Skip to main content

Here's a very cool map of the United States that almost represents a sort of alternate history, from John Lavey of the Sonoran Institute, a conservationist group:

A map of the United States with state borders redrawn according to watersheds
(click for larger)
Lavey was inspired to redraw the continental United States along the lines of its watersheds by 19th century geologist John Wesley Powell, who proposed that new states created in the arid west be formed around watersheds to minimize conflicts over scarce water resources. Powell's vision, detailed in a gorgeous, full-color map, never came even close to realization, though:
Map of drainage districts in the western United States
(click for larger)
Lavey explains that rail companies lobbied against Powell's plan because they preferred existing state lines, which he says allowed them to maximize revenues from the agricultural industry. Had we instead followed Powell's ideas, we might see far fewer fights over water between states today. But Lavey also explores at length many other changes that Powell's map might have wrought—and then takes things one step further by asking "what if?" and applying Powell's approach to the entire country. It's a fascinating notion of an alternate United States, one that would likely be very different from the nation we know.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Elections on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 09:59 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Being in N Ohio in the Lake Erie Watershed, (12+ / 0-)

    I like the state drawn there that includes Cleveland, Erie, Detroit and Buffalo, it's a region with a great deal in common culturally and economically. We sure have more in common with those cities than with Columbus and Cincinnati.

    Sign me up!

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:02:58 AM PST

  •  I like watersheds because they give me an idea of (15+ / 0-)

    which way is up and down. Down towards the Gulf of mexico or the Pacific on the other side. Just between CO and WY is a major one. Wyo is Columbia River, CO is colorado river that empties from CA into Mexico.

    I'm often constrained in one of my hobbies or pastimes by watersheds. The state often divides things by roads, rivers, etc, but just as often by the height of land between two differing watersheds. Easy enough to tell if you are in the woods on a side of a mountain.

    On the divide once when my kid was little and needed to take a leak I explained that if he pissed in that direction it would end up in CA, this way and it goes to Louisiana. He loved the idea.

    “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

    by ban nock on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:11:25 AM PST

    •  Excellent illustration! More on divides.... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FindingMyVoice, leu2500, ban nock, KenBee
      On the divide once when my kid was little and needed to take a leak I explained that if he pissed in that direction it would end up in CA, this way and it goes to Louisiana. He loved the idea.
      Another aspect of the "divides" is that they, at least occasionally, provided decent travel routing.  I know the California Trail roughly east-west through south-central Oklahoma was in large part along the divide between the Washita and (South) Canadian Rivers.

      "Push the button, Max!" Jack Lemmon as Professor Fate, The Great Race

      by bartcopfan on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:28:10 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  We do the same thing, with ashes. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ban nock, peregrine kate, ColoTim, KenBee

      If you throw cremation ashes off one direction or the other, you send your loved one on a very different journey...

      The number of children and teens killed by guns in one year would fill 134 classrooms of 20 students each. (Chlldren's Defense Fund, 2013)

      by nzanne on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:37:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Far more Senators from this map than what (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jay C, FindingMyVoice

    we have with our 50 states now.  Don't know if that would be a good thing or a bad thing.

    Interesting, too, with the various cross-boundary water projects like the ones here in Colorado to take Colorado River water and send it east across the Continental Divide and put it into the Platte River drainage for Denver and the Front Range.

    •  Looks like the same number of states to me (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jay C, Rolfyboy6, MJB, peregrine kate

      Of course, my big beef with this map is that the Senate is unbalanced as it is -- at first glance the "Wyoming" and "Colorado" drawn here will get two Senators with even fewer actual people.

    •  Looks like more states to me (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ColoTim

      Powell's map delineates 27 or 28 separate regions west of his "Eastern boundary" - plus, those areas on the Pacific Coast: say, 31 "states" - some apparently quite small - vs. the 14 or 15 there now - Texas is problematical. Of course, that's not saying each watershed has to be (or should) be its own polity: but given the political pressures local elites (especially in the West) have been able to use to control "their" territories, it probably wasn't a great idea. Would the Senate really be improved by the presence of another 20 or so "Sagebrush Rebellion" types? Another dozen Tom Coburns or Ted Cruzes?

    •  If we had gone with Powell's idea (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KenBee

      We may have ended up with more or less states.

      But the 1st map on the dairy has all 48 continental states.

      •  This is not a slam on Mexico (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        thanatokephaloides

        But if they're interested, we could give them TX back and save money by not having to pay 2 senators and 36 congresspersons and then we'd have more money to feed the poor, house the homeless, provide education...and no Ted Cruz to stop it.  And Texas would be gone...I'm getting giddy at the very thought.

    •  no any more senators (0+ / 0-)

      50 states, 100 senators, it's a constitutional thing unless you were actually referring to the House of Reps because there would most likely be more congressional districts stretching the map like that.  More Congresspersons, given the current state of the House, would not be a good thing.

  •  Georgia, Alabama and Florida are fighting (4+ / 0-)

    over water from the Chattahoochee River. And some here in Georgia have proposed redrawing a boundary with Tennessee to acquire more water. Maybe this could stop all the feuding over water.

    "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

    by Lily O Lady on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:22:29 AM PST

    •  When I was at Georgia Tech in the late '80s (0+ / 0-)

      I had a class whose sole project was working on a solution to this problem.  I ended up dropping it.  IIRC, the real northern border of GA should actually be well into TN, but errors gave the current line.  The revised border would give GA access to the Tennessee River.

      •  Article (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        leu2500, peregrine kate
        According to Geisinger, the border between Georgia and Tennessee  was “established at the 35th parallel of north latitude and would have been located on the northernmost bank of the Tennessee River at Nickajack” – a lake connected to the river. Geisinger says that two representatives, one from each state, who, in 1818, drew the border line, got the location of the line wrong. He argues that the line the two men drew is too far to the south, at some places by more than a mile, thus giving Tennessee control over territory, and water, which rightfully belong to Georgia.
        http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/...
    •  divides (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peregrine kate

      I am not sure how this would help.  Water in the US is really a continental issue,which for many places in North America makes it an international issue.

      The Georgia and Albama border is on the edge of the central area of the US between the Great and Eastern divides up almost to Canada.  Any water that falls above them is going to be, in some way, be shared by all the states above them and even Mexico.  The Geogia and Alabama are not getting enough water, it is not a border issue, it is because consumers upstream are using too much water.

      A state fighting over water would be like Mexicans fighting over water amongst themselves.  It is not a Mexican problem, it is an international problem.  The US uses all the water before it gets to Mexico.

      •  I like Colorado. There isn't a single stream of (0+ / 0-)

        any significant size in our state that doesn't originate here in our mountains.  I like being upstream from everyone.  I do realize that doesn't mean our water rights are superior to everyone else, as Kansas has pointed out successfully in the courts and as Arizona and California are continually trying to do.  Still, when push comes to shove, we are first in line.

  •  You had me at "cool map"! (16+ / 0-)

    "Push the button, Max!" Jack Lemmon as Professor Fate, The Great Race

    by bartcopfan on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:23:16 AM PST

  •  not feasible (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nzanne, MJB, leu2500, peregrine kate

    The USGS has this map @ nationalatlas.gov for anyone interested in purchasing a full size version(and tons of other cool maps as well).

    I think it would be politically impossible to break up the states by watershed.  It's one of those ideas that made sense when the country was forming, but could never happen today.

    •  in a sense (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peregrine kate

      understandable, since states are common creations of people and people´s minds, not natural things. once a community has formed it exists out of its own right.

      by the way, under this model, should not all lands in the greater St Lawrence watershed fall to Canada?

    •  Yeah, it's not practical at all (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      INMINYMA, peregrine kate, Debby

      This map's Colorado, for example, would have almost no population, might even have fewer people than the real-world Wyoming has.

      This map's Montana, Wyoming, and Nevada might have even fewer people.

      The biggest oversight is that the map fails to take terrain into account.  It carves the most inhabitable (hospitable) portions out of states like Colorado and Nevada and leaves them with pretty much just mountainous and high-desert terrain.

      Please help to fight hunger in the U.S. by making a donation to Feeding America.

      by MJB on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:57:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wyoming would be fine... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        INMINYMA, La Gitane, peregrine kate

        Wyoming loses Cheyenne (it's capital) but gaines Billings Montana which is actually larger.

        Colorado on this map might have a smaller population that our Wyoming. Anyone got a clue what the large city is in the new Colorado? (Grand Junction???)

        Nevada isn't much worse than it was prior to World War II, Carson City/Reno and a bunch of Desert.

        There are two really fun ones politically: Utah, which just had Las Vegas added to it (Can you imagine the Goodmans visiting Salt Lake City?) and Mississippi which looks like Memphis plus the "Black belt" part of our Mississippi.

        New York really gets nuked.

        •  But then there's California (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          peregrine kate, James Allen

          Which loses none of its population at all -- and would still have only two senators.

          Unless the constitution were drastically amended, poor old nuked New York would still have the same number of senators, as would depopulated Colorado and all.

          And why is Oklahoma so huge? Looks like it could be divided into three respectable watersheds.

          Interesting fantasy, though.

          •  Agreed. (0+ / 0-)

            But then this proposed map wasn't intended to equalize population. I'm not sure if the distribution of states by population is significantly more equal or significantly less equal than what we have now, but unless the map has state boundaries that split LA from SFO and DFW from Houston (and San Antonio, I think) then it isn't really trying in that regards.

      •  Coming from a state (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Bisbonian, KenBee

        defined by its river boundaries, I find it odd to see that lost in these maps. The people on opposite banks of a large river might have more in common than people farther away, but that negates what a big obstacle a really large river can be. Politically, it might work better though. People might be more invested in taking care of their watershed.

        You're gonna need a bigger boat.

        by Debby on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 02:33:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Probably not, but of course the questions raised (0+ / 0-)

      are worth considering, especially as the U.S. population increases and the sources of our fresh water are more imperiled. Thanks for the link to the USGS maps.

      Welcome from the DK Partners & Mentors Team. If you have any questions about how to participate here, you can learn more at the Knowledge Base or from the New Diarists Resources Diaries. Diaries labeled "Open Thread" are also great places to ask. We look forward to your contributions.

      Support Small Business: Shop Kos Katalogue If you'd like to join the Motor City Kossacks, send me a Kosmail.

      by peregrine kate on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 02:21:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Interesting, but I'd have to quibble with WA (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rolfyboy6, James Allen, La Gitane

    Powell's original map focused on what he referred to as the "arid region of the United States." Hence, he didn't bother to provide any detail in the Northwest west of the Cascade Mountains, as this area is by no measure arid. As a consequence, he colored the coastal area west of the Cascades the same tone of gray both north and south of the of the Columbia River estruary. Lavey appears to have carried that forward on his map, grouping the area west of the Cascades but south of the Columbia River with the area west of the Cascades but north of the Columbia River, even though these areas are hydraulically distinct. No drainage crosses the lower Columbia (of course).

    I would have grouped the coastal area south of the Columbia with either the Columbia drainage (labeled as "OR"), with which it shares many easy connections by relatively low-elevation passes, or made it its own mini-state, rather than group it with the area north of such a major hydrologic divide as the Columbia River.  

    •  Upon closer look (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ColoTim

      I'd also take exception to the relationship between Utah and Nevada. Lavey's map seems to (incorrectly) imply that large parts of Nevada are in the drainage basin of the Great Salt Lake. It's not.

      It would have been better to leave Nevada more intact than drawn by Lavey, as most of the state (under current climatic conditions) internally drains to various terminal basins between the mountain ranges of Nevada, which were described by Powell's associate Clarence Dutton as "an army of caterpillars," when he wrote:

      Whoever has examined, even cursorily, the map of Western America must have noticed the following arrangement of the mountain masses: The great belt of cordilleras coming up through Mexico and crossing into United States territory is depicted as being composed of many short, abrupt ranges or ridges, looking upon the map like an army of caterpillars crawling northward.
  •  of course you can write any crap you like. n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  very cool indeed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nzanne, La Gitane

    I would love to see a version of this that used a color scheme to show the relationship among these watersheds.  For example red hues empty into gulf, blue - atlantic, green - pacific, etc.  And maybe darker colors downstream from lighter color tributarty watersheds upstream.

    I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

    by Satya1 on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:37:44 AM PST

  •  I have always admired Powell's original (11+ / 0-)

    suggestion, and rued the fools who rejected it. I hadn't known though that that was the RR folks. Interesting.

    My favorite of his statements:

    “There is not enough water to irrigate all the lands,” he remarked at a Los Angeles congress of farmers and developers in October 1893. “I tell you gentlemen you are piling up a heritage of conflict and litigation over water rights, for there is not enough water to supply the land.”
    He was booed from the room.

    But he was right.

    The number of children and teens killed by guns in one year would fill 134 classrooms of 20 students each. (Chlldren's Defense Fund, 2013)

    by nzanne on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:41:45 AM PST

    •  Here in SoCal (0+ / 0-)

      we do have some groundwater in the high desert and rural eastern counties, but they are certainly being depleted.

      Another fascinating (unheeded) hindrance to development was in San Diego.  The original land owners/developers saw a rich white-man's paradise here.  The weather, the scenery was just beautiful.  But since we are blocked in to the east by rocky mountain ranges, getting direct rail into San Diego was impossible.  So they had to come in from the north through Los Angeles.  This heavily impacted the industrial development here, and therefore the capital investment potential of the region.

      That is why our economy is so heavily dependent upon land ownership; it was all we had - traded and sold amongst rich white men (until the powers that be lobbied the hell out of Secretary of the Navy Franklin D. Roosevelt to select San Diego as the HQ of the Pacific Command, because they understood that the survival of our economy could not depend indefinitely on land wealth alone).

      So, a little off-topic, but history of land development has always interested me.  And San Diego's history has some very unique aspects to it.

      "Mediocrity cannot know excellence." -- Sherlock Holmes

      by La Gitane on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 12:28:52 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Lowry has made certain decisions (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    INMINYMA, KenBee

    about what to include in watersheds in the western US which are a bit dubious.  None of Southern California is in the same watershed as Northern or Central California.  

    I'm also not clear why he thinks the Klamath watershed should be lumped with the Sacramento/San Joaquin watershed. Including it with the non-Columbia areas of Oregon would have given the mythical State of Franklin.  

    There are a ton of anomalies in his decisions in the Great Basin too.  The Minnesota River will be entirely in Wisconsin.  Why a Wyoming at all?  The Powder River country just doesn't have it to be a State all by itself.  And so on and so forth.  

    "It's too LATE to stop now!" - John Lee Hooker

    by Rolfyboy6 on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:42:21 AM PST

  •  While my more vindictive self likes the fact (0+ / 0-)

    that Kansas is left with no surface water resources, it disturbs me that Oklahoma is so enlarged.

    And the division of the Colorado Plateau in this way makes no sense.  I'd include most of central and southern Utah with SW Colorado, northern AZ and the San Juan Basin in NM - even if the watersheds don't completely align, the geology does.  Make SLC the capital of a Great Basin state instead.

    “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

    by ivorybill on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:51:21 AM PST

  •  Great! We'd have legal weed now! (0+ / 0-)

    The western part of Oregon would be in Washington state which doubtless would have voted to legalize mary-gee-wanna starting today in this alternate history.

    What stronger breast-plate than a heart untainted! Thrice is he arm'd, that hath his quarrel just; And he but naked, though lock'd up in steel, Whose conscience with injustice is corrupted. Henry VI Part II Act 3 Scene 2

    by TerryDarc on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 10:59:05 AM PST

    •  careful (0+ / 0-)

      the Willamette area isn't, so Eugene, Corvallis, Salem, and Portland metro are still in Oregon. Southern Oregon and the coast are what's in that chunk of the new Washington.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 11:08:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  This Oregon might be as liberal (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoregon

    we'd lose the coast and Ashland, so possibly not, but the territory we'd gain in SW Washington wouldn't be too bad, and it doesn't look like we'd gain much else in terms of people, but we'd lose hard right areas like Klamath, Douglas, and Josephine counties as well, so we might come out better or at least even.

    ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

    by James Allen on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 11:07:29 AM PST

  •  Why are the Umpqua & Rogue watersheds "Washington" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ColoTim, James Allen

    That whole SW Oregon section getting assigned to WA on the map boggles my mind. And why doesn't the Columbia watershed follow up North to the Canadian Border?

    I don't see any other "state" split like WA is, with the Columbia/Willamette basin sitting in between.

  •  For anyone who loves maps (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peregrine kate, Debby, ColoTim, KenBee

    There's a neat (free) Coursera course about digital mapmaking from PennState: https://www.coursera.org/...

    I made an Eel River watershed map for Northern California as one of my assignments.

    Basically, you can get geocoded data for major and minor US watersheds and overlay it on any map of your choosing, which can be a lot of fun to play with.

    Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

    by elfling on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 11:54:15 AM PST

  •  Having just watched Gasland Part II on HBO last (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peregrine kate, RainyDay

    night, I'm even more interested in a map of aquifers.
    With a 1 in 20 failure rate in the cement capping, we are having hundreds of these wells injecting toxins into our major water sources.
    The program chronicles the environmental destruction (both natural & political) caused by fracking. When the EPA attempted to intervene, the Obama administration got rid of the head of EPA. The EPA then announced that the polluted wells were safe.
    The corporations are running wild, & PBO and Congress (& HRC) are bought & paid to keep quiet.
    Watch the program & then act locally to stop this while we still can. This is very serious shit.

    Warren is neither a Clintonesque triangulator nor an Obamaesque conciliator. She is a throwback to a more combative progressive tradition, and her candidacy is a test of whether that approach can still appeal to voters.-J. Toobin "New Yorker"

    by chuck utzman on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 11:54:48 AM PST

    •  You are very, scarily, right. Serious shit. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ColoTim

      Not remediable once done, only preventable.

      Support Small Business: Shop Kos Katalogue If you'd like to join the Motor City Kossacks, send me a Kosmail.

      by peregrine kate on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 02:13:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The profits will be made and the people long (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        peregrine kate, RainyDay

        gone by the time the ruins are discovered.  Nobody could have foreseen the environmental pollution by frackers, so of course nobody but the public will pay the price for it.

        •  BTW. Phase 2 of their plan is to use cheap gas (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KenBee, ColoTim

          to squeeze out renewables. Build LNG facilities to ship gas to Asia where the price is currently 8x what we now pay. Then our price goes up too as supplies get tight.

          Warren is neither a Clintonesque triangulator nor an Obamaesque conciliator. She is a throwback to a more combative progressive tradition, and her candidacy is a test of whether that approach can still appeal to voters.-J. Toobin "New Yorker"

          by chuck utzman on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 03:35:05 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Nuclear power plants are built on rivers. Is it (0+ / 0-)

      worth the risk of contaminating an entire watershed?

      Blue Castle Holdings is on it's way to approval of a new nuclear power plant on the Green River in Utah. It won a court battle last November.  

      The Green River drains into Lake Powell.  After Fukushima, who feels confident that a nuclear accident can be contained.

      Water doesn't get the respect it deserves.

  •  I ran across this concept thirty years ago... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peregrine kate, KenBee

    ...in an article by the late, great, ecologist Peter Warshall in the pages of The CoEvolution Quarterly.

    Peter was a pioneer of "watershed awareness", and I think he only proposed the alignment of political boundaries with watersheds as a thought experiment to get people interested in question like, "where does my drinking water come from?" and "where does my toilet drain to?".

    If I recall correctly, he was talking about county-size regional units rather than state-sized.

    During his long career as a writer, editor, educator and activist, he found time to compile a "quiz" of 30 questions to test your awareness of your local environment. You can still find it at Kevin Kelley's website.

    Try answering all the questions. It's a real eye opener.

    “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing
    he was never reasoned into” - Jonathan Swift

    by jjohnjj on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 11:59:27 AM PST

  •  John Wesley Powell... (0+ / 0-)

    The more I learn about him, the more brilliant he seems.  He really had a very good handle on the problems the west would face.  Moreover, he had very good ideas about how to deal with them.

  •  Wouldn't the borders with Mexico and Canada (0+ / 0-)

    also need adjustment, in that case?

  •  Under this map (0+ / 0-)

    New York City would be in New Jersey.  So what would it be called then?  Jersey City's already taken.

    Also, my guess is that Maryland, by taking in the Potomac River watershed (including DC), would have about 13 or 14 congressional districts.

    38, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

    by Mike in MD on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 01:20:29 PM PST

  •  Platte River watershed (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ColoTim, peregrine kate, AnnCetera

    Powell's map is correct. Denver is on the South Platte River and the northern part of the Front Range is part of the Platt River watershed. The South Platt heads north into Wyoming and meets up with the North Platt.

     But this new Lavey map is wrong. Denver's water does not go east into Kansas. Denver would be included in the Nebraska territory. So would Boulder, Greeley, Ft. Collins, and Cheyenne, WY.

  •  We need to add Alaska, Canada...rest of world. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bisbonian

    United watersheds of planet earth.

  •  Great map! Geology undergirds us all... (0+ / 0-)

    Several watersheds could have been combined into one state, to keep the Senate balanced with the rest of the US population, while still respecting the importance of water(sheds) in the arid west.

  •  Old saying... not sure of origin. (0+ / 0-)

    "Whiskey's for drinking. Water's for fighting."

    "Fast, Cheap, and Good... pick two." - director Jim Jarmusch

    by AnnCetera on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 08:34:32 PM PST

  •  On Lavey's Map, Texas Is A Lot Smaller (0+ / 0-)

    Would that make it less stoopid?

  •  NO!!! (0+ / 0-)

    You WILL NOT put me in Ohio, watersheds be damned!  NO!  Bad map, bad!  I'll rub your f*cking nose in it if you try that again!

    Just sayin', I won't go to a red state, no matter how much I love the color red.  (Why do the repugs get such a cool color anyway, shouldn't it be Black and Blue states?  We're all taking a beating here anyway…)

    I'm damaged and I like it, it made me what I am!

    by Damaged262 on Sat Jan 04, 2014 at 07:04:04 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site