The first one doesn't even list the Pacific Northwest as a seperate region- it just lumps it all in with California boooo. It also makes questionable decision and puts Missouri in with the South- also very iffy and likely to inflame nerves. Missouri was a border state during the Civil war for a reason...
The second one isn't any better. Alaska is lumped in with the Pacific Northwest, despite being separated by 800 miles of Canada (and that's just to get to the lowest point, which isn't even close to the bulk of the state). North and South Dakota are lumped into the Rocky Mountain Region, even though the Rockies end half way through Montana, and have much more in common with the Central Plains, than they do the Rockies (here's a hint... on the western-most edge of North Dakota, is the Little Missouri National
Grassland). Heck... you're probably closer to the Canadian Shield, than you are to the Rockies.
Whoever put those regions together has obviously never been to the places they're categorizing. They're also missing the border between WA and ID, and have an extra "n" on the end of the "Great Lakes Regionn". Not a stellar example of map-making.
Previous Topic
Index
