Alternate Southwestern USA

JJohnson

Banned
I'm working on an alternate version of the Mexican-American War, wherein:

-Republic of the Rio Grande succeeds with Texian help, then joins the US in 1846
-The US annexes down to Baja California, Sonora, and Chihuahua

How would this be divided up into states?

My thought was:

-North and South California, divided at Monterey County, with South California containing Baja, and capital at San Diego
-Arizona's southern border is at OTL Sierra Vista east-west, with sea access just north of Puerto Penasco
-New Mexico's border follows the same line
-Sonora is formed from Chihuahua and Sonora.
-Rio Grande is a new state.

How would Arizona be affected having full-on sea access? How would Sonora and Rio Grande evolve as US states?
 

JJohnson

Banned
In 1836, Texas declared independence, as in OTL. In 1840, the Republic of the Rio Grande also declared independence, but was able to secure Texan help in exchange for settling their mutual border at the Rio Grande. General Canales met with President Lamar in April 1840, and he instead decided to support RRG's independence. Texan and Rio Grande forces, meager as they might've been, managed to secure RRG's independence.
 
If the RRG gets independence and the US takes Baja California, Sonora, and Chihuahua, then where does Benitez go if the French show up with Maximillian? Would the RRG support a Confederacy or would the US support the Yucatan? And would the RRG eventually join the US?
 
well if Sonora and Chihuahua are already part of the US, then there would be no Gadsden Purchase; thus, the southern border of *Arizona would mostly be along the Gila River like it used to be

i also have the American Southwest set up similarly to this in my ASB ATL, though without the Rio Grande Republic. one thing i had decided on was that Baja would originally be part of the rest of the State of California and split off later on (in 1952, actually) and being geographically identical to OTL's Baja states in Mexico, with the exception that OTL's San Diego county is part of the State of Baja California and serves as the state capital (with TJ being part of San Diego)
 
well if Sonora and Chihuahua are already part of the US, then there would be no Gadsden Purchase; thus, the southern border of *Arizona would mostly be along the Gila River like it used to be

Ah, would it? I imagine a purchase would still exist.

Without the south, would Arizona retain its triangle post-war? That's the big question there. Or perhaps give it up in exchange for gulf access?
 
Ah, would it? I imagine a purchase would still exist.
the Gadsden Purchase was made to establish a transcontinental railroad to Southern California, iirc. if Sonora and Chihuahua are already part of US territory, there's no need to make the purchase because they already have the land required to build that railroad
 

FDW

Banned
You should put the boundary line between Northern and Southern California along the grain of the mountains. This would put the inland segments of San Luis Obispo county and the Central Valley portions of Kern County within Northern California, while not splitting watersheds. The rest of border would consider would consist of the border between Inyo/Mono counties (belonging to Southern California) and Tulare/Fresno/Madera/Mariposa/Tuolumne/Alpine counties (belonging to northern California). This change keeps Watershed boundaries intact, ensuring that Southern California can continue to rely on water supplies from the Owens Valley area.

Going to other areas, Nevada wouldn't exist as a state, Northern California, Southern California and Utah would take chunks of it. (Northern California would get the Western parts including Reno and Carson City, Southern California would take Southern Nevada and small bits of OTL Utah and Arizona (the area around St. George in Utah and the part of Arizona immediately north of the Grand Canyon) , while Utah would take the rest of Nevada and some chunks of Oregon (The parts within the Great Basin).

As for Arizona, having a coastline in that area (And not having the Mexicali/Imperial valley divided by an international border) means that you're probably going to see a sizable city (Over 2 Million minimum) established in the Colorado delta, with a major port facility that has the benefit of comparatively easy access routes to the Western Interior.
 

JJohnson

Banned
Now, if that division doesn't work, how about simply a straight-line southern border of California, capital of San Diego, containing the Baja Peninsula, and calling itself South California? The two Californias might do what they did OTL and simply tell Congress 'these are our borders' and have Congress accept them (How the States Got Their Shapes, great book).
 
the Gadsden Purchase was made to establish a transcontinental railroad to Southern California, iirc.

A purchase. That was part of it.

Gadsden was authorized to buy all the land encompassing what we know today as every border state from the Atlantic to the Pacific. I imagine that some part of that would be part of a future purchase/desire.
 

FDW

Banned
Arizona's is the only one that I can see not being rejected immediately.

Were it not so late, I'd try my hand at them, too. If I remember tomorrow, I definitely will.

Well, that weird spur that Southern California has with Utah was because of a couple of rivers there. The remaining borders sit largely along watersheds, and generally it's a bad idea to split up watersheds in a region as dry as the American West. Hell, The West only got it's OTL borders because they were drawn before the locations of the major watersheds were known.
 
Last edited:
Well, that weird spur that Southern California has with Utah was because of a couple of rivers there. The remaining borders sit largely along watersheds, and generally it's a bad idea to split up watersheds in a region as dry as the American West. Hell, The West only got it's OTL borders because they were drawn before the locations of the major watersheds were known.

And why wouldn't that rational still apply even now...such territorial boundaries are likely to be drawn during the mid course of the 19th C. when most of these watersheds are unknown. straightline borders will almost certainly be the norm for first territories and then states.. between only major landform features such a mountain ranges or, oceans or bays or major rivers (ie the Pacific Ocean, Gulf of California, Colorado River, San joaquin and Sacramento and Snake rivers, Rocky mountains, Wasatch, Sierra Nevadas and perhaps the Tehachapis). Parallels straight lines could be drawn using a single significant peak as its reference point. Ie the line of longitude passing through "xyz" peak or even a line of latitude if its not something simpler like a specific line At a whole degree. Or straight lines linking what are easily identifiable prominent landform features.
 

FDW

Banned
And why wouldn't that rational still apply even now...such territorial boundaries are likely to be drawn during the mid course of the 19th C. when most of these watersheds are unknown. straightline borders will almost certainly be the norm for first territories and then states.. between only major landform features such a mountain ranges or, oceans or bays or major rivers (ie the Pacific Ocean, Gulf of California, Colorado River, San joaquin and Sacramento and Snake rivers, Rocky mountains, Wasatch, Sierra Nevadas and perhaps the Tehachapis). Parallels straight lines could be drawn using a single significant peak as its reference point. Ie the line of longitude passing through "xyz" peak or even a line of latitude if its not something simpler like a specific line At a whole degree. Or straight lines linking what are easily identifiable prominent landform features.

Okay, I modified it slightly so the most controversial parts (which seem to be the great basin borders) make more "sense". But I'm holding my ground on the border between the Californias, as parts of that border were proposed OTL as the state boundaries of California.

EDIT: you can click on the same link I put up earlier, it leads to the revised map.
 
Top