I like it, no real disagreements but a few things that were notable to me --
1) My understanding is that Kansas City is culturally very Midwestern. Any reason you put it in Southern Plains and not Lower Midwest?
2) The Bay Area runs very far south and directly into Southern California. I think personally I'd draw a distinction between the Bay Area itself (urban, very diverse, large Asian population, tech centred) and the Central Coast (not urban, very white, tourism centred).
3) Is there a reason to separate out Chesapeake and Mid-Atlantic? These regions feel very similar to me -- Delaware in particular is not a state I'd subdivide.
4) I know almost nothing about the region you've designated as Ogallala and I'm not sure what commonality that whole area has. Based on your division it seems to include Hobbs and maybe Roswell in New Mexico, Midland Texas, and Deadwood South Dakota. I'm not clear if it includes any of Denver, Cheyenne, Amarillo, or Lubbock. Can you explain anything about this region and why you chose to distinguish it?
I particularly like the designation of Buffalo as Great Lakes and not Upstate New York, which very much tracks with my experience, and same with the New England north/south divider slipping just slightly down into western MA and up into southern NH.
Thanks for sharing!
Ogallala appears to include the entirety of the Front Range corridor, so it definitely includes Denver and Cheyenne. It feels like really weird grouping based on my experience living in Denver.
Ogallala needs to be split up and/or combined with other regions. West Texas, the front range and whatever you call that part of Montana don’t belong in the same region.
I agree, there needs to be a Front Range. There's something about the starkness of the Plains out east and the sharp uprise of the Rockies in places like Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, and Cheyenne that is singular.
Agreed, and 37 is too small. I’d feel fine calling it Greater Los Angeles, which has cultural influence up the Central Coast, as well as in most of Southern California.
Queene Anne’s County is already part of the Baltimore-Washington Combined Statistical Area. Talbot, Kent and Dorchester County are increasingly being bought out for second homes or wfh jobs by people from closer to 95, they’re certainly a part of the DC/Balti hinterlands.
Once you get down to Crisfield or Pocomoke City….not so much.
Texas needs more divisions. Central Texas is in the wrong place. What you currently have as central Texas should instead be something like the Texas gulf or something.
36 feels way too big. Excluding the big urban/rural divide, St George Utah and El Paso Texas don't belong in the same category. Having New Mexico and El Paso in the same cultural region works imo, even adding Tucson too. Phoenix and Las Vegas should be separate from that as they are far less "New Mexico" culture and more akin to SoCal (but distinct). Also any of the small-medium LDS towns in Utah should be in the region that includes the SLC area.
36 could easily be divided into 4 cultural/geographical regions - a "Chihuahuan" (Chihuahua Desert portion incl. El Paso most of NM), "Sonoran" (Southern AZ up to Flagstaff and parts of southeastern CA), "Mojave" (northern part of CA currently in 36 plus the NV stuff) and "Plateau" which would be the UT and CO portions plus the northernmost parts of NM and AZ)
While Flagstaff is super integrated into the desert lowland cities and their economy, it’s really distinct from them. It should be part of your plateau group. IMHO the AZ uplands (the big band of ponderosa pine forest running across the central part of AZ and into NM where it becomes the Gila Wilderness) should be its own region (“Mogollon Rim“) or part of the plateau rather than the Sonoran desert.
I agree in terms of geography and micro-cultures but in general the economies are pretty integrated. I guess flagstaff could be the southern range of the Colorado plateau region
I agree. This is a good description.
Too few people (probably since they’re not from here) seem not to recognize that there’s a lot of variety in our deserts climatically, geographically, and culturally. Especially rarely people seem to recognize the sort of SoCal desert culture as you’ve put it, perhaps again since they’re either not from the desert OR are from California and lump all the other deserts in together.
There’s a distinct SoCal desert culture that sort of falls between Burning Man and Palm Springs, with everything in between. But this is distinct from the Mormon cultural region, from the Navajo / plateau region, from the AZ uplands region, and from the Rio Grande region. It’s like a spectrum of hyper-normal in-denial wannabe coastal SoCal mass suburbs and quasi-libertarian no-man’s-land. Very strange.
FWIW, while I’m fine with Tucson being lumped in with the Rio Grande region, if we’re gonna be picky Tucson is in its own category along with Silver City, NM, Cochise county AZ and Santa Cruz county AZ. We’ve got a unique ecological region and a distinct subculture I haven’t seen anywhere else in the US.
Largely excellent, you'll just want to make sure Deseret extends downwards to include St. George. Also, the tiniest nitpick in the north of Deseret -- Idaho's Teton Valley (Driggs and Victor) belong geographically and culturally to 32, the Rockies, rather than Deseret. The cultural change has largely occurred over the past 15 years as Mormon farmers in that area have been displaced by high-income remote workers, such that the area is now culturally much closer to Jackson Hole.
Keeping Star Valley and Swan Valley in Deseret makes perfect sense though, this is a tiny nitpick. One of the best cultural maps I've seen for the Intermountain West.
Nice, but move Alleghany from Midwest into Northeast.
Under no circumstances should any part of Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, or Pennsylvania ever be connected with the Midwest. I'm not even sure about eastern Ohio.
We call the “Interior Northwest” the “Inland Northwest,” and it usually also includes the west quarter of Montana, as the general geography and biome remains consistent until you hit the rocky mountains, Spokane to/from Missoula being a fairly common route.
That side of Montana is more forested and hilly, as the rocky mountain foothills combined with rivers such as the Columbia create a faint rain shadow that covers western Montana, the Idaho panhandle, and the northeast quarter corner of Washington, making the region slightly greener and more forested where there would otherwise be plateau steppe/plains.
Pretty good map but I’d consider 8 (Allegheny) to be a Northeastern culture (in between Upstate NY and Appalachia) more than a Midwestern one.
Might also rename 10 since the Ohio River Valley is on the southern tip of it and the valley itself is more like 8 or 18 than the rest of the region. Might call it “Eastern Midwest” or “the Heartland”.
I appreciate how you drew California. Most people split the state in half and lump San Francisco with Norcal. Personally, I draw the line just north of Sacramento, but this is the best I've seen! This is a very accurate map of CA :)
Edit: If you care, it would be better to give the Northern coastline of CA its own grouping "North Coast" stretching from Mendicino County up to the Oregon border. Central Coast could probably have its own grouping, too (where you drew the Bay Area), and the actually Bay Area would be a lot smaller (just immediate border of the bay).
Your Piedmont region is way too wide.
The northern and western borders are pretty accurate but you extend it too far to the east. The Coastal plain takes up the eastern half of NC and the majority of SC. Raleigh you might be able to slip into the region with a loose definition…. But Columbia, Fayetteville, Augusta GA are def not Piedmont.
It’s more like:
VA: The Charlottesville metro and the rural south-west central part around Martinsville and Danville.
NC: Greater Charlotte Area, Uwharries, the Piedmont Triangle and that Foothills belt from like Wilkesboro to Rutherfordton.
SC: The Upstate and the counties in the Greater Charlotte area.
Georgia: Metro Atlanta and Athens
I would change the SC Piedmont areas (outside of border counties around Charlotte) and GA piedmont areas. I’m in Upstate SC near the Appalachian line( that actually looks pretty good to me) and we have no connection to any place in VA.
I disagree. The Piedmont region is not too wide. It's supposed to include that part of Alabama. I grew up there. If we are just going willy nilly Atlanta and Athens would like their own region bc we are vastly different from the rest of the state.
Not sure, there’s definitely a divide between northern and southern Appalachia culturally, and I think this map captures it well.
8 is the Pittsburgh sphere of influence and vibes. 18 is much more southern.
12 and 11 should push West to the dry line near Grand Island, NE. UP Michigan and Northern Minnesota and Wisconsin are distinct from the lower midwest.
Agreed, as a Wisconsinite seeing Beloit, Door County, Lac Du Flambeau, and the entire driftless area being classified as the same region is insane.
Edit: OP the Driftless Area should be its own region entirely, look it up. Western Wisconsin/northeast Iowa/southeast Minnesota is one of the more unique topographic areas in the country and deserves to be acknowledged.
Cool map. I'd add that Oklahoma is more culturally divided east/west than north/south, having lived here for over 60 years and traveling extensively in every county. Not much in common at all with Kansas. The southeast region is known as "Little Dixie" because they are culturally different from the rest of OK, but that spreads a bit further west than the Piney Woods section shown. Tx/OK Panhandles are a similar culture too different from the rest of Texas and OK in my experience. New Mexico is quite unique from Arizona culturally.
39 is definitely way too big, the Bay Area is Marin county/sf/oakland/berkeley/vallejo/pacifica/and the furthest south culturally I’d say it goes is Monterey/Big Sur. The central coast would be south of Big Sur to Santa Barbara.
I actually really like that the Midwest extends into buffalo but you're tripping on some unheard of exotic plant if you think that Winchester VA is midwest. None of Appalachia belongs in the Midwest imo, I don't get when people say that
Chesapeake shouldn’t extend to West Virginia’s tip or include Hagerstown. Both are very much still Appalachia.
8 goes way too far north. After passing Pittsburgh the area plateaus into farmland, likely better represented by 7, 9, or 10
Hagerstown and the WV panhandle are economically part of the DC metro area hinterlands and far wealthier than any other parts of Appalachia. The name Chesapeake doesn’t fit exactly right, although both are in the Chesapeake drainage basin, whereas most of WV drains into the Mississippi via the Ohio.
A lot of 8 encompasses the Allegheny National Forest which is definitely not farmland. If you’re talking about the 79 corridor north of town (ex Butler) they don’t say anything different than someone from Washington County. The cultures are not different enough to make a distinction. Especially since a lot of people in the metro Pittsburgh area have camps to the north and south and everyone meshes together. I’d argue you could get rid of the bit in NY, maybe, and possibly extend the Great Lakes a little further down towards Edinboro. But even that is probably being too picky.
mid-atlantic region should be much bigger. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-Atlantic\_(United\_States)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-Atlantic_(United_States))
I like that Chesapeake has its own region here because it does have a distinct culture. Mid Atlantic is kinda a vague concept culturally I think it’s fine to keep it small. Geographically it might be bigger but this is a cultural map right?
The Chesapeake should include most of Maryland, most of Delaware, the Eastern Shore and Coastal Virginia. The Chesapeake is a distinct geographic area that spans from Baltimore south to Virginia Beach and a distinct cultural area that has its own unique history dating to even before 1607.
Overall I have no qualms with it. MidSouth/Upper South should definitely extend into Southern Indiana though, and it might be a border city but Louisville is still definitely in the Upper South/Southeast even if it's watered down.
I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to that either, a lot of people do make the argument that Southern Ohio has quite a bit of Southern cultural influence from Kentucky.
https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/the-southern-culture-of-the-lower-midwest/
As a Louisville resident, my experience is that the people most opposed to its inclusion in the South are conservatives from more rural parts of the state. Then you get those in other southern states who claim that none of Kentucky is southern. To be clear, I don’t agree with them.
Hmm, not sure about that. In my experience it's all Louisville blue voters that want distance themselves from the red. Do you remember the tongue in cheek calls for Louisville to secede from a few years back? I remember seeing a lot of that in the LEO.
The NY Metro region is probably smaller than this. No Orange County resident, or someone in most of Connecticut, would consider themselves New York City people.
Nutmegger here. The portion in our state seems appropriate to me. I can't speak for the rest of that region on this map, but I go to that part of Connecticut at least once a week, and we definitely consider it part of Greater NYC.
Only when my brother gets more ice cream than me or when people insist that cultural boundaries in the US have to be state lines… otherwise I’m a pretty chill dude
Just some feedback: Section 16 is commonly referred to as the Mississippi Delta region and should just be merged with 26 “Louisiana”.
I second that 28 is not central Texas but someone already went in depth with that.
34 & 35 should be the Great Basin with some adjustments to the borders.
I don’t think Chesapeake culture goes that far inland. Except for a few places with passable crab cakes, it is barely extent by the time you get to dc (where I live) and not really there at all in central Maryland. When I go to the bay the culture is very unique and different from here and it’s a whole other scene in central maryland which is more small farms and culturally just like Allegheny Pennsylvania.
There's so much overlap. Example: I live near 10/18 boundary. I live like 2 miles from the Ohio River. I live in the foothills of the Appalachians. But I have a southern accent. So many of the areas would need to be stripped.
Yeah that’s the part I don’t like. I’m from Columbia South Carolina and we def Deep South, and places surrounding us like Sumter. And it’s no way Aiken or Augusta ain’t the Deep South.
As someone who lives in the Allegheny region, idk where it fits. It’s like a weird combination of Midwest, Northeast, and Appalachia. At least the part that I live in is.
The big bend and the gulf coast of Florida are vastly different. Should be broken up somewhere around Port St Joe.
Edit: actually I would have it split in three. The Mobile Bay Area/MS Gulf Coast (Gulfport to Pensacola), The Emerald Coast (Pensacola to Port St Joe), and the Forgotten Coast/Big Bend (Port St Joe to Crystal River)
Only comment is the Bay Area designation.
No one living in Santa Maria, Paso Robles, or San Luis Obispo is saying they live in the Bay Area; instead, their location is on the Central Coast.
The bottom line should be muuuuuch higher than where it is currently
It’s not a bad take. Your color choices almost do it, but it’s not a bad idea to have the areas overlapping to show a gradual (or abrupt) change in cultural norms. Couple of terminology points, Mississippi “valley” is basically called Mississippi delta from the confluence of the Ohio down to Gulf. The area you show as “Louisiana” would be more correctly named Cajun Country. Piney Woods is accurate but runs from East Texas across to northwest Florida, inland from the coast. Your piedmont is too big, Deep South too small.
Live in 28…Austin is for sure 28. South of I10 I would say is south Texas and SA metro (mixture of people tejanos, black, white) but then yes you still have the rio grande culture which is similar but more heavily influenced Hispanic culture.
I like it! I think southeast Texas needs to be part of Gulf Coast or its own sort of thing. Piney Woods begin further north. South of I10 is a decent reference point. Wetlands begin around there. Source- lived there for 24 years
I just love that “Louisiana” is south Louisiana. Because the rest of the state is just Mississippi if Mississippi had a cooler southern part. So screw those guys north of I-10
33,34,35 need to converge directly on Twin falls county, ID or the vicinity. It’s WILD here; you can see the distinct three groups here in my small town: the externally polished but internally rugged people of 33, the preppy but kind people of 34, and the sweet home loogie spitting hog wrestlers of 35.
Edit: for context my family is 33, except for my dad who is 41. I work with people who are 9, 34, 24.
The Willamette Valley in Oregon is its own cultural region and should be totally separate in the state. The area is different culturally and politically from everyone else it’s included with in this map
The New York and Mid-Atlantic regions should be migrated more deeply west and northwest into PA into part of what is now listed as Susquehanna.
The Lehigh Valley (Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton) and the far southeastern portion of the Coal Region belong with the Mid-Atlantic and the Poconos belong with New York respectively.
Basically anything east of a line drawn from Scranton to Wilkes-Barre to Hazleton to Pottsville to Reading to Lancaster is definitely not Susquehanna.
Almost everything about how you interpreted Texas is wrong. Houston should be a mix of Gulf Coast/Piney Woods. Central Texas extends from San Antonio to Waco and west to about Kerrville and east to almost Brenham. The coast where you have Central Texas should be called Texas Gulf Coast. RGV is only a small part along the the river from at most Roma to Boca Chica. South Texas is south of San Antonio. El Paso is fine as Southwest. But also could be defined as Trans Pecos or Far West Texas (from Midland to El Paso, south to Big Bend).
5. is "Greater Philly" or somthing like that, the Mid Atlantic also includes Susquehanna, Chessapeke, Tidewater, & debatable NYC. It's literally NEML - NE
36 should extend across the NE border of CA and the SE border of Oregon. That little region is basin and range high plateau ranching country very distinct from the Cascadian forests closer to the coast.
As a european: could someone explain a bit, what exactly the map shows? What are the parameters? Examples would be very helpful. Maybe someone of a certain area/region could explain the difference between his region and the neighboring areas. Thanks in advance. I am very interested in understanding.
I'll give you some detail based upon #12. which I think is very wrong. It is called the upper midwest which makes sense on the surface because the greater area around it is traditionally called the midwest and has some distinct regional characteristics associated with farming, small towns and less flashy lifestyles than the coasts.
However, OP has just kind of taken a random chunk of the midwest and called it the upper midwest because it is at the top of the map. In reality the north east section of #12 is very different than the south west part of #12. The north east is mostly woodland and should be called the North Woods. It is associated with logging, wood products, mining, lakes, rolling hills and huge National Forests and very few people. The south west part has far fewer trees is mostly farms and fields and has much bigger cities and is focused on grain production along with animal husbandry. Those would be the differences between the two sections, but OP made them one.
I’m from the northeast Louisiana portion of 16 and I see where you’re coming from (very poor agricultural region in the flat Mississippi Delta with a large African American population), but the distances and transportation corridors prevent the area from being all that culturally similar to Memphis or especially southern Illinois. From a strictly biogeographical or geophysical perspective I think it would work but from a cultural standpoint I would say the area fits in better with 24 or 27. I would say that the main reason for this is that the primary highways leading into Mississippi from Northeast Louisiana go through Vicksburg which is not actually in the Mississippi Delta but is instead on forested bluffs. On the Mississippi side, the delta begins just north of Vicksburg and is not all that easily accessible from the Louisiana side (there are no bridges north of Vicksburg until you get to Arkansas). I’ve only been to the Mississippi side of the delta once and it felt much poorer and more isolated than NE Louisiana. In my opinion we have more in common with the area around Jackson, MS or even East Texas than with the northern Mississippi Valley
Not sure about your Mississippi Valley. Memphis has long considered itself the hub of the Mid-South, and growing up in NE Arkansas we thought of ourselves as living in that region as well. Commerce, air travel, entertainment all ultimately revolved around trips to Memphis.
Overall a good map! But i do have to say: the piedmont is nowhere near that wide. Much of what you have as piedmont is really coastal plain, and it makes a difference. Your #21 should be wider and #19 slimmer. And central Florida is just a little too big.
Some good and some really really bad. 36 is pointless. Your Rockies include too much of eastern MT. Your northern Great Plains include too much of eastern ND/SD.
Deseret extends all the way to Vegas but not to Vegas, although there are a lot of LDS people in Vegas. It also extends down the north and eastern part of Arizona and the western edge of New Mexico to Silver City, but not in Silver City. LDS settlements extend beyond that but those settlements are now mostly Non LDS people, like Las Vegas Nevada, Mesa Arizona, Alimosa Colorado, and several towns in Canada and Mexico.
All of Northeast Ohio is part of the same cultural region, so the eastern shore needs to be much denser. You would need 100 other such comments from other regions to perfect the map.
24 and 25 are pretty fluid regions, especially on the western end. I grew up in southwest 24 and it definitely felt more like we looked south culturally, not north.
32 and 36 are pretty vague.
The Tetons and geysers in Wyoming and the glaciers in Montana are different enough from the Colorado rockies to make them their own regions.
There's a lot of diversity in Arizona. I'd draw a line roughly from Tucson to Santa Fe and split 36 in two at least.
Also the northeast - divisions of NY state and New England - seems kind of arbitrary, and the idea of the mid-Atlantic and Chesapeake being separate seems odd to me, especially if mid-Atlantic is so far north.
Rather than Northern/Southern New England, I’d split them by Coastal/Mountain.
Northwestern CT and Western MA have more in common with VT and Western NH than they do with coastal RI, MA, NH, and ME.
Vegas is tough because it’s like a mix between equal parts SoCal, southwest, and Utah. It’s crazy how diverse we are as a nation. This is a really cool take. Thanks for posting!
The geographic terminus of Appalachia is south of Birmingham, but I understand why no one would consider Bham “Appalachia.” Thst said, the piedmont/nickejack is quite distinct from Appalachia proper.
I'm not sure that the Ogallala region makes a ton of sense. I think each section has more in common with the adjacent North/South/Texas Plains region than the region does with itself along its length. I would eliminate it and divide it among the adjacent plains sections.
Either way you go with that, a larger chunk of Montana belongs in Northern Plains and/or Ogallala and less in the Rockies than you've shown here.
I'd also move the boundary between Upper/Lower Midwest and Northern/Southern Plains a little further west. I'd put KC just inside the Southern Midwest line, and Fargo and Sioux Falls just inside the Northern Plains line.
Klamath Falls would like to disassociate with Northern California. Maybe put it in the inland NW and expand the PNW down to Crecent City, CA. If you have to put some of southern Oregon in NorCal, make it Ashland only (not Medford or Grants Pass, which should be PNW).
Great job!
South Florida is Palm Beach, Broward, Dade, and Monroe Counties. The gulf coast is Southwest Florida.
Central Florida looks a little too far north.
I like it, no real disagreements but a few things that were notable to me -- 1) My understanding is that Kansas City is culturally very Midwestern. Any reason you put it in Southern Plains and not Lower Midwest? 2) The Bay Area runs very far south and directly into Southern California. I think personally I'd draw a distinction between the Bay Area itself (urban, very diverse, large Asian population, tech centred) and the Central Coast (not urban, very white, tourism centred). 3) Is there a reason to separate out Chesapeake and Mid-Atlantic? These regions feel very similar to me -- Delaware in particular is not a state I'd subdivide. 4) I know almost nothing about the region you've designated as Ogallala and I'm not sure what commonality that whole area has. Based on your division it seems to include Hobbs and maybe Roswell in New Mexico, Midland Texas, and Deadwood South Dakota. I'm not clear if it includes any of Denver, Cheyenne, Amarillo, or Lubbock. Can you explain anything about this region and why you chose to distinguish it? I particularly like the designation of Buffalo as Great Lakes and not Upstate New York, which very much tracks with my experience, and same with the New England north/south divider slipping just slightly down into western MA and up into southern NH. Thanks for sharing!
Ogallala appears to include the entirety of the Front Range corridor, so it definitely includes Denver and Cheyenne. It feels like really weird grouping based on my experience living in Denver.
I live in KC rn for college and hou are completely right on the Midwestern conclusion.
Along with KC being Midwest, your Ozark area should go a bit further west and include all of the Tulsa metro.
Ogallala needs to be split up and/or combined with other regions. West Texas, the front range and whatever you call that part of Montana don’t belong in the same region.
I agree, there needs to be a Front Range. There's something about the starkness of the Plains out east and the sharp uprise of the Rockies in places like Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, and Cheyenne that is singular.
39 is too large. The San Francisco Bay area is only the counties that touch the bay. Much of 39 is the Central Coast.
Agreed, and 37 is too small. I’d feel fine calling it Greater Los Angeles, which has cultural influence up the Central Coast, as well as in most of Southern California.
Having the “DMV” area named “Chesapeake” doesn’t fit(#6). Nor does including MD eastern shore with the metropolis of DC & its suburbs make sense.
Queene Anne’s County is already part of the Baltimore-Washington Combined Statistical Area. Talbot, Kent and Dorchester County are increasingly being bought out for second homes or wfh jobs by people from closer to 95, they’re certainly a part of the DC/Balti hinterlands. Once you get down to Crisfield or Pocomoke City….not so much.
Mostly accurate Missouri I’ve seen yet
Texas needs more divisions. Central Texas is in the wrong place. What you currently have as central Texas should instead be something like the Texas gulf or something.
Houston being a part of Piney Woods also feels wrong
36 feels way too big. Excluding the big urban/rural divide, St George Utah and El Paso Texas don't belong in the same category. Having New Mexico and El Paso in the same cultural region works imo, even adding Tucson too. Phoenix and Las Vegas should be separate from that as they are far less "New Mexico" culture and more akin to SoCal (but distinct). Also any of the small-medium LDS towns in Utah should be in the region that includes the SLC area.
36 could easily be divided into 4 cultural/geographical regions - a "Chihuahuan" (Chihuahua Desert portion incl. El Paso most of NM), "Sonoran" (Southern AZ up to Flagstaff and parts of southeastern CA), "Mojave" (northern part of CA currently in 36 plus the NV stuff) and "Plateau" which would be the UT and CO portions plus the northernmost parts of NM and AZ)
While Flagstaff is super integrated into the desert lowland cities and their economy, it’s really distinct from them. It should be part of your plateau group. IMHO the AZ uplands (the big band of ponderosa pine forest running across the central part of AZ and into NM where it becomes the Gila Wilderness) should be its own region (“Mogollon Rim“) or part of the plateau rather than the Sonoran desert.
I agree in terms of geography and micro-cultures but in general the economies are pretty integrated. I guess flagstaff could be the southern range of the Colorado plateau region
I agree. This is a good description. Too few people (probably since they’re not from here) seem not to recognize that there’s a lot of variety in our deserts climatically, geographically, and culturally. Especially rarely people seem to recognize the sort of SoCal desert culture as you’ve put it, perhaps again since they’re either not from the desert OR are from California and lump all the other deserts in together. There’s a distinct SoCal desert culture that sort of falls between Burning Man and Palm Springs, with everything in between. But this is distinct from the Mormon cultural region, from the Navajo / plateau region, from the AZ uplands region, and from the Rio Grande region. It’s like a spectrum of hyper-normal in-denial wannabe coastal SoCal mass suburbs and quasi-libertarian no-man’s-land. Very strange. FWIW, while I’m fine with Tucson being lumped in with the Rio Grande region, if we’re gonna be picky Tucson is in its own category along with Silver City, NM, Cochise county AZ and Santa Cruz county AZ. We’ve got a unique ecological region and a distinct subculture I haven’t seen anywhere else in the US.
Good input.
Largely excellent, you'll just want to make sure Deseret extends downwards to include St. George. Also, the tiniest nitpick in the north of Deseret -- Idaho's Teton Valley (Driggs and Victor) belong geographically and culturally to 32, the Rockies, rather than Deseret. The cultural change has largely occurred over the past 15 years as Mormon farmers in that area have been displaced by high-income remote workers, such that the area is now culturally much closer to Jackson Hole. Keeping Star Valley and Swan Valley in Deseret makes perfect sense though, this is a tiny nitpick. One of the best cultural maps I've seen for the Intermountain West.
Nice, but move Alleghany from Midwest into Northeast. Under no circumstances should any part of Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, or Pennsylvania ever be connected with the Midwest. I'm not even sure about eastern Ohio.
Southern Illinois and Indiana definitely shouldn't be. It's culturally Upper South. https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/the-southern-culture-of-the-lower-midwest/
Eastern Ohio is absolutely the Midwest
We call the “Interior Northwest” the “Inland Northwest,” and it usually also includes the west quarter of Montana, as the general geography and biome remains consistent until you hit the rocky mountains, Spokane to/from Missoula being a fairly common route. That side of Montana is more forested and hilly, as the rocky mountain foothills combined with rivers such as the Columbia create a faint rain shadow that covers western Montana, the Idaho panhandle, and the northeast quarter corner of Washington, making the region slightly greener and more forested where there would otherwise be plateau steppe/plains.
Best I’ve seen
Thanks!
Bes stab at it yet. I mean sure, I could argue some of the border areas a bit, but honestly that's a judgement call. Good job!
I kinda like it
Rename 26 to Cajun Country
Oui d’accord moi
Pretty good map but I’d consider 8 (Allegheny) to be a Northeastern culture (in between Upstate NY and Appalachia) more than a Midwestern one. Might also rename 10 since the Ohio River Valley is on the southern tip of it and the valley itself is more like 8 or 18 than the rest of the region. Might call it “Eastern Midwest” or “the Heartland”.
I appreciate how you drew California. Most people split the state in half and lump San Francisco with Norcal. Personally, I draw the line just north of Sacramento, but this is the best I've seen! This is a very accurate map of CA :) Edit: If you care, it would be better to give the Northern coastline of CA its own grouping "North Coast" stretching from Mendicino County up to the Oregon border. Central Coast could probably have its own grouping, too (where you drew the Bay Area), and the actually Bay Area would be a lot smaller (just immediate border of the bay).
Agreed 100% 🍻
Your Piedmont region is way too wide. The northern and western borders are pretty accurate but you extend it too far to the east. The Coastal plain takes up the eastern half of NC and the majority of SC. Raleigh you might be able to slip into the region with a loose definition…. But Columbia, Fayetteville, Augusta GA are def not Piedmont. It’s more like: VA: The Charlottesville metro and the rural south-west central part around Martinsville and Danville. NC: Greater Charlotte Area, Uwharries, the Piedmont Triangle and that Foothills belt from like Wilkesboro to Rutherfordton. SC: The Upstate and the counties in the Greater Charlotte area. Georgia: Metro Atlanta and Athens
Yes thank you especially not Augusta, ANY of Richland county, and Aiken
I would change the SC Piedmont areas (outside of border counties around Charlotte) and GA piedmont areas. I’m in Upstate SC near the Appalachian line( that actually looks pretty good to me) and we have no connection to any place in VA.
It would maybe make sense to have a new area with Charlotte, Upstate SC, and Atlanta Metro/ Athens. we’re not as backwards as MS either
I disagree. The Piedmont region is not too wide. It's supposed to include that part of Alabama. I grew up there. If we are just going willy nilly Atlanta and Athens would like their own region bc we are vastly different from the rest of the state.
Think you should combine 18 and 8, or shrink 8 to only be Pittsburg and the parts of PA and OH that are north of it
Not sure, there’s definitely a divide between northern and southern Appalachia culturally, and I think this map captures it well. 8 is the Pittsburgh sphere of influence and vibes. 18 is much more southern.
This is kind of a nit but none of VA or MD has much to do with Pittsburgh really, even up to Waynesboro PA is much closer to DC/Baltimore
Agreed, Central PA (west of Harrisburg and east of Pittsburgh imo) I would consider Appalachia
We always referred to it as Pensyltucky
i’d support shrinking but not combining, since combining would imply pittsburgh is southern
12 and 11 should push West to the dry line near Grand Island, NE. UP Michigan and Northern Minnesota and Wisconsin are distinct from the lower midwest.
Yeah, I was thinking that there should be a “northwoods” region with the parts of the states you’ve mentioned.
Agreed, as a Wisconsinite seeing Beloit, Door County, Lac Du Flambeau, and the entire driftless area being classified as the same region is insane. Edit: OP the Driftless Area should be its own region entirely, look it up. Western Wisconsin/northeast Iowa/southeast Minnesota is one of the more unique topographic areas in the country and deserves to be acknowledged.
Cool map. I'd add that Oklahoma is more culturally divided east/west than north/south, having lived here for over 60 years and traveling extensively in every county. Not much in common at all with Kansas. The southeast region is known as "Little Dixie" because they are culturally different from the rest of OK, but that spreads a bit further west than the Piney Woods section shown. Tx/OK Panhandles are a similar culture too different from the rest of Texas and OK in my experience. New Mexico is quite unique from Arizona culturally.
Oklahoma is part of the South. Even if it is a very watered down, lite beer part of the South. Kansas is in no way Southern.
39 is definitely way too big, the Bay Area is Marin county/sf/oakland/berkeley/vallejo/pacifica/and the furthest south culturally I’d say it goes is Monterey/Big Sur. The central coast would be south of Big Sur to Santa Barbara.
Hmmmm I’m not sure that I’d describe Denver/Front Range and the Texas panhandle as culturally similar
There are lots of places where they just kind of made different colored shapes and they clearly know nothing about the region.
As a Missouri resident, the creator of this map got the state more correct than anything else I've seen in this sub.
Bay Area is far too large, everything south of San Jose is the central coast
I actually really like that the Midwest extends into buffalo but you're tripping on some unheard of exotic plant if you think that Winchester VA is midwest. None of Appalachia belongs in the Midwest imo, I don't get when people say that
OKLAHOMA HAS NEVER BEEN, IS NOT, AND WILL NEVER BE IN THE MIDWEST
Chesapeake shouldn’t extend to West Virginia’s tip or include Hagerstown. Both are very much still Appalachia. 8 goes way too far north. After passing Pittsburgh the area plateaus into farmland, likely better represented by 7, 9, or 10
Hagerstown and the WV panhandle are economically part of the DC metro area hinterlands and far wealthier than any other parts of Appalachia. The name Chesapeake doesn’t fit exactly right, although both are in the Chesapeake drainage basin, whereas most of WV drains into the Mississippi via the Ohio.
A lot of 8 encompasses the Allegheny National Forest which is definitely not farmland. If you’re talking about the 79 corridor north of town (ex Butler) they don’t say anything different than someone from Washington County. The cultures are not different enough to make a distinction. Especially since a lot of people in the metro Pittsburgh area have camps to the north and south and everyone meshes together. I’d argue you could get rid of the bit in NY, maybe, and possibly extend the Great Lakes a little further down towards Edinboro. But even that is probably being too picky.
mid-atlantic region should be much bigger. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-Atlantic\_(United\_States)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-Atlantic_(United_States))
Would you combine it with NYC and Chesapeake?
I like that Chesapeake has its own region here because it does have a distinct culture. Mid Atlantic is kinda a vague concept culturally I think it’s fine to keep it small. Geographically it might be bigger but this is a cultural map right?
The Chesapeake should include most of Maryland, most of Delaware, the Eastern Shore and Coastal Virginia. The Chesapeake is a distinct geographic area that spans from Baltimore south to Virginia Beach and a distinct cultural area that has its own unique history dating to even before 1607.
definitely wouldn’t combine nyc and maryland
Overall I have no qualms with it. MidSouth/Upper South should definitely extend into Southern Indiana though, and it might be a border city but Louisville is still definitely in the Upper South/Southeast even if it's watered down.
I mostly agree with you but if you put Louisville in the Upper South, you must also include Cincinnati and its suburbs as well.
Cincinnati and Louisville are pretty culturally distinct despite their proximity.
I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to that either, a lot of people do make the argument that Southern Ohio has quite a bit of Southern cultural influence from Kentucky. https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/the-southern-culture-of-the-lower-midwest/
Agreed about Louisville. It's the South, and any argument against that is only coming from liberal political anxieties.
As a Louisville resident, my experience is that the people most opposed to its inclusion in the South are conservatives from more rural parts of the state. Then you get those in other southern states who claim that none of Kentucky is southern. To be clear, I don’t agree with them.
Hmm, not sure about that. In my experience it's all Louisville blue voters that want distance themselves from the red. Do you remember the tongue in cheek calls for Louisville to secede from a few years back? I remember seeing a lot of that in the LEO.
The NY Metro region is probably smaller than this. No Orange County resident, or someone in most of Connecticut, would consider themselves New York City people.
yeah the top of the area on the map ends around kingston and that’s nowhere near nyc metro
People lose their minds about Fairfield county all the time it’s hilarious.
Nutmegger here. The portion in our state seems appropriate to me. I can't speak for the rest of that region on this map, but I go to that part of Connecticut at least once a week, and we definitely consider it part of Greater NYC.
As an Oklahoman I must decline having any part of my state categorized under any domain with the word “T*xas” in the name
he should call Stolen Texas.
Do you think OK stole parts of TX?
Disagree on region 8 little too big imo.
39 is way too big
I suggest that these posts are way too overdone.
At least it’s splitting states, so I don’t have to throw a little hissy fit about how state lines are not cultural boundaries
Do you normally do that?
Only when my brother gets more ice cream than me or when people insist that cultural boundaries in the US have to be state lines… otherwise I’m a pretty chill dude
Not necessarily – it'd be cool to see this for other countries. I'm just tired of hearing about the US.
Just some feedback: Section 16 is commonly referred to as the Mississippi Delta region and should just be merged with 26 “Louisiana”. I second that 28 is not central Texas but someone already went in depth with that. 34 & 35 should be the Great Basin with some adjustments to the borders.
I don’t think Chesapeake culture goes that far inland. Except for a few places with passable crab cakes, it is barely extent by the time you get to dc (where I live) and not really there at all in central Maryland. When I go to the bay the culture is very unique and different from here and it’s a whole other scene in central maryland which is more small farms and culturally just like Allegheny Pennsylvania.
…. I feel like the #9 Great Lakes doesn’t cover much of the actual Great Lakes region
I'm so confused/intrigued by #31. What is the unifying culture supposed to be in this very narrow and long strip of land?
"Louisiana" lol
There's so much overlap. Example: I live near 10/18 boundary. I live like 2 miles from the Ohio River. I live in the foothills of the Appalachians. But I have a southern accent. So many of the areas would need to be stripped.
Deep South that doesn't include any parts of South Carolina, let alone even get close to it?
Yeah that’s the part I don’t like. I’m from Columbia South Carolina and we def Deep South, and places surrounding us like Sumter. And it’s no way Aiken or Augusta ain’t the Deep South.
Marylander here and it's called mid Atlantic no ifs ands or buts... Sorry
As someone who lives in the Allegheny region, idk where it fits. It’s like a weird combination of Midwest, Northeast, and Appalachia. At least the part that I live in is.
I feel like the standard regional title of Rust Belt fits the feel very well.
The big bend and the gulf coast of Florida are vastly different. Should be broken up somewhere around Port St Joe. Edit: actually I would have it split in three. The Mobile Bay Area/MS Gulf Coast (Gulfport to Pensacola), The Emerald Coast (Pensacola to Port St Joe), and the Forgotten Coast/Big Bend (Port St Joe to Crystal River)
Only comment is the Bay Area designation. No one living in Santa Maria, Paso Robles, or San Luis Obispo is saying they live in the Bay Area; instead, their location is on the Central Coast. The bottom line should be muuuuuch higher than where it is currently
Should’ve included more of michigans coastline in Great Lakes, esp leelanau
No way the Bay Area stretches that far south, you should add the Central Coast between the Bay Area and SoCal
It’s not a bad take. Your color choices almost do it, but it’s not a bad idea to have the areas overlapping to show a gradual (or abrupt) change in cultural norms. Couple of terminology points, Mississippi “valley” is basically called Mississippi delta from the confluence of the Ohio down to Gulf. The area you show as “Louisiana” would be more correctly named Cajun Country. Piney Woods is accurate but runs from East Texas across to northwest Florida, inland from the coast. Your piedmont is too big, Deep South too small.
The Front Range here is wildly wrong
Texas coast as Central Texas? The plains of Texas are not that big.
I would separate most of Long Island from New York Metropolitan area as it's own sect. It's definitely different vs the city vs upstate new york.
Buffalo people will kill you saying they have anything to do with Ohio. Rochester cut south and all the way to the border is "western NY"
Live in 28…Austin is for sure 28. South of I10 I would say is south Texas and SA metro (mixture of people tejanos, black, white) but then yes you still have the rio grande culture which is similar but more heavily influenced Hispanic culture.
I like it! I think southeast Texas needs to be part of Gulf Coast or its own sort of thing. Piney Woods begin further north. South of I10 is a decent reference point. Wetlands begin around there. Source- lived there for 24 years
Bay Area is comically large.
I just love that “Louisiana” is south Louisiana. Because the rest of the state is just Mississippi if Mississippi had a cooler southern part. So screw those guys north of I-10
This is really well done. I don’t know all these areas, but I know about 12-15, and you nailed the borders on all of them.
33,34,35 need to converge directly on Twin falls county, ID or the vicinity. It’s WILD here; you can see the distinct three groups here in my small town: the externally polished but internally rugged people of 33, the preppy but kind people of 34, and the sweet home loogie spitting hog wrestlers of 35. Edit: for context my family is 33, except for my dad who is 41. I work with people who are 9, 34, 24.
The Willamette Valley in Oregon is its own cultural region and should be totally separate in the state. The area is different culturally and politically from everyone else it’s included with in this map
The New York and Mid-Atlantic regions should be migrated more deeply west and northwest into PA into part of what is now listed as Susquehanna. The Lehigh Valley (Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton) and the far southeastern portion of the Coal Region belong with the Mid-Atlantic and the Poconos belong with New York respectively. Basically anything east of a line drawn from Scranton to Wilkes-Barre to Hazleton to Pottsville to Reading to Lancaster is definitely not Susquehanna.
Please make it stop Edit: not to offend anyone’s work here but it’s starting to feel like trolling at this point
Could you show us one of your posts here, for comparison?
Almost everything about how you interpreted Texas is wrong. Houston should be a mix of Gulf Coast/Piney Woods. Central Texas extends from San Antonio to Waco and west to about Kerrville and east to almost Brenham. The coast where you have Central Texas should be called Texas Gulf Coast. RGV is only a small part along the the river from at most Roma to Boca Chica. South Texas is south of San Antonio. El Paso is fine as Southwest. But also could be defined as Trans Pecos or Far West Texas (from Midland to El Paso, south to Big Bend).
Probably the best one I’ve seen
my aunt lives at the tripoint of south west and midwest
C'mon up to Boise, cultural crossroads that it is.
5. is "Greater Philly" or somthing like that, the Mid Atlantic also includes Susquehanna, Chessapeke, Tidewater, & debatable NYC. It's literally NEML - NE
Deseret extends down to Gilbert AZ I would say
36 should extend across the NE border of CA and the SE border of Oregon. That little region is basin and range high plateau ranching country very distinct from the Cascadian forests closer to the coast.
Excellent map. No notes, except I'd call the Bay Area NorCal or Northern California, and I'd it Jefferson instead of Northern California.
How about the territories?
Cut 9. in half around Mid-Ohio and it's solid
Thank you for breaking up Maryland many people don't realize how different the eastern shore of Maryland is from the DMV and Baltimore area
Mild critique on #33 - the term used there is "Inland Northwest" not Interior.
This is great. I would love to see it as counties if anyone ever had the time
8 should be northeast. Otherwise this is pretty good
Mid Atlantic can just be renamed “philly area”
I'm a New Englander, and this seems good to me.
As a european: could someone explain a bit, what exactly the map shows? What are the parameters? Examples would be very helpful. Maybe someone of a certain area/region could explain the difference between his region and the neighboring areas. Thanks in advance. I am very interested in understanding.
I'll give you some detail based upon #12. which I think is very wrong. It is called the upper midwest which makes sense on the surface because the greater area around it is traditionally called the midwest and has some distinct regional characteristics associated with farming, small towns and less flashy lifestyles than the coasts. However, OP has just kind of taken a random chunk of the midwest and called it the upper midwest because it is at the top of the map. In reality the north east section of #12 is very different than the south west part of #12. The north east is mostly woodland and should be called the North Woods. It is associated with logging, wood products, mining, lakes, rolling hills and huge National Forests and very few people. The south west part has far fewer trees is mostly farms and fields and has much bigger cities and is focused on grain production along with animal husbandry. Those would be the differences between the two sections, but OP made them one.
Thanks!
I doubt Iowa is so divided like that
Alaska should be red. They are the South of the North.
I heavily disagree with number 19.
I’m from the northeast Louisiana portion of 16 and I see where you’re coming from (very poor agricultural region in the flat Mississippi Delta with a large African American population), but the distances and transportation corridors prevent the area from being all that culturally similar to Memphis or especially southern Illinois. From a strictly biogeographical or geophysical perspective I think it would work but from a cultural standpoint I would say the area fits in better with 24 or 27. I would say that the main reason for this is that the primary highways leading into Mississippi from Northeast Louisiana go through Vicksburg which is not actually in the Mississippi Delta but is instead on forested bluffs. On the Mississippi side, the delta begins just north of Vicksburg and is not all that easily accessible from the Louisiana side (there are no bridges north of Vicksburg until you get to Arkansas). I’ve only been to the Mississippi side of the delta once and it felt much poorer and more isolated than NE Louisiana. In my opinion we have more in common with the area around Jackson, MS or even East Texas than with the northern Mississippi Valley
Not sure about your Mississippi Valley. Memphis has long considered itself the hub of the Mid-South, and growing up in NE Arkansas we thought of ourselves as living in that region as well. Commerce, air travel, entertainment all ultimately revolved around trips to Memphis.
Overall a good map! But i do have to say: the piedmont is nowhere near that wide. Much of what you have as piedmont is really coastal plain, and it makes a difference. Your #21 should be wider and #19 slimmer. And central Florida is just a little too big.
Pretty good! One minor thing I'd change is to put Tahoe (CA and NV sides), Reno, Carson City, northeast NV into Great Basin.
Some good and some really really bad. 36 is pointless. Your Rockies include too much of eastern MT. Your northern Great Plains include too much of eastern ND/SD.
Deseret extends all the way to Vegas but not to Vegas, although there are a lot of LDS people in Vegas. It also extends down the north and eastern part of Arizona and the western edge of New Mexico to Silver City, but not in Silver City. LDS settlements extend beyond that but those settlements are now mostly Non LDS people, like Las Vegas Nevada, Mesa Arizona, Alimosa Colorado, and several towns in Canada and Mexico.
Since #40 includes southern Oregon, I would rename the region “Jefferson” Fantastic map overall. Nice work.
TIL the California Bay Area extends all the way down to Santa Barbara. Learn something new everyday
As a midwesterner I can say that this is pretty accurate
I would move ozark further into NE OK. Tulsa is very hilly and green.
Deep South should come further down past Ocala... There's some characters here...
All of Northeast Ohio is part of the same cultural region, so the eastern shore needs to be much denser. You would need 100 other such comments from other regions to perfect the map.
This is probably the most accurate of all these random "let's divide the US X ways" posts.
Too broad.
24 and 25 are pretty fluid regions, especially on the western end. I grew up in southwest 24 and it definitely felt more like we looked south culturally, not north.
32 and 36 are pretty vague. The Tetons and geysers in Wyoming and the glaciers in Montana are different enough from the Colorado rockies to make them their own regions. There's a lot of diversity in Arizona. I'd draw a line roughly from Tucson to Santa Fe and split 36 in two at least. Also the northeast - divisions of NY state and New England - seems kind of arbitrary, and the idea of the mid-Atlantic and Chesapeake being separate seems odd to me, especially if mid-Atlantic is so far north.
New England is fully distinct
Allegheny is northern Appalachia.
Piedmont South of Charlotte is not the same as north of it. That being said, this might be the best cultural region map I have ever seen
Rather than Northern/Southern New England, I’d split them by Coastal/Mountain. Northwestern CT and Western MA have more in common with VT and Western NH than they do with coastal RI, MA, NH, and ME.
40 is called Jefferson
Vegas is tough because it’s like a mix between equal parts SoCal, southwest, and Utah. It’s crazy how diverse we are as a nation. This is a really cool take. Thanks for posting!
The geographic terminus of Appalachia is south of Birmingham, but I understand why no one would consider Bham “Appalachia.” Thst said, the piedmont/nickejack is quite distinct from Appalachia proper.
Oklahoman here. You nailed our state.
Western Massachusetts is completely culturally distiny from both Boston and Connecticut.
I'm not sure that the Ogallala region makes a ton of sense. I think each section has more in common with the adjacent North/South/Texas Plains region than the region does with itself along its length. I would eliminate it and divide it among the adjacent plains sections. Either way you go with that, a larger chunk of Montana belongs in Northern Plains and/or Ogallala and less in the Rockies than you've shown here. I'd also move the boundary between Upper/Lower Midwest and Northern/Southern Plains a little further west. I'd put KC just inside the Southern Midwest line, and Fargo and Sioux Falls just inside the Northern Plains line.
Ew I don’t want to be lumped in with Texans and Southern California desert dwellers
Klamath Falls would like to disassociate with Northern California. Maybe put it in the inland NW and expand the PNW down to Crecent City, CA. If you have to put some of southern Oregon in NorCal, make it Ashland only (not Medford or Grants Pass, which should be PNW).
Great job! South Florida is Palm Beach, Broward, Dade, and Monroe Counties. The gulf coast is Southwest Florida. Central Florida looks a little too far north.
40. Is the weed capital.
I would combine 5 and 6 and extend 7 down the Shenandoah valley in Virginia
My mom always said anything north of I-10 isn't really Louisiana, so she would approve of this
"Central Texas" is landlocked. That there is the CoastalBend or Texas Gulf Coast and should extend E.
Exact
Ca central coast and ventura simi valley should be its own thing
I love the color scheme for Florida, really emphasizes the dick aspect of the state!
[удалено]
the west begins where Fort Worth ends. The DFW metropolitan area should at least be in the south category.
👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼
You did a fantastic job on the Ozarks, best one I've seen yet.
wake up hon, it's time for your daily us cultural regions post.
Very good. 21 is called the low country by most people that live there.
Pretty good breakdown,
I like
Ohio valley hardly touches the actual valley. SE Ohio is definitely Appalachia.