New "Regions" for Overland Bound Members

[Michael]

Hey all,

I am thinking about tweaking regions a bit, which will mess some folks up a bit (hopefully not many). before I do that, can I get a few votes on this map? I think I like it more than whats in place.

Somehow makes sens that our domestic regions are based on the NPS?

I'll need to get good advice from our partners abroad for international regions.

Thank you!

 

[RescueRangers]

I like where you are going with it but not sure I can dig it. I mean, having Texas in the same region with Montana? Doesn't exactly promote regional meetups.

If we are going to do the regional rockers, its not exactly an even playing field. Look at our Appalachian trip last July, nine states totaling 2,882 miles and only pick up one rocker. Even the trip we have planned for this spring which we feel is still pretty aggressive as far as miles, doesn't get us out of our home region. Yes, we know we are in Florida and it is a drive to any where.

Just my view on it, don't mean to be negative.

 

[WJ - Firefly]

Good points! I hadn't even thought about it that way. Arkansas and North Dakota are two very different kinds of overlanding, especially if climate is a consideration...

 

[roamingtimber]

I just don't want to be associated with California.... I'll keep my guns, V8's and freedom.

But seriously, it looks like a good start. I would divide Pacific West and Inter Mointain into North and South, that would each resulting region more linked by geography and climate. California would most likely need to be split in to Northern and Southern. The SoCal going into the region with Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico etc, while NorCal goes with Oregon and Washington. I also think that Idaho would rather be linked with Montana and Wyoming than Washington and Oregon, but that might be more of a political division than anything else.

 

[Mike G]

I like it. But how about adding sub-regions under those main regions? For example, Pacific West would have sub-regions of NorCal, SoCal, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii and Alaska. That way we can just view/list meet ups for that specific region.

 

[ShawnR]

No matter how you slice it, there's going to be give and take. I'm game for whatever. But I also understand the thought process on smaller regions.

 

[hidesertwheelin]

But seriously, it looks like a good start. I would divide Pacific West and Inter Mointain into North and South, that would each resulting region more linked by geography and climate. California would most likely need to be split in to Northern and Southern. The SoCal going into the region with Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico etc, while NorCal goes with Oregon and Washington. I also think that Idaho would rather be linked with Montana and Wyoming than Washington and Oregon, but that might be more of a political division than anything else.

I agree with this, but more along the lines of So Cal and the rest of the southwest together.

 

[TreXTerra]

In my opinion, Texas and Oklahoma shouldn't be lumped in with the Mountain States and Idaho should be included in the Mountain region.

From Salt Lake to Texas (just to the border, not even anywhere inside Texas) is a two day drive on the interstate. There is very little that Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, and Arizona share with Texas and Oklahoma culturally or geographically. Maybe add a "Great Plains" region for Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska. South Dakota can really go with either Midwest, Great Plains, or Mountain depending on who you ask and I think North Dakota has more in common with the Mountain region than any other.

You could also split Texas (although some Texans will certainly take issue with this) and put the east half with the South East and spin the west half into a South West region with Arizona and New Mexico. But that might be carving things up a little too much.

Also, I think we need to have Alaska and Hawaii represented. Alaska is a popular destination and might be deserving of it's own region due to the distance and sheer size of the state.

Here are some other regional breakdowns that I think make more sense.

On this one "New England" and "Mid East" can be combined.

The "West" region on the following map could be broken down into "West" and "Pacific"

Even skipping state lines and going by time zone makes some sense.

In none of these are Texas and Montana in the same region.

 

[Michael]

This is going to need some thought...I'm not rushing it!

 

[roamingtimber]

There are a lot of ways to do this. I'm glad @administrator is figuring this out, not me.

 

[TreXTerra]

This is going to need some thought...I'm not rushing it!

Yeah, sorry to complicate things.

 

[Steve]

I think it was my suggestion to use the NPS districts, since so many of our destinations are in or near national parks. But with further discussion, I can see that these districts might not be optimal for Overland Bound.

 

[RescueRangers]

On this one "New England" and "Mid East" can be combined.

If you are combining New England the Mideast, that is exactly what I was thinking. Its still a bunch of driving but that is what Overlanding is about anyways. The big difference is if we have a meet up its a reasonable distance from one another and we all have something basically in common, weather for one.

I vote for this design.