Comment on why does almost nobody live here?
Karmanopoly@lemmy.world 4 weeks agoIt’s just weird that it’s the West Coast of North America and the major cities (seattle and Portland are well inland)
Just a little further south and it’s one of the mot populated regions (SanFran, San Jose, LA etc)
Jarix@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Do a quick look at the terrain option on Google maps. I think it’s very obvious that there were advantages places for larger populations to settle around. That particular section of the west coast is fairly inhospitable. Look at the coastal sea floor as well. It paints a fairly clear picture on its own, especially when comparing it to the east coast. Secondly find a timelapse of the how north American was settled as colonies. Stuff mostly came from the east and eventually made it’s way to the west. Railroads are big big part of how the west was colonized and there wasn’t much use for north south railways as things progressed as there was to get things to and from the east.
That locks in or at least reinforces the locations of where major populations can establish themselves.
It’s only been about 135 years since trans Pacific trade started(quick google info please be kind if that’s wrong)
And it was with people’s that had absolutely no relation with the European colonists. And they were also very xenophobic culturally and didn’t develop very advanced in deep ocean sailing due to lack of interest.
The old world was east of the Americas, mystery and the unknown was the Pacific. There be monsters there!
So all in all it seem to make a lot of sense that there wasnt much economic pressures requiring big coastal economies until well after established communities and regions developed.
I think Astoria is one of the older major coastal trade cities, but it faltered as Seattle and Portland developed.
And to your point about being inland a ways, they are in much most hospitable regions for farming and agriculture to support a large population