pittsburg as their residency.... but come winter time... that place is a ghost town. I suspect a large number of so-called "residents" only live there during the warmer months.


The population density for Maine according to the 2000 US Census can be found at this map:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lation_map.png

It lists < 1 resident per square mile for certain northwest counties which makes it even sparser than Pittsburg, NH.... but either way... I suspect both of them are probably the winners of the contest.

Also of possible interest (map provides a broader overview of the whole country by locality):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lation_map.png

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uplo...on-density.gif

http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb...0-459169A6.gif

Down by the Everglades in Florida, the state has a really low population density which is quite large in area..... might even rival (or exceed) Maine. Though I don't know if you really want to count that, given how much of that area is probably inhospitable for human habitation.

[maineguy8888]

As far as just pure remoteness, I don't think there are any areas in the entire lower 48 that are more remote than northern Maine. All the previous contenders have seen quite a bit of change over the last 50 years. Or they are located on the way to "somewhere else". But we're still our own little world lol
I like it........it keeps the crazies and wimps out lol

[Three Wolves In Snow]

Originally Posted by FreedomThroughAnarchism

Maine probably wins the contest for having the largest area of low population in the northwest, though on smaller scale I might also point to Pittsburg, NH as a very worthy runner-up contender behind Maine (also see last paragraph). http://www.noerf.com/irk/nhmaps/New_Hampshire_population_map.png (broken link)

Pittsburg is the largest town (by land mass) in NH (it borders Canada) and though it has a population listed as 869 people, those people are spread out over 290 square miles (the size of the town), making for a population density of 2.98 people per square mile. That's a really low population density (and the population is most likely concentrated in the vicinity of the town-proper and below where the farm houses are. There's like nothing north of the town-proper other than tourist cabins on the various Connecticut Lakes, which are largely seasonal. It's all just dirt logging roads and mountains up there. Pittsburg, New Hampshire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In addition, by way of observation.... my opinion is that the figure listed for residents overestimates the number of people that actually "live" there. That may be the number of people that claim Pittsburg as their residency.... but come winter time... that place is a ghost town. I suspect a large number of so-called "residents" only live there during the warmer months.


The population density for Maine according to the 2000 US Census can be found at this map:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lation_map.png

It lists < 1 resident per square mile for certain northwest counties which makes it even sparser than Pittsburg, NH.... but either way... I suspect both of them are probably the winners of the contest.

Also of possible interest (map provides a broader overview of the whole country by locality):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lation_map.png

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uplo...on-density.gif

http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb...0-459169A6.gif

Down by the Everglades in Florida, the state has a really low population density which is quite large in area..... might even rival (or exceed) Maine. Though I don't know if you really want to count that, given how much of that area is probably inhospitable for human habitation.

Not that it's inhospitable so much as a lot of it is National Park and people are not allowed to live in much of it. I did live in the Glades and you are right, there really are not a lot of people there...although where I lived, it felt like too many people.

[Maine Writer]

Kudos to you for recognizing that there is a western part of Maine. A lot of people. including some who live here, know of only southern and northern Maine. A Discovery television show recently had an episode of a survival show in the oceanic shipping lane of northern Maine.

Are you looking for a remote place to live? Vacation?

[Coaster]

There's a now-famous photograph of North America at night that shows the entire eastern United States as a mass of lights from towns, cities, streets, etc. The only black spot is northern and western Maine. By that measure, yes, it's the most remote spot east of the Mississippi. If you want more remote, you have to head north into Canada.

Here's one photo. Scroll down for a pic of North America:

Night Satellite Photos | Earth, U.S., Europe, World | Geology.com

[Robel]

Originally Posted by Maine Writer

A Discovery television show recently had an episode of a survival show in the oceanic shipping lane of northern Maine.

I saw that show. Dual Survival with Cody Lundin and Dave Canterbury. They showed how to survive in the wilds of Northern Maine. Then walked three miles and found the coast. LOL.....

[Maine Writer]

Originally Posted by Robel

I saw that show. Dual Survival with Cody Lundin and Dave Canterbury. They showed how to survive in the wilds of Northern Maine. Then walked three miles and found the coast. LOL.....

If you find an ocean in northern Maine 1) you are more lost than you realize and 2) should stay there until your ship comes to rescue you.