AHC: East and West Dakota

Have the Dakota Territory split East-West along the Missouri River for the most part rather than North South. See map for reference border. Bismark and Pierre are both in East Dakota

 
Nah that's dumb the Missouri river is the transport route and vital water source, you'll have far more commerce and relationships with the guys on the opposite banks than a hundred miles up or down stream. Plus it means 'West Dakota' has a much much smaller population than East Dakota and a much bigger proportion of Indian lands, neither things congress will be particularly keen to engender.
 
Nah that's dumb the Missouri river is the transport route and vital water source, you'll have far more commerce and relationships with the guys on the opposite banks than a hundred miles up or down stream. Plus it means 'West Dakota' has a much much smaller population than East Dakota and a much bigger proportion of Indian lands, neither things congress will be particularly keen to engender.

It is not dumb for the people that live in the area. I am from South Dakota, west river South Dakota to be more specific. There is a distinct difference West River and East River. West river is more ranching and gravitates around Rapid City as East River is more farming and gravitates around Sioux Falls. There is a rivalry between East river and West river.

As for the Native American question, perhaps East Dakota is a state before West Dakota as West Dakota is settled along the lines of Oklahoma where it is an Indian Territory first. But the problem with this is that the Sioux were as organized politically as the tribes of the Southeast that were moved to Oklahoma.

Another option is to have West Dakota include sections of Wyoming and Montana, it would be larger in area but help to even the population numbers.
 
Nah that's dumb the Missouri river is the transport route and vital water source, you'll have far more commerce and relationships with the guys on the opposite banks than a hundred miles up or down stream. Plus it means 'West Dakota' has a much much smaller population than East Dakota and a much bigger proportion of Indian lands, neither things congress will be particularly keen to engender.

Iowa and Nebraska are on opposite banks of a river. As are Kentucky and Ohio.
 
Iowa and Nebraska are on opposite banks of a river. As are Kentucky and Ohio.

Neither are on opposite sides of the singular transport route to reach the territory, Ohio having the lakes and Kentucky the routes east, ditto people moving direct into Iowa from Illinois. the Dakotas there's really only one major route in.

hzn5pk: there may be rivalry between East and West River South Dakota nowadays but is it a) greater than the difference between them and North Dakota and b) dependent on the two competing focal cities which only emerged after the introduction of rails and roads that made those cities grow?

When the states were made the two population centres of the Dakota territory were around Bismark and the south east corner abutting Iowa, which makes for a natural North-South split. And that population distribution is a natural result of geography.
 
Top