How are the Appalachian mountains and the Rocky Mountains culturally different from each other?
Posted by NoHold7153@reddit | AskAnAmerican | View on Reddit | 120 comments
CurrencyCapital8882@reddit
In every possible way, they are as dissimilar as the Italian Alps and the Russian Urals.
Appalachian_Aioli@reddit
As others have said, the differences are too vast to name.
One thing to note: the Appalachians were settled by Europeans long before the Rockies. The distinct Appalachians culture is older. In addition, the Appalachians are more traditionally isolated than the Rockies. Even today.
PacSan300@reddit
Especially by Scottish settlers, which is a coincidence when you consider the fact that both the Appalachians and the Scottish Highlands were part of the same prehistoric mountain range.
jlanger23@reddit
Most of my ancestors were from the Appalachians and my mother's dna results were 40% Scottish. Those communities stayed pretty insulated for a good 300 years. My family tree showed the same few families sticking together for a long time.
Another interesting fact (if I'm remembering it right): when we were at Loch Ness, the guide showed us that one side of that particular area had North American bedrock/terrain and trees common in N. America, while the opposite side had European trees, from when the tectonic plates collided.
worrymon@reddit
You got a family copse.
jlanger23@reddit
We've branched out in the last fifty years or so (pun intended). Our gene pool is getting a bit more variety these days.
Alareth@reddit
Fun fact, the Appalachian mountains are older than trees.
KiaraNarayan1997@reddit
Younger than the mountains, growin’ like a breeze
strumthebuilding@reddit
The bedrock part makes sense, the trees part doesn’t
betahemolysis@reddit
Maybe they meant fossils
itsafoxboi@reddit
the mountains are older than trees, so it's unlikely that there would be tree fossils in it
codenameajax67@reddit
The mountains might be older, but the fossils can be much younger than the rock under them.
jlanger23@reddit
The trees were different on that particular side but I can't imagine them remaining the same through ice ages etc..
I looked it up and there are trees common to N. America but a lot of them were introduced it seems. It was interesting how different both sides looked though. I'm not sure if it was that one particular section of the Loch though. It's massive
panthar1@reddit
Yeah, I was like there's no way, that a species would go that long separated, and not evolve enough to be its own species.
Almost certainly a case of humans introducing it in last few hundred years.
angrywithnumbers@reddit
The Appalachians were formed before trees evolved.
TheDude-Esquire@reddit
A quarter of my ancestry is Scottish, but emigrated from Scotland directly to California during the gold rush. But still hill/mountain people.
GardenVarietyHag@reddit
I always wonder if they were drawn there because it was similar in a way. They are gorgeous mountains. Could’ve just been that. As someone who lived out West for awhile you do miss the mountains. The smell of the pine trees everywhere.
Clique_Claque@reddit
It’s cool and interesting historical coincidence, but it’s missing some key details. The Appalachians were largely settled by the Scots-Irish a unique, and prominent, American ethnic group. Yes, they were originally from Scotland, and then spent a few generations in Ulster (our European friends typically refer to them as Ulster Scots) before immigrating to British North America.
However, the Scots-Irish were primarily from the Scottish lowlands. So, yes, the Scottish settled the Scottish highlands, but the Scots-Irish were from a separate ethnic substrate.
kichwas@reddit
Is this true or is that just by Anglo and US settlers?
The Rockies are on the edges if Spanish territory and New Spain went all the way from Texas to Oregon since the 1500s.
The entire concept of cowboy is actually from the cattlemen of the Viceroy of Mexico which blends Spanish / Moorish and Indigenous and was all over the region west if the Rockies for centuries before the “Yanks” got there.
I know the people of New Spain traded up into the Great Plains east of the Rockies for centuries but did they never enter the mountains?
CZall23@reddit
From what I could tell, they rarely went into the Rockies. They were more focused on New Mexico. Communities in the Rockies were very isolated and small.
Southern-Usual4211@reddit
The rockies go down into New Mexico, hell Santa Fe and Albuquerque are technically near mountains in the Rockies
RelativeIncompetence@reddit
There are old Spanish mines in southern Idaho.
Appalachian_Aioli@reddit
A cursory review shows that the oldest continuously occupied town in the Rockies is San Luis. This was 1853.
While there were Europeans in the area before that, this is still younger than the capital of West Virginia, Charleston, which was founded in 1788. Hell, my alma mater was sounded in 1837.
The Appalachians have had a permanent population longer than the Rockies far longer.
I suspect there are older towns in the Rockies, but not in the numbers you finding Appalachia.
Southern-Usual4211@reddit
Prior to the 1500s? The Spanish were in the Southern part of the rockies in the 1540s and started settlements in the 1590s 🤷♂️
oh_such_rhetoric@reddit
Let’s, uh, not forget that both areas were populated by Indigenous peoples long before Europeans showed up.
lagonitos@reddit
Spanish settlers lived in the southern Rockies a hundred years before the pilgrims landed in Massachusetts.
notsosecretshipper@reddit
The Rockies are for extreme sports, rich people, and where all the movie place the secret government bunkers.
The Appalachians are for ghosts, poor people, and abandoned coal mining towns.
Laurie-la@reddit
Lol I live in the rockies and we're definitely not all rich.
Zizi_Tennenbaum@reddit
Right, you're "comfortable".
Hot-Frosting-5286@reddit
This may shock you, but poor people exist in pretty much all regions. There are no borders confining poverty to a specific area
Laurie-la@reddit
R u joking bro I cant afford insurance. I can't afford a car or car insurrance. I live with my parents because I'm disabled and can't work. There are poor people everywhere. Not everyone here is skiing 😭
Zizi_Tennenbaum@reddit
It’s not all about you. Rocky Mountain zone is vastly more wealthy than Appalachia.
Laurie-la@reddit
I'm not arguing it's not. Your reply specifically addressed me, and dismissed my experience. If your going to rudely make assumptions about people don't be shocked when they reply giving more explanation. Forgive me for being frustrated, but your really not being polite.
Zizi_Tennenbaum@reddit
You misunderstood my reply and instead of just not responding you chose to throw a hissy fit. Save your energy 😂
Substantial_Arm_6903@reddit
The Appalachians also have tons of extreme spots just with less luxurious/high profile experiences but we are skiing, riding, rafting, cycling and zip lining etc here too.
Accomplished-Fun215@reddit
Some of the actual secret government bunkers are in Appalachia - see the Greenbrier resort for a declassified one. Also Mount Weather.
itsmebrian@reddit
Wait, the Appalachians have at least one bunker: Site R.
HorseFeathersFur@reddit
Hoo boy. Where to start
Educational-Big-6609@reddit
Hoo boy. They’re over a thousand miles apart geographically and probably 100 years apart culturally, not to mention the populations of both are ethnically divergent (for the most part).
TapeDaddy@reddit
Appalachia is waaaaay more haunted.
Yeahboyeah@reddit
Height
OldPolishProverb@reddit
The Rocky Mountains cover over 4,800 km (3000 miles) across two countries. They start in norther Canada and end in New Mexico in the US. The width of the range varies from 100 km (62 miles) wide in Canada to nearly 600 km (370 miles) wide in the US. The highest peak is 14,440 feet (4,400 meters)
The Appalachian Mountains range is over 3200 km (2000 miles) long and it also starts in Canada and runs to Georgia in the US. They range from 160 to 480 km (100 to 300 miles) wide from. The highest peak is 6,684 ft (2,037 m)
The distance between the two mountain ranges is roughly 1000 to 1500 miles.
I believe you can fit the entire UK in the area of the Rocky Mountain range a few times over.
shelwood46@reddit
I'd note there are even cultural differences within the Appalachians, depending on how far south/north you are.
SockSock81219@reddit
Appalachian Mountains are ancient, older than the trees, as John Denver reminds us. Current denizens, living in carved out settlements in the slopes and valleys, are typically descendants of Scotch-Irish immigrants, who mined, hunted, farmed as best they could, and were famous for making moonshine, an illicit home-distilled alcohol from corn mash and/or sugar. The word "hillbilly" derives from these populations. There is not much skiing to be done on these low and densely wooded slopes.
The Rocky Mountains are much newer, steeper, wilder, and more recently discovered by Europeans. Culture around the Rocky Mountains is often seen as yuppie, rich, ski-slope enthusiasts. Chateaus and resort towns abound, and property is typically very expensive.
It's like the difference between the Carpathian Mountains and the Swiss Alps, but maybe even more so?
shelwood46@reddit
The Appalachians go all the way up to Canada, there is absolutely skiing and other outdoor winter sports in t he northern bits -- though the elevations are not as high, so the rich people do indeed do their skiing further west. Also there are tons of resorts (the Poconos and Catskills are both part of the Appalachian chain), but more for summer day trips.
ATLUTDisMe@reddit
It's like asking what's the difference between the Caucasus mountains and the alps
SockSock81219@reddit
true, one has Dracula, but the other has actual vampires, sooooooo... (shrug)
Responsible-View-804@reddit
What is built off pioneers. One is built off hillbillies
buttchugreferee@reddit
too many ways to list
they are over 1000 miles apart
ZannY@reddit
I would say that's a bit of hyperbole. It's more like scotland and england, close but very distinct.
mjheil@reddit
The Appalachians are 3,000 miles across plains and desert from the Rockies. They are on the same continent. Scotland and England are on the same island and are separated by a man-made wall.
THE_CENTURION@reddit
Why are you pretending like physical distance = cultural difference?
There are absolutely cultural differences. But the entire US is far more alike than different. And comparing it to other countries that are the same distance apart has no relevance.
mitshoo@reddit
I mean, I think that sounds like an interesting question, too!
Lostygir1@reddit
It’s more like asking “What are the cultural differences between France and Turkey”
dragonsteel33@reddit
France and Turkey, or France and Germany for that matter, are way more different than Appalachia versus the Rockies lmao
No_Butterscotch_5612@reddit
Objectively, sure. But the point is that, within the context of the US (which this subreddit firmly is) Appalachia and the Rockies are about as different as it gets, whereas within the context of Europe France and Germany are really pretty similar.
No_Butterscotch_5612@reddit
At least France and Germany border each other, share some stuff. It's more like asking "What's the difference between Switzerland and Bulgaria?"
dragonsteel33@reddit
France and Germany, or Switzerland and Bulgaria, are countries with completely different legal, economic, religious, and cultural identities.
The geographic distance might be similar, but settlers in Appalachia and the Rockies (or any two regions in the US for that matter) share a national identity, a single governmental tradition that has been broken once and unsuccessfully, a language, religious institutions (with Mormonism being a major exception), and so much more than a Swiss person and a Bulgarian do.
buttchugreferee@reddit
Good point, I just didn't feel like thinking too hard about geography today
Many_Pea_9117@reddit
You could've at least picked countries that weren't neighbors. That was probably the worst example. France and Germany have a lot in common compared to many other countries.
VoodooYouDoSoWell@reddit
Like a true American!
voltairesalias@reddit
Meh I mean I don't if it's quite like that, but I do see what you're getting at. I think it would be more like comparing Bavaria to the German speaking parts of Silesia.
CZall23@reddit
Overall, I think the Appalachian Mountains have a more uniform culture than the Rocky Mountain states. The Rockies feel more transient overall with culture centering on the cities/metro areas.
theshortlady@reddit
The Appalachians are far older than the Rockies. You can see it in how the Appalachians are more rounded and softer looking than the Rockies.
InvestigatorJaded261@reddit
The appalachians are inhabited even at very high elevations (proportional to their heights), where the Rockies would not be.
cheddarsox@reddit
Like the rocks themselves, its (old) east coast money vs (newer) west coast money.
Healthy-Brilliant549@reddit
Appalachians are full of hillbillies. The Rockies are a mix of old ranchers and tech bros in Patagonia
jginvest71@reddit
In the US, Appalachia is stereotyped as poor and uneducated; the Rockies are the opposite. But these are stereotypes. The regions are way too big to make such blanket statements. Geographically, the Rockies are WAY taller. Much colder winters. Baseball home run hitters like to play in Denver because the atmosphere is thinner. People might have a day or two of oxygen sickness when traveling to high mountain towns. Appalachia has none of that.
Sufficient_Cod1948@reddit
I think the only thing they have in common is the word “mountain.”
Drawn-Otterix@reddit
Rocky Mountains are recreational and Appalachian mountains is not a place you hike at 2 am to go watch the sunrise, unless you want to experience a supernatural ending.
semisubterranean@reddit
It would be easier to list the few similarities. Different waves of settlers, different industries, different accents, different population density, different ecologies and elevations ... there is very little overlap other than being in the same country and speaking the same language. The Appalachians have more in common with the Ozarks, and the Rockies have more in common with the Southwest and Pacific Northwest (including Alaska).
Adorable_Dust3799@reddit
And same language is iffy. They're both technically English but Appalachia has a lot of old English, Scots, Celtic /whatever. I'm probably partly wrong but close enough. It's not cajun level but close. I can not understand a deep mountain accent any more than i can cajun unless I'm watching the face and know what we're taking about.
snoogle312@reddit
I think it's beyond Cajun level. I've heard that Appalachian is considered one of the most difficult to understand dialects of English.
Adorable_Dust3799@reddit
I have game friends in both areas. The bayou friend is intelligible to me, because he spent a few years working at it. But if he's taking to someone in the background i might get a word or two. I'll tank them both as unintelligible and accept any opinion as to which is worse. They both have archaic aspects. The cajun less soo, but cajun includes a lot of bastard hybrid french. I do love listening to both. Such deep cultural roots that are fascinating to a California girl.
MillieBirdie@reddit
I don't have any example for the Rockies, but if you're curious about Appalachia you could check out Peter Santenello's 'Appalachia' series on youtube.
0le_Hickory@reddit
Appalachia. Imagine Scotland but it’s a rain forest with hot summers. Clannish and happy to scrape by on very little.
West of the 100th parallel, social cohesion of immigrant communities largely feel apart as population density dropped so low. (Until you get to the coast) the Rockies are very sparsely populated. Culture is uniquely American wide open spaces and independent.
Mountain people the world over have a bit of a rebellious independent streak so there are similarities but i would say having grown up in Appalachia it is very much harder to integrate into our communities then it would be in the West where historically everyone is from somewhere else. My mother married in and was 45 years later still a little bit seen as an outsider.
zoppaTheDim@reddit
Nearly all of the Appalachians are farmable, at least by pre industrial standards.
Very little of the Rockies are.
lonestar659@reddit
They’re very far apart for starters. Why are the Caucasus and Himalayas different?
BlackQuartzSphinx_@reddit
This sounds like a question I'd ask my geography students
voltairesalias@reddit
Unrelated but I just moved back to southern Albertaans can see Glacier from my place. I'm so excited to head south and visit Glacier and the Bob again (along with the rockies up here in Alberta too obviously). I had a few hesitations moving back here but seeing that Chief Mountain again on the skyline erased all of them. I'm excited to rediscover your state neighbour.
BlackQuartzSphinx_@reddit
I'm excited for you! I like closer to Makoshika than Glacier so I've only been once but it's a memory I treasure.
voltairesalias@reddit
Oh I've been out there! I love the badlands. As a prairie boy myself I quite appreciate that part of the earth, although I acknowledge it's not for everyone - only for us maniacs who really enjoy this God forsaken barrens stretch of the northern plains. From what I remember there's a decent amount of white tail out there interspersed between the prairies, badlands and hills. Seems like half decent hunting country.
BlackQuartzSphinx_@reddit
It's very nice! I live in a really rural area, mostly farms and ranches. It's not unusually to get whitetail or pronghorns in the yard even though I live in town.
voltairesalias@reddit
I just moved back from BC where they got amazing lakes, trees, mountains and warm winters (by yours and my standards) because I actually was insane enough to miss this prairie so much. I totally get it. It's God's country, but only for those of who are crazy enough to see it that way. I am legitimately very excited to revisit Montana - East of the divide l, not west. Although I'm more into the Choteau County north to the Canadian border type, I'm always into heading further east into the land that makes me feel at home.
If you can't tell - I'm very excited to be back on the prairies. The day I returned (last Saturday) I filled up my car at a place and there was a guy with a stetson, wranglers, I said hi - he gave me a huge copenhagen smile and asked me how my day was.... And I was just like... Oh fuck yeah I'm so back home lol.
BlackQuartzSphinx_@reddit
Lol I totally get it! I went to college in Missoula and the mountains and forests are gorgeous but it felt so closed in! People ask me why the heck I came back here ("here" being the Dawson-Richland-Prairie County triangle I grew up in) and just... it's home.
voltairesalias@reddit
Totally! It's like a feeling of claustrophobia. I also didn't like the grey winters. I'm not sure if Missoula had the same deal but the Okanagan had these super grey, sunnless winters where the clouds rolled into the valley in late Oct and didn't leave until late April. I missed those big blue skies so much.
False-Cookie3379@reddit
I read this and immediately thought that this is a student needed homework help.
GenZ2002@reddit
History, migrant communities, political histories, native cultures, economic history, resources, etc, etc.
Feels like comparing the Alps to the Pyrenees.
SphericalCrawfish@reddit
You can run off and live a life as a hermit in one and if you try it in the other you just die.
Substantial_Arm_6903@reddit
Appalachians have less vert and more groundwater.
MrLongWalk@reddit
This is like asking the cultural differences between the Dolomites and the Scottish Highlands
averagejosh@reddit
I guess this isn't explicitly a cultural part, although I think it plays a role; because the Appalachians are so much older than the Rockies (we're talking 400 million years older), they've had time to settle, erode and cover in vegetation. That means people can live among/on/scattered about the mountains.
Whereas the Rockies are still so young, craggy and jutting that it's mostly like... you mostly live next to the mountains and not typically on them.
Someone feel free to correct me, but as someone who's lived in the Appalachians my entire life, that's how I felt when visiting Montana, Wyoming, Idaho and Utah.
Ok-Big2807@reddit
I’ve only seen photos but, this feels a bit like comparing the Scottish Highlands to the Swiss Alps.
Pernicious_Possum@reddit
Just imagine every way too people’s could be as different socially as possible. That’s how different
CloudedLeopardDaemon@reddit
Appalachia has been inhabited by European- and African-Americans since the 1700s. It has a very, very distinct culture, rooted in the Scots-Irish Protestant identify of the first white settlers, with contributions from various Native American nations (foodways, folk medicine, local toponyms, etc), free blacks who fled the Lowland South to scratch out a living of their own, and later waves of people who trickled in. It's adjacent to Southern culture but very much its own thing. Often characterised from without and within by stubborn pride, distrust of outsiders, self-reliance, familial loyalty, fierce independence, and capable of both nihilistic debauchery and ardent piety.
The Rockies were settled by whites much later, and really didn't coalesce into a distinct region of the US until around the turn of the 20th Century. Telegraph, radio, and railways were always there to connect inhabitants to the civilised world back east, so there was no period of isolation for a truly distinct local identity to really form. Whereas someone from West Virginia or Kentucky will tell you with pride about how many generations their family has lived in those same hills and hollers (hollows), most people in Colorado are relatively recent arrivals from elsewhere, with the exception of Mormons who settled the region before the civil war, but that's another matter entirely. So someone from elsewhere in the US or Canada can settle in the Rockies and probably feel quite at home, as the culture there is much less distinct from the mainstream Anglo-American culture. Whereas Appalachia is more likely to feel like another world of you weren't born there.
Less-Load-8856@reddit
The way a Londoner is different from someone in a tiny village in Scotland.
Aspen9999@reddit
How is your country different than the country a thousand plus miles from you?
FoggyGoodwin@reddit
The Appalachians are covered w people, in valleys and on ridges, because they are old and worn down. The Rockies are part of the Continental Divide; they are sparsely populated on the lower reaches and not at all on the ridges, some of which are actually growing taller.
Aware_Molasses_7443@reddit
Culturally? I don’t think they are different. Economically? I also don’t think very different. Every region of the US has poor/middle/upper middle/wealthy
Queasy-Extension6465@reddit
Aren't the Appalachian mountains the oldest on earth and used to be higher than the youngster Rocky mountains but eroded over millennia?
Sufficient_Cow_7132@reddit
Westerners vs Easterners
Aware_Molasses_7443@reddit
2000 miles
Formal-Radish1413@reddit
Appalachia actually has a lot in common with Scottish culture. Historically thats where a lot of Scottish immigrants settled so many of their cultural elements are similar.
The Rockies are more indigenous influenced IMO. The indigenous tribes lived out there a lot longer than they did in the Appalachians and they had a larger impact on the settlements out there.
I think theres a lot of “darkness” in Applachian culture but more “light” in Rocky culture. In Appalachia theres a sort of morbid acceptance and cohabitation of/with death whereas in the Rockies death isnt as big of a part of life there.
Its hard to describe.
Id say Appalachia is like the Goth while the Rockies is more Bohemian.
jessek@reddit
In every way and not the least in geology and altitude
JooJooBird@reddit
The mountains themselves are also very different. The Appalachian mountains are geologically very old- they’re more rolling hills than “mountains”. Whereas the Rockies are relatively young and ragged.
GSilky@reddit
Living in the Rockies, I have noticed many parallels, some real agreement that is coincidental, but a lot of it is forced. Both have long histories of hardscrabble populations making it work. Both have histories of religious dissenters starting communities that color the broader culture. However, the people who settled in Appalachia were mostly forced into it, being rewarded for their indentured servitude with the worst possible land the employee owned. The Rockies were settled by people who mostly chose to go. Both populations developed interesting cultural quirks that are held in esteem by locals, but thought poorly of by outsiders because they developed in relative isolation from the dominant culture. Now, with everyone moving here from elsewhere, they saw mountains and a more rural focused lifestyle and decided bluegrass is what the Rocky Mountains mean. That stuff, as well as sasquatch and most other nonsense from outsiders, is completely tacked on by wealthy urbanites for whom one hill billy might as well be another. One major difference between the two is that there is a sense of hopeless defiance in Appalachia that is mostly absent in the Rockies, where everyone is going for something. They might not know what they are going for, but they are going for it. In Appalachia, I feel a sense that the people are going to continue being themselves, rather than looking for transformation.
Fit_Poetry_267@reddit
To add on - Id say people in Appalachia fiercely hang on to land, tradition, family, religion etc and put up literal and figurative walls around them
HonestLemon25@reddit
The biggest some others have mentioned is Appalachia is one of the poorest regions in the country. The Rockies are one of the richest.
MetroBS@reddit
Two of the most different regions in the country
voltairesalias@reddit
In every conceivable way from subculture to geography. They're entirely different. I almost can't even narrow it down honestly.
The Rockies are way bigger, more jagged, newer (settled by white people way later), colder, less fertile, and in more expensive states and Canadian provinces.
The Appalachians are more like hills, tree covered, more agriculturally fertile, older with our civilization, way poorer economically, warmer climatically, and with very different flora and fauna.
mapotoful@reddit
I'm from western NC and now live in the southernmost rockies.
They are different in almost every imaginable way. The only thing they share in common is getting from point A to point B usually involves going around your ass to get to your elbow.
Spikeintheroad@reddit
Someone else already mentioned the Rockies being relatively wealthy while Appalachia is the poorest area in the United States, with its only real competition being the rural areas of the Mississippi delta. To elaborate on that further the Rockies were developed more recently along the lines of deliberate real estate development which, aside from more wealth in general, means the area is developed for bringing in tourist dollars with skiing and vast amounts of natural beauty. Appalachia, while not totally lacking in tourist dollars, is relatively underdeveloped for tourism relative to its vast natural beauty. Appalachia is probably more accurately described as a post industrial area with formerly huge industries like coal extraction and steel production rapidly dying as a result of globalization. Its why Appalachia often gets looped into the Rust Belt description of neighboring Ohio.
WonderfulVariation93@reddit
The Appalachian region was heavily abused by industry and politicians. There are more environmental issues, health and infrastructure problems that have existed for years. People who CAN get out (usually the educated) DO whereas educated and wealthy people move TO the Rockies.
Traditional_Trust418@reddit
Idk. I grew up near the Rockies, not near Appalachia. I'm not sure what the Appalachian mountains are even like, but all mountain ranges are different. The environment surrounding them will make a difference
thatcoolguy60@reddit
The biggest difference is that the Appalachian mountains are really really poor. The Rocky Mountains are the opposite.
GSilky@reddit
A perennial entry in Ten Poorest American Counties list is Conejos county. There are a few very wealthy outposts around ski resorts, land barons, and a whole bunch of migrants and people who only own a cabin built before the forest was nationalized. Appalachia is similar. There are resorts worth billions behind hill people shacks.
theegodmother1999@reddit
this is like asking how the Pacific Northwest is different from the Southwestern Desert. it's all the things lol
-RedRocket-@reddit
Appalachia was settled much earlier, in spite of colonial prohibitions of expansion. The music, dialect and culture remained much closer to European standards of the 17th Century.
The Rockies were settled later, with a more racially and culturally diverse population, including second-wave immigrants from central and eastern Europe, African-Americans, and imported Asian laborers. The Rockies are also much younger mountains: taller, more rugged, less easily forested or travelled, less fertile. Ranching likely superseded farming as the major economic activity. Mining was for metals, not for coal.
It's a big question but answerable in terms of history and populations settling the regions.
Accomplished-Fun215@reddit
In nearly every way?
Both are big enough to have a lot of different subcultures, but parts of the Rockies are some of the wealthiest places in the country and parts of Appalachia are some of the poorest.
distrucktocon@reddit
Pretty much in every way possible.