!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
No major cities
One reason I haven't seen mentioned: it's hard to get there. The best you get is a two-lane highway (as in one lane for eastbound and one for westbound). Also because you have to go over a mountain range, there's actually very few highways to even use.
For the Oregon Coast, in that circle you have 4 highways: 6, 18, 26 and 30. If you want to go to, say, Newport you pretty much have to go to Lincoln City and then head South.
Ask the people in Astoria and the other cities there.
A few reasons. One is there isn't much flat land; most of it is hilly and even mountainous and covered in thick forests. The flat areas are occupied with farms and towns but the space is small and not enough for big cities to grow. The hills and mountains are heavily forested and there has never been a big enough population to need to encroach on them. It's also not great for building and farming, unless grazing animals.
The other big reason is there are no natural deep sea ports in that region. It's either marshy or the estuary of the river Colombia. Small fishing towns would be fine, but not big industrial ports that drive city growth (or did in the past). Meanwhile, Portland sits further back up the river with plenty of flat land and access to the water, so makes a natural port. And Seattle sits on the bay further north and is coastal, and a good port.
The dynamic got set up of big cities further back, and those areas never really grew. Once the land became part of state forests, then that restricts growth even more.
EDIT: Here is a topographical map showing in blue the flat land: https://en-gb.topographic-map.com/world/?center=38.54817%2C-119.79492&zoom=6
I just realized why it's called Portland.
In my defense, I've never seen a map of it before.
Nope, the name was decided with coin flip. Lol Could ended up as Boston.
i thought you were kidding until i saw the wikipedia link. that's fascinating, and very cool that they still have the penny
Going down a Wikipedia rabbit hole:
[Portland, Maine] was formally founded in 1786 and named after the English Isle of Portland. In turn, the city of Portland, Oregon, was named after Portland, Maine.
I failed at finding how the Isle of Portland got its name but saw this:
In Dorset, England:
The origin of the name "Portland" on the Isle of Portland is uncertain, but theories include:
- It may be a corruption of the Celtic word "Port Lann" ("harbor by the cliff").
- It may derive from the Old English "portelond" ("land by the harbor").
- It may refer to a fortified harbor or headland.
https://etymologyworld.com/item/portland
Its the first time I've seen the site though and that page feels a bit AI generated
That's a little disappointing.
Inland port -> Portland seemed nice and tidy
All good points but you also forgot to mention another key factor. This is more or less the rainiest region in the country. It's extremely wet and most people don't like that.
It really is shitty out there most of the year. Even in summer it can be 95 degrees in the valley and raining on the coast. Most of the people living out on the coast are natives, retirees, and Trump supporters as there isnt much work outside of casinos, gas station/fast food, and logging. There's also tourism but thats also just the beach, the casinos, and your standard saltwater taffy shop, antique shop, kite shop trio repeating over and over all up and down the coast.
Yeah people love to complain about rain in Seattle but some parts of the coast here get around double that amount of rain.
Yes. The temperate rainforest region of Pacific Northwest is a horror show. 300+ days of rain. And the others are just cloudy. You can't swim in the ocean. It's constantly below 80. Don't move here. It's horrible.
Because somebody put a giant red fence around the area, nobody can get in.
The Goonies: am I a joke to you?
NGL I’d move to Astoria in a heartbeat if I had a remote job and a place to land lined up, but the Epstein class has decided that can’t happen
I freaking loved Astoria, such a mood. Totally get why you’d move there. Maybe one day…
What they said but also, that's the Cascadia Subduction Zone. Faced disastrous drop in land level back in the 1700s. Dunked the whole coast into the Pacific
Maybe too hilly or steep cliff coast ( = bad when you want fishing or an harbor)
we just went to that area yesterday!! its very rocky and lots of cliffs on the coast, and super super hilly and forested in the interior.
many absolutely do live there, and those municipalities marked on your map there are reasonably populated. but the terrain is not super great for building large stuff, and they really do not like deforestation either. it is also farther away from freeway I-5, where most stuff on the west coast is freighted by truck, and is more expensive, at least from our experiences.
the sunset on the coast is SO pretty though :)
I'll add to all the maybe's by saying maybe Bigfoot.
This
There is clearly a secret Bigfoot preserve or if you believe scp-1000 a super advanced civilization of hyper-inteligent homonids we colloquially refer to as bigfoot
Other comments give a good tl;dw already, but in case anyone wants a video with pictures and examples, Geography By Geoff has done this topic a few times. Here's one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqyM54CNSsY
Maybe the same reason there are so few ports on the African West Coast.
i think that when locals call a place "the land that god made in anger", it might be wise to not settle there
These places feel normally populated for the geography when you drive through them.
The Northwest Sasquatch tick can grow to 6” in size and kill a person overnight.
It's a Bigfoot reserve.
I was there yesterday. It's cold AF all year.
Why do you think almost no one lives there just because you don't know of a major city in the area?
It's simple logistics, there's no reason for a major city to be there.
You have Seattle, Vancouver, Victoria in the same region. And if anything is coming to the area it's going to that region already, and if it's going farther south you have better ports in Oregon.
Genuinely curious what made you interested in this idea or where it came from
Basically, that's not where the farmland is (or, when it was first being settled, the fur, which provided the major economic incentives for why that area was settled in the first place). You also have to think about how the land was settled. Settlers from the east used mountain valleys to get around. Mountain valleys in that circled area aren't easily traversable and don't go anywhere or lead anywhere useful. Settlers from the southwest used ships and followed shipping routes up the coast. When you consider both these settlement methods simultaneously (and they were in fact used almost simultaneously) you will come to the conclusion that these are some of the most remote areas to be settled in the continental US, and their relative remoteness has a lot to do with why they were settled the way they were.
Meanwhile, from the perspective of a ship sailing up the coast there are few good protected anchorages to use as a sheltered waystation or safe harbor in case of inclement weather directly along the coast, but if you go just a little further you'll reach good port lands (it's literally called "Portland") or Seattle and you might as well journey just a little further to stop there instead if you possibly can. When you consider people taking a long and perilous journey around the horn of South America (there was no Panama Canal) you're almost at the end of the line, and you aren't going to want to stop 99% of the way, you're so close that you'll push on to the end, and that's why Portland, Seattle and Vancouver developed where they did. The farmland got worse the further north you went and became increasingly unsustainable so nobody really went much further before the gold rush provided yet another economic incentive to draw people there, but that's a different story.
If I remember correctly, they talk about it in this YouTube video. It basically boils down to the terrain and it being bad for ports.
There's a city named "Newport" smack dab in the center of the circle ironically enough.
It has been blocked off by a ring of lava
These are ceremonial, organ-harvesting sites.
Best to stick to the main roads.
they are populated. gorgeous drive up the coast. did a week in the banana belt near the turn of the millenium. it was a very nice municipality.
My buddy lives in Lincoln city. He’s a glass blower
glass and your buddy must be very happy together.
Because they live somewhere else
This isn't an informed guess, but I'd imagine it has to do with ground suitability, as well as risks caused by the ocean and weather. I recently read an article that major cities in the area, away from the coast, are causing the ground to sink below their weight.
Cold, wet, rocky.
They didn't know it when the states were formed, but I think a lot of the modern hesitancy comes from 'the big one' that we now know will certainly occur. I love visiting Newport - but you can't ignore the tsunami safety zone makers and evacuation route signage everywhere you look. There are plenty of houses and tons of space to build, but because these coastal towns are far away from the major hubs, no one is going to commute from there either, imho.
The harbor/bay at the north of that circle is Aberdeen and Hoquiam. It used to be a larger city and a major port, but with Seattle's development, the railroads from the east terminating at Puget Sound, and the boom of WW2 making the region a military base, it became overshadowed and neglected for the last 100 years.
Based on the voting districts alone, those areas aren't the least populated in the state, but they're also definitely not cities.
Since those areas also don't have hiking trails unlike a huge swath of the state, I'm going guess the terrain along the coast there is not easily traverseable.
Not sure if this applies to the entire northwest coast but I had a friend from a small town in the northwest who said the water was colder and there were more sharks in those waters. So it wasn't like beachfront property where people would regularly go swimming.
Also like the other comment mentioned those areas also tend to be steeper, more cliffs, etc so I imagine developing property around there could get expensive, and that's ignoring if any of those areas are park / natural preserve areas.