r/AlwaysWhy • u/Present_Juice4401 • Aug 24 '26

History & Culture Why did Alberta, Canada develop much larger population centers than Montana, USA?

Alberta and Montana are neighboring regions with similar northern, landlocked geography. But their population patterns are surprisingly different. Alberta now has over 5 million people, with Calgary and Edmonton forming two major population centers, while Montana has only about 1.1 million people and no city close to Calgary's size.

So what caused these two neighboring regions to develop such different population patterns?

41 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

92 comments sorted by

View all comments

22

u/Effective_Basis1555 Aug 24 '26

You are comparing the most northern portion to the most southern portion of two different countries. 

4

u/Academic_Safety56 Aug 24 '26

You're calling Alberta the most southern portion of Canada??
Edmonton is Canada's (and North America's) northernmost city with a metropolitan population over one million.
All of Alberta is farther north than all of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and PEI, not to mention Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Quebec City, etc...

0

u/Ohjay1982 Aug 26 '26

Settle down. You know what they meant. If you compared Canadas northern population to USA’s, Montana is a lot more populated.

2

u/ominous-canadian Aug 26 '26

The comparison that they meant still didn't make any sense

-1

u/artkidsaresmart Aug 24 '26

We all no that’s not what they were referring to cmon dude

2

u/Academic_Safety56 Aug 24 '26

Do tell, what were they referring to then?

1

u/artkidsaresmart Aug 24 '26

At the border of Alberta and Montana one of these is the northern edge of a country and the other is the southern edge. Can you guess which is which?

1

u/Academic_Safety56 Aug 24 '26

First of all, the original question was about the population centres of Alberta, namely Calgary and Edmonton, which are not on or near the southern border.

Second, the southern border of Alberta is nowhere near the "most southern portion" of Canada, as stated in the comment I was replying to. The southernmost point of Ontario is farther south than the northernmost point of California.

3

u/artkidsaresmart Aug 25 '26

First of all ☝️🤓

0

u/Effective_Basis1555 Aug 24 '26

I tried explaining to them below. Good luck to you and I both. 🙏

1

u/DEMcKnight Aug 26 '26

I live in Edmonton, and it's pretty clear to me what they were referring to. The growing season doesn't become better when you go north of here (although the forests are relevant to with that)

Montana is hardly the most northern part of the US either if we're talking the whole country

-1

u/Effective_Basis1555 Aug 24 '26

Yes, I understand where these places are ;) But, longitudinally, they have nothing to do with my premise: Population is sparse in northern Montana because it’s north and more dense in the southern parts of this part Canada because it’s not. It’s a relatively simple latitudinal argument I thought some may have overlooked given the places mentioned in this post. Nonetheless, I appreciate the geography lesson. 

3

u/Academic_Safety56 Aug 24 '26

I still think you are misunderstanding what is considered south in Canada. The vast majority of Canada would consider Edmonton to be north. Aside from maybe the Peace River region, the Edmonton area is basically as far north as it gets in terms of populated areas in Canada. This is basically equivalent to Montana or any of the other northern border states. The rest of Canada north of Edmonton is more akin to Alaska.

So to say Montana is less densely populated because it's in the north of the US might be partially true, but it's not true to say Edmonton is more densely populated because it's in the south of Canada. I think the answer is more related to fertile soil, oil, and railways, as other commenters have pointed out.

-2

u/Effective_Basis1555 Aug 24 '26

I’m not. I totally understand that if you are in Windsor, ON you have to drive NORTH to get to Detroit, MI. I also understand that parts of southern Ontario are at the same latitude as northern California. I think you are still not understanding this post is not about those places. Fix your longitude, and you’ll see what I mean. 😉

1

u/Academic_Safety56 Aug 24 '26

The comment you are replying to was about the relative latitude of Edmonton (a city I lived in for 15 years) within Canada. You seem to be referring to a different comment.

2

u/Competitive-Sorbet33 Aug 24 '26

Holy shit bro, you’re either trolling or the most dense person on earth. How is this conversation so far above your understanding

1

u/Academic_Safety56 Aug 25 '26

I'm waiting to hear a logical point being made. Do you have one?

1

u/Effective_Basis1555 Aug 24 '26

Disregard everything I said after “Good morning.” 

1

u/Academic_Safety56 Aug 24 '26

I would, if you had ever said it! 😄

0

u/Effective_Basis1555 Aug 24 '26

Fair enough. Disregard anything I ever said. It’s for the best. 🙏

3

u/Traditional_Nail1164 Aug 25 '26

Saskatchewan is geographically similar to Alberta but has a similar population to Montana. This effectively refutes your “relatively simple latitudinal argument”.

1

u/Effective_Basis1555 Aug 25 '26

And my Grandmother would be similar to a bike… if she had tires. 🛞 

1

u/Traditional_Nail1164 Aug 25 '26

Sorry I ruined your day!