4 ms·
Related video about US geography and the ongoing desertification of the flyover states, which for me, someone who has never left europe in his life, has been a
by est31 4y ago
Related video about US geography and the ongoing desertification of the flyover states, which for me, someone who has never left europe in his life, has been a bit interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwJABxjcvUc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwJABxjcvUc
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- finiteseries 4y agoThat’s about the Western US, some of which are flyover states, but most flyover states exist east of the 100th meridian and are generally more at risk to flooding than desertification!
- est31 4y agoOkay sorry I used the wrong term, not flyover states but western US states. Tucson seems to be affected by precisely this drought problem.
- finiteseries 4y agoThey absolutely are, anybody relying on the Colorado River and its compact are at risk, ie the southwestern US and Denver but particularly the southern division states like California and Arizona. Was slightly worried to hear people thinking Ohio is at any risk of desertification is all :)
- cossatot 4y agoThe western states are for sure the most fun to fly over, though.
- agensaequivocum 4y agoInteresting video. Another factor is the obscene amount of land owned by the federal government which has stop virtually all growth in rural areas in the western American states.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y agoHave you actually been on that land? Almost all of the land owned by the federal government in the west is mostly unbuildable. It is a mix of forest land, scrub land, rock, and infertile dirt, generally with a complete lack of surface water and often not sitting on groundwater of any note. What little can be ranched often is. The idea that ownership by the federal govt is stopping rural growth out here is ridiculous. ps. I live in rural New Mexico, and travel widely across the western states, frequently staying on federally owned land.
- agensaequivocum 4y agoYes I live in Arizona. There wouldn't be as easy as other places, but the existing settlements prove otherwise.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y agoThe existing settlements generally prove there's not much appetite for the substantial growth of random rural communities. There's a reason that Phoenix (and Tucson) exploded to become #5 in the nation, while hundreds/thousands of small communities remain pretty much as they were <back when>. The reason Patagonia isn't exploding is not nearby federal land ownership.