WI: North American borders were more geographic?

Mhh, thinking about it, I think there are some merits in using topography even in relatively flat regions compared to the river borders, although not always.

If someone needs a base map for the US, this should be good:

dESHdr2.jpg

For the Appalachians, while I wouldn't follow watersheds exactly I wouldn't try to incorporate all the elevated areas but try to put the eastern borders at the closest peakes rather than the foothills if they don't contain any importnat territory. I'm not going to do a full map, because it's kinda frustrating that I don't have a mixed topography watershed map, but I think the suggestion made here are solid overall, maybe factoring in the topography the map above shows could make some borders better, although there is still this issue of connectivity vs. similar geography which are 2 relatively opposing philosophies, I'm partial to the first, although I can see the problem it could create if it's prioritized too much.
 
Mhh, thinking about it, I think there are some merits in using topography even in relatively flat regions compared to the river borders, although not always.

If someone needs a base map for the US, this should be good:

dESHdr2.jpg

For the Appalachians, while I wouldn't follow watersheds exactly I wouldn't try to incorporate all the elevated areas but try to put the eastern borders at the closest peakes rather than the foothills if they don't contain any importnat territory. I'm not going to do a full map, because it's kinda frustrating that I don't have a mixed topography watershed map, but I think the suggestion made here are solid overall, maybe factoring in the topography the map above shows could make some borders better, although there is still this issue of connectivity vs. similar geography which are 2 relatively opposing philosophies, I'm partial to the first, although I can see the problem it could create if it's prioritized too much.

Do you know where I can find equirectangular projections of maps like these, only separated by black outlines and not colored?
 
Appalachia has been the big barrier in the American South.

Virginia couldn't manage West Virginia. The Carolinas and Georgia don't cross the mountains.

States have been known to adjust their borders, after being admitted to the union. Even little Rhode island had its struggles, with Massachusetts.

Florida needed some cash after the Civil War and it offered to sell the Pensacola panhandle to Alabama. However, Alabama was also broke, so the proposal didn't develop.

Florida lives in its own world. It should include the Bahamas and some other islands. Cuba? It may happen.

If the United States acquires new territory, my guess is that the new territory will be Atlantic Canada and the English-speaking areas.

Sea level rise? Some of the island nations are drowning. It's possible that a few will join with the United States. What happens when a nation goes under water?
 
Appalachia has been the big barrier in the American South.

Virginia couldn't manage West Virginia. The Carolinas and Georgia don't cross the mountains.

It's pretty easy to imagine Virginia still having control of West Virginia. State secession ideas in the US are nothing new, and in that same time period, East Tennessee tried the same thing West Virginia did, but failed.

Carolinas and Georgia lost control of their western territories for different reasons than Virginia.

Florida lives in its own world. It should include the Bahamas and some other islands. Cuba? It may happen.

The Bahamas were a colony on the level of the 13 Colonies (so would be their own state), and Cuba would also be its own state. The Bahamas would likely have been far more populated if they had been part of the US before the 1960s--it is one of the least densely populated countries on Earth, and there's tons of land for Florida-style sprawl.

Sea level rise? Some of the island nations are drowning. It's possible that a few will join with the United States. What happens when a nation goes under water?

That's where the Compact of Free Association comes in, since it's unlikely many nations would be admitted to the US as territories (like American Samoa). They preserve their sovereignity but receive some benefits from the US.

Few nations have voluntarily voted themselves out of existence. Newfoundland did, I suppose, when they voted to be essentially annexed by Britain in response to the Great Depression combined with government corruption. But would the Maldives, Tuvalu, or Kiribati vote for the abolishment of their country if/when their islands sink? Even if all of their citizens live in India/Australia/US/wherever, they'd likely still want to exist under international law, much like the Knights of Malta have despite losing Malta over 200 years ago. In any case, ocean colonisation might become a thing in the future giving actual physical territory to nations which have sunk beneath the sea.
 
Top