Rural Communities

Show Only ...
Maps - Photos - Videos

30 Zip Codes with the Fewest People Per Square Mile πŸ“¨

30 Zip Codes with the Fewest People Per Square Mile πŸ“¨

1HamiltonHoffmeister 13353
2HamiltonPiseco 12139
3St. LawrenceChildwold 12922
4HamiltonLong Lake 12847
5EssexNorth Hudson 12855
6HamiltonRaquette Lake 13436
7HerkimerEagle Bay 13331
8UlsterClaryville 12725
9HamiltonInlet 13360
10St. LawrenceCranberry Lake 12927
11HamiltonBlue Mountain Lake 12812
12HamiltonLake Pleasant 12108
13St. LawrenceSouth Colton 13687
14EssexNewcomb 12852
15WarrenNorth River 12856
16EssexSaint Huberts 12943
17EssexMinerva 12851
18GreeneWest Kill 12492
19HerkimerOld Forge 13420
20OswegoRedfield 13437
21HamiltonIndian Lake 12842
22FranklinOwls Head 12969
23EssexNew Russia 12964
24OneidaForestport 13338
25HamiltonWells 12190
26FranklinSaint Regis Falls 12980
27St. LawrenceParishville 13672
28LewisGlenfield 13312
29St. LawrenceOswegatchie 13670
30St. LawrenceDegrasse 13684

Land Without Bread | Catherine Tumber

Land Without Bread | Catherine Tumber

The loosely defined proposal for a Green New Deal hits the panic button, American-style, but it does not exactly lay a cornerstone. Which is to say that it avoids prickly issues of land use—generally reserved for states and localities that regularly do battle with sacrosanct private property rights. Yet the choices we make about our land are foundational to any future we construct, low-carbon or otherwise. It has always been so. Just ask the pre-Columbian indigenous peoples, the slaveholders and their human property, the “settlers,” the railroad barons, and the policy architects of postwar suburbanization and urban disinvestment. And consider the fact that sprawling suburban development devoured nearly 31 million acres of agricultural land—cropland, woodlands, pasture, and range land—between 1992 and 2012 alone, according to a 2018 report by American Farmland Trust (AFT). That is an area almost as large as New York State. More than a third of that conversion, 11 million acres, took place on prime farmland blessed with the world’s richest soil. That is an area roughly the size of California’s Central Valley. Protecting such land, and doing so in an equitable manner, is critical not only to our future food supply but also to mitigating and adapting to climate change.

A few others have pointed out the land-use blind spot in the Green New Deal, but they have focused almost entirely on urban land use, practices promoted by the New Urbanist and Smart Growth movements in the 1990s that aim for greater urban density, compact mixed-use, transit-oriented development, and walkability as antidotes to greenhouse-gas-pluming, car-centered suburban expansion. These urbanist measures are important in offering up an alternative to sprawl, of course, and are very much au courant in view of our newfound love affair with cities. But somehow, the inverse—protecting agricultural lands from development—has receded from public discourse in recent years, a casualty, perhaps, of the growing urban-rural divide that birthed the 2016 presidential election results. So has use of the word sprawl itself, that thing going on out there past the decrepit, empty shopping malls, far from the thrum of the metropolis.

Human brain hard-wired for rural tranquillity | The Independent

Human brain hard-wired for rural tranquillity | The Independent

Humans may be hard-wired to feel at peace in the countryside and confused in cities – even if they were born and raised in an urban area.

According to preliminary results of a study by scientists at Exeter University, an area of the brain associated with being in a calm, meditative state lit up when people were shown pictures of rural settings. But images of urban environments resulted in a significant delay in reaction, before a part of the brain involved in processing visual complexity swung into action as the viewer tried to work out what they were seeing.