The Pacific Northwest is comprised of...

[TDAS04]

Oregon, Washington, BC

[ottermax]

Growing up there was a channel for Pacific Northwest news which used the WA, OR, ID definition, which I feel was the most common one growing up in the region.

[Sol]

WA, OR, all of Idaho except the Mormon belt in the far east, and western Montana. Northern California fits as well. In Canada, just BC.

[PSOL]

All except Montana, Alaska, and Yukon

[SevenEleven]

Alaska, BC, Oregon, Northern California (not NorCal), and Washington.

[OBD]

Oregon, Washington, BC. Maybe parts of western and northern Idaho if we’re feeling inclusive.

[Agonized-Statism]

I tend to think of it as Cascadia minus the Canadian and Alaskan bits- Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Shasta Cascade and Emerald Triangle regions of California, Montanan Glacier Country.

[Sestak]

Oregon, Washington, and Idaho west of the easternmost point of Boise County.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

British Columbia, Washington, Oregon and Northern California from Mendocino County up.

Haven't thought of Idaho being part of the region, but I could be sold to the idea

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Anywhere where languages in the Pacific Northwest Sprachbund were historically spoken.

[Mexican Wolf]

Northern California, Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, and the southern coast of Alaska. I only count the states/provinces that border the Pacific. Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming are Intermountain West and Yukon is Northern Canada by my definitions.

[ملكة كرينجيتوك]

I tend to think of it as Cascadia minus the Canadian and Alaskan bits- Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Shasta Cascade and Emerald Triangle regions of California, Montanan Glacier Country.

It's preposterous to exclude any part of the Northwestern Lower 48 that doesn't drain into the Pacific Ocean. I voted for WA + OR + ID but there are good reasons to include MT and WY. Who was the 1 person out of 46 who didn't vote for Oregon?

Here's what the Internet says

link


"Map of the Pacific NW"


Northwestern US Physical Map

[ملكة كرينجيتوك]

I tend to think of it as Cascadia minus the Canadian and Alaskan bits- Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Shasta Cascade and Emerald Triangle regions of California, Montanan Glacier Country.

It's preposterous to exclude any part of the Northwestern Lower 48 that doesn't drain into the Pacific Ocean. I voted for WA + OR + ID but there are good reasons to include MT and WY. Who was the 1 person out of 46 who didn't vote for Oregon?

Here's what the Internet says

more anecdotal evidence in favor of the argument that the Bay Area is more similar to SoCal than to the PNW

Idaho has a massive influx of conservatives from California, they think they're "escaping" the communists in Cali to join the good folk in Idaho.

They don't accept that the native Idahoans hate them....

Liberal-hippies get along with the country-conservatives in Idaho way more than the Californian-conservatives..

My boss lived in Idaho (worked remotely) and he loved that I rode my bike everywhere and drove an electric car in Seattle because it meant I was taking care of the environment. He would comment on that stuff all the time about how he liked me because I cared. And he was conservative as ; would be on video calls with a "Let's Go Brandon" mug, all of it.

My step-sister is hippie as  and she fits right in up there (also anti-vaxx, so they like her on that too).

They all hate the suburban Californians running away up there.

Yeah, I agree. I think there are plenty of shared values for people that grew up here, regardless of political leanings—everyone generally seem to care about nature (whether it’s looking at it through binoculars or shooting at it) and there’s an attitude of polite indifference between groups, “live and let live”, in my experience at least.

The new transplants seem to be more suburban assholes who want to build a castle, dodge taxes, and act entitled in public.

Live in ID, can confirm pretty much this whole thread. ID conservatives, especially East ID conservatives, are more old-school libertarians than culture warriors. No one here likes DeSantis, and even Trump signs aren't super common (even that idiot Ammon Bundy, who is from NV, compared Trump to Hitler). I think that's largely a function of the Mormon population, to be fair.

As far as newcomers go, what reason do ID conservatives have to want them? Many of them see new residents as more competition for their favorite campsites, hunting grounds, fishing holes, hiking trails, and golf tee times. I think that plenty of Republicans from CA and WA and OR get the wrong impression entirely from the "greater Idaho" foolishness (which was mostly started in the first place by people from OR and WA).

[Sumner 1868]

Growing up there was a channel for Pacific Northwest news which used the WA, OR, ID definition, which I feel was the most common one growing up in the region.

NWCN channel 2. I remember that!

I tend to think of it as Cascadia minus the Canadian and Alaskan bits- Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Shasta Cascade and Emerald Triangle regions of California, Montanan Glacier Country.

The southeastern part of Alaska really does have an awful lot in common with costal parts of Washington and Oregon. And while the Vancouver area is the only part of BC I've been in, it really did remind me a lot of WA.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

ID, WA, OR, and BC

[It’s so Joever]

Idaho has and will always be a Rocky Mountain Region State. The Pacific NW only is OR, WA, and the far North of CA.

[Aurelius2]

WA, OR, BC, and the non-Mormon parts of ID. Coastal CA north of Willits. Parts of AK too. I just got back from a week in Kodiak and it felt like the PNW on steroids.

Missoula is arguably a PNW city too.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I don’t think anyone in Idaho believes that Idaho is part of the Pacific Northwest, which is almost always taken to mean ‘west of the Cascades’, but most people in Idaho believe that Idaho is part of the Inland Northwest, which is a subset of the Northwest - this language is routinely used by the local news stations to mean ‘anything between Ellensburg and Mullan’. I would add that the usage of Pacific Northwest in this thread comes off as the language of a goofy outsider: I rarely, if ever, heard people use this term, it was always just ‘the Northwest’, unless they were referring to the area west of the Cascades but usually you just say Seattle or Portland or Olympia for specificity.

I insist that anyone arguing that Idaho is not part of the Northwest is a fool. The panhandle is closely connected to Spokane, always has been, and is closer to Seattle than Boise. If someone moves away from north Idaho, they’re almost certainly moving to Seattle or Portland. The Seattle sports teams dominate, there’s a propensity to root for Gonzaga etc.

[Del Tachi]

Interchangeable with Cascadia.  Includes parts of WA, OR, BC and AK. 

[Tintrlvr]

I don’t think anyone in Idaho believes that Idaho is part of the Pacific Northwest, which is almost always taken to mean ‘west of the Cascades’, but most people in Idaho believe that Idaho is part of the Inland Northwest, which is a subset of the Northwest - this language is routinely used by the local news stations to mean ‘anything between Ellensburg and Mullan’. I would add that the usage of Pacific Northwest in this thread comes off as the language of a goofy outsider: I rarely, if ever, heard people use this term, it was always just ‘the Northwest’, unless they were referring to the area west of the Cascades but usually you just say Seattle or Portland or Olympia for specificity.

I insist that anyone arguing that Idaho is not part of the Northwest is a fool. The panhandle is closely connected to Spokane, always has been, and is closer to Seattle than Boise. If someone moves away from north Idaho, they’re almost certainly moving to Seattle or Portland. The Seattle sports teams dominate, there’s a propensity to root for Gonzaga etc.

I think the real answer here is that you'll find a fair number of people who, consistent with not considering Idaho the "Northwest", don't really think Spokane and Umatilla are in the "Northwest", either, and even Ellensburg and Bend are a little bit suspect.

I do think even people in Idaho would say that they have more in common with Montana, Wyoming and Utah, maybe even Nevada (certainly ex. Las Vegas) or even Colorado than with Washington or Oregon - perhaps not if they live in Coeur d'Alene, but otherwise. And the social geography absent state lines kind of bears this out. The real answer here is that state lines in this area follow neither geographical features (with some exceptions) nor socio-cultural boundaries and so are not a great way to determine "regions".

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I don’t think anyone in Idaho believes that Idaho is part of the Pacific Northwest, which is almost always taken to mean ‘west of the Cascades’, but most people in Idaho believe that Idaho is part of the Inland Northwest, which is a subset of the Northwest - this language is routinely used by the local news stations to mean ‘anything between Ellensburg and Mullan’. I would add that the usage of Pacific Northwest in this thread comes off as the language of a goofy outsider: I rarely, if ever, heard people use this term, it was always just ‘the Northwest’, unless they were referring to the area west of the Cascades but usually you just say Seattle or Portland or Olympia for specificity.

I insist that anyone arguing that Idaho is not part of the Northwest is a fool. The panhandle is closely connected to Spokane, always has been, and is closer to Seattle than Boise. If someone moves away from north Idaho, they’re almost certainly moving to Seattle or Portland. The Seattle sports teams dominate, there’s a propensity to root for Gonzaga etc.

I think the real answer here is that you'll find a fair number of people who, consistent with not considering Idaho the "Northwest", don't really think Spokane and Umatilla are in the "Northwest", either, and even Ellensburg and Bend are a little bit suspect.

I do think even people in Idaho would say that they have more in common with Montana, Wyoming and Utah, maybe even Nevada (certainly ex. Las Vegas) or even Colorado than with Washington or Oregon - perhaps not if they live in Coeur d'Alene, but otherwise. And the social geography absent state lines kind of bears this out. The real answer here is that state lines in this area follow neither geographical features (with some exceptions) nor socio-cultural boundaries and so are not a great way to determine "regions".

This is so wildly off base that it's hard to know where to begin. Fundamentally, it's an example of an opinion that is poisoned by the notion that politics is the primal force driving all divisions in the US. It's also an opinion that ignores the brutal realities of physical geography in the western half of the US: lines on a map abstract away from important physical barriers known as 'mountain ranges', and 'national forests' where no one lives, which in turn create cultural divisions and boundaries separating people. Wyoming and Montana are, more or less, on the other side of these barriers so Idahoans do not spend much time there nor are they connected to these places (there is an exception between western Montana and north Idaho but this is the justification for connecting Kalispell and Missoula with the NW!). Parts of Nevada where people live are also behind these barriers.

I won't bother spending much time discussing how southern Idaho should be categorized because, bluntly, I know little about southern Idaho, which tells you a lot about the importance of the divisions I just mentioned. So, sure, I am arguing in favor of north Idaho being part of the NW. The rest of Idaho can be categorized as belonging to "Mormonland".

[Tintrlvr]

I don’t think anyone in Idaho believes that Idaho is part of the Pacific Northwest, which is almost always taken to mean ‘west of the Cascades’, but most people in Idaho believe that Idaho is part of the Inland Northwest, which is a subset of the Northwest - this language is routinely used by the local news stations to mean ‘anything between Ellensburg and Mullan’. I would add that the usage of Pacific Northwest in this thread comes off as the language of a goofy outsider: I rarely, if ever, heard people use this term, it was always just ‘the Northwest’, unless they were referring to the area west of the Cascades but usually you just say Seattle or Portland or Olympia for specificity.

I insist that anyone arguing that Idaho is not part of the Northwest is a fool. The panhandle is closely connected to Spokane, always has been, and is closer to Seattle than Boise. If someone moves away from north Idaho, they’re almost certainly moving to Seattle or Portland. The Seattle sports teams dominate, there’s a propensity to root for Gonzaga etc.

I think the real answer here is that you'll find a fair number of people who, consistent with not considering Idaho the "Northwest", don't really think Spokane and Umatilla are in the "Northwest", either, and even Ellensburg and Bend are a little bit suspect.

I do think even people in Idaho would say that they have more in common with Montana, Wyoming and Utah, maybe even Nevada (certainly ex. Las Vegas) or even Colorado than with Washington or Oregon - perhaps not if they live in Coeur d'Alene, but otherwise. And the social geography absent state lines kind of bears this out. The real answer here is that state lines in this area follow neither geographical features (with some exceptions) nor socio-cultural boundaries and so are not a great way to determine "regions".

This is so wildly off base that it's hard to know where to begin. Fundamentally, it's an example of an opinion that is poisoned by the notion that politics is the primal force driving all divisions in the US. It's also an opinion that ignores the brutal realities of physical geography in the western half of the US: lines on a map abstract away from important physical barriers known as 'mountain ranges', and 'national forests' where no one lives, which in turn create cultural divisions and boundaries separating people. Wyoming and Montana are, more or less, on the other side of these barriers so Idahoans do not spend much time there nor are they connected to these places (there is an exception between western Montana and north Idaho but this is the justification for connecting Kalispell and Missoula with the NW!). Parts of Nevada where people live are also behind these barriers.

I won't bother spending much time discussing how southern Idaho should be categorized because, bluntly, I know little about southern Idaho, which tells you a lot about the importance of the divisions I just mentioned. So, sure, I am arguing in favor of north Idaho being part of the NW. The rest of Idaho can be categorized as belonging to "Mormonland".

This is saying too much and getting upset about something I didn't even claim. The commonalities are not political unless you make them political. The commonalities are things like shared social values, shared employment (ranching, mining, environmental careers, small-town tourism), shared religious values (whether Mormonism or the various moderate or conservative brands of western U.S. Christianity), shared demography (here perhaps slightly less relevant as Idaho has surprisingly few Native Americans), etc. These are not things someone in, say, Nampa (well, unless they relocated there from California recently - a different story) would say that they have in common with Seattle or Portland or Olympia, but are things they would recognize in common with Cheyenne or Billings or Elko.

They would recognize the commonality with Spokane or Richland or Umatilla - but again my point is that even those areas are not "really" in the Northwest from a socio-cultural or geographic perspective and still have more in common with many places east of the Continental Divide than they do with, say (to choose some more conservative spots), Albany (OR) or Centralia (WA) or Mt. Vernon (WA) that are still clearly politically conservative but also clearly Northwestern.

If you're really only arguing about "North Idaho" (i.e., Couer d'Alene and Moscow), you have to accept that this is both geographically and population-wise a quite small part of Idaho and really not very relevant for determining the nature of the state as a whole. As I said above, state lines especially in this part of the country often don't follow the boundaries we would draw now on geographic or cultural lines.

[All Along The Watchtower]

"West of the Cascades, east of the Pacific Ocean" seems like a pretty reasonable definition for the PNW.

[Vice President Christian Man]

AK, YK, BC, WA, OR, ID

[Upper Canada Tory]

Pacific Northwest = Washington state, Oregon, Northern California

Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming = part of Northwestern United States

(Note: The Pacific Northwest is also a part of the Northwestern United States, but excludes Alaska, Idaho, Montana and Wyoming)

British Columbia = part of Western Canada

Yukon = part of Northern Canada

I basically consider the Pacific Northwest, Western Canada and Northern Canada three separate categories that are not interchangeable.

Also, I don't understand why places like Yukon, Idaho, Wyoming, etc. that don't border the Pacific are considered part of the Pacific Northwest.