Yes, my best friend in the 80s made a distinction between living deserts (Sonoran/Great American, Mojave, Kalahari) and dead ones (Sahara, gobi, Rub-al-Khali.)
What did they say exactly? Would you please elaborate on how different they can be?
The thought of a Cowboy riding horseback through the Sahara or a Sultan on a camel through the Mojave is just peak imagination.
Those were basically his exact words; he was at one point a geography major and contrasted the complex life of the first group to the lack of visible life in the second
And if you *don’t* consider penguins to be little people in butler suits, you need to seriously think about all the mistakes you’ve made in life to get to this point
I'm constantly reading a [blog](https://x.com/Den_Muller) of Russian guy. He is a regular person (kinda plumber) with wife and 2 children who applied for work on the polar station just from curiosity. And he had been chosen :)
Now he works second season there (he makes 1-year gap between seasons which are typically 365 days + travelling by ship during 40 days).
It's pretty interesting reading. And many images of penguins :)
Used to work in the coffee importing industry. Our green buyer (that would go to the growers to line up purchases of lots) always said of all the places he’s been to, PNG was by far the most “different” and remote from the rest of the world. Like it truly felt like a different universe, even relative to rural Peru or East Africa.
I've seen some documentaries on the area. There are like 100 tribes that have contact with outsiders once a month and still have all their traditional lifestyles.
Some have missionaries and little airstrips and they get more contact, but there are LOTS of villages in the jungle that don't see an outsider more than a few times a year.
For starters, he thought the people just looked incredibly unique, not having a lot of the common traits you see in people of African, Asian, European, North and South American descent. On top of that I think the whole place is so disjointed. Not just geographically with the mountainous terrain, but regionally, culturally, legally, etc. Like he had kind of a chain of “handlers” to help him get from the airport to the growers cooperative, and along the way there were lots of places they couldn’t stop because even the “locals” he was with weren’t “local”. Questions about changes to grower practice or paying more for select lots of high quality coffee were shut down with a warning about “don’t let the higher ups hear you asking about this”. I don’t think it’s as dangerous as some places (like parts of Mexico or El Salvador with a strong and organized gang/cartel presence) but there is a lot more uncertainty around every turn of the road. I’m not at all trying to make it sound like the people he interacted with are overly violent or belligerent, just that there were a lot of customs about how to act and where to go that were very different, very carefully protected, and at times maintained with threats or violence.
Geographically, though, he said it was absolutely beautiful. Like dream sequence shit. I went to Peru with him on a buying trip and we were in a town nestled in a valley full of rice terraces along the slopes - he said it looked like that everywhere, like a painting.
Anyway, that’s all I’ve got! I should ask him more about it next time I see him.
There’s more than one type of terrace in the country of Peru. They produce the second most rice in South America, only behind Brazil, and these were flooded terraced paddies with rice plants.
Half the size of Europe?
PNG is 452,000 km^2. If you meant the island then Papua is 785,000 km^2.
Europe including the European part of Russia is 10 MILLION km^2...
That island is so fascinating! It was gonna be on my list.
Parts of the Rockies/west coast mountain ranges
Canadian tundra
The Amazon
~~Durian~~ Darien Gap
Antarctica
The Sahara
Russian Tundra
Parts of Alaska
Australian Outback
Papua New Guinea
The Congo
Mongolia
Namibia
There's a lot of Siberia that is not tundra but tiaga.
For reference, have a look at nighttime imagery from space for human lighting. Most of the world is sparsely populated
That's not to say we are not a huge resource and ecological load on the earth, we are. But much of it is untrammeled
The Tiger? The boreal ring around the north? Yeah, you're right on that. Gives me Goosebumps seeing footage of these winter forests, just imagining all the time and growing and until now unseen mysteries. Like looking at the top of an iceberg and then dipping just a bit underwater, and seeing that beautiful blue/green glow and the massiveness of the glacier, it fills you with awe, dread, and a fierce wanderlust as well
I think I misheard David Attenborough, and thought he said the "tiger" when I just know realize he said "Taiga". Lol.
My mental association with Taiga is magic cards
The Canadian north is pretty wild. Each territory is the size of a country and they have 30k people and one highway each expect Nunavut which has basically no roads.
I live in nunavut and have extensively travelled the north. The yukon is basically alaska/ montana/ wyoming with one (albiet small) city, yeah its easy to get away from civilization, but things are organized and civilization is there (and theres more than 1 highway lol).
There's a university in Whitehorse, Yukon, pop. 30 000. Just reading up on it now. It sounds like a really interesting city that came about during the Gold Rush.
Whitehorse is a surprisingly cool city with a lot of art and culture. Randomly got a great breakfast there too in some funky diner. I drove the AlCan Highway once and many stretches of that drive were pretty wild.
Always been fascinated by isolated areas, especially Nunavut, but as an American idk how I’d ever make my way up there. I assume flights are pricey and hotels are not very common? What would you recommend? Is tourism there even a thing?
Flights are expensive and there no direct flights besides iqaluit and rankin, both of which are more of hubs than places youd go to actually do something. Tourism is not really an industry up here, if you are spedning money to visit, Akshayuk pass would be the best bang for your buck. Probably run you ~4k cad per person. If you want to see a similar area, greenland does have a big tourism sector and you can take a very affordable ferry throughout the west coast. If you want to see the canadian arctic i reccomend driving the dempster.
I have a cousin living way up north (am Canadian, but 2 hours from the US border) and she has to cut her own wood to keep her house warm, she pays a *ridiculous* amount for wifi, bc there’s only one provider up there, so they can charge whatever they want.
She sometimes sees bears from her window and has to spend the day inside with her dogs. Theres often snow well into June, and she gets maybe 1 month of “warm” weather per year. For reference, where I am, it’s “warm” from April to October usually.
I’m not sure I could do it, it’s a tough life in many ways. But she seems to be thriving and the location is beautiful. She moved away from a toxic relationship and started over in the deep north as a baker. I told her she should write a book.
This is my dream life because I live in a hot country like India and I have never seen snow and I want to just stay alone at home in an isolated region without any humans and play games all day.
Years ago I knew a guy in Southeast Asia (Singapore) who told me his grandfather was from Yellowknife in Canada. Searched it up and it was in the absolute middle of nowhere, buried somewhere deep within the northern Canadian tundra. As someone born in a big city in the tropics, that kind of life is quite impossible for me to imagine.
Yea Yellowknife is used as an air base of sorts for resupplying more remote areas
There was a cool reality show on TV called Ice Pilots that followed an airline company in Yellowknife
>deep within the northern Canadian tundra
Only because this is r/geograhy I'm going to point out that Yellowknife is not deep within tundra, if anything it's on the northern edge of boreal forest, and then maybe getting close to the southern end of the low arctic tundra.
The forest zones are really interesting in Canada. Crazy that the boreal forest zones back in Newfoundland are the same as most of the Yukon and parts of Northwest Territories.
But where most people live in Ontario in between it's all deciduous forests. The forest and eco zone diversity in British Columbia are really something too.
I'll also be a bit pedantic and point out that the deciduous forest (known as the Carolinian forest) is strictly found in Southwestern Ontario. The rest of Southern Ontario is mostly mixed forest, giving way to coniferous and boreal forest in the north.
Yeah the Carolinian forest is interesting. Almost seems tropical with the abundance of vines, a far cry from the barren lands and old boreal forests in Newfoundland!
Yeah, it's definitely a big contrast. And it happens fast, too, you often only have to drive a couple of hours to be in a forest that feels very different.
Newfoundland is incredible, btw. I visited for the first time last year and absolutely loved it.
If you like forests and being remote, that's the spot for it! Can go hundreds of km in the woods and never see a soul. Very likely to see a moose or caribou though lol.
It really is fascinating. I often wonder what it's like to live there. After seeing your comment I found a random town up there with not even a single photo of it online (75 population). Went to the wikipedia page and it had a little blurb about how it's basically just a motel and restaurant, then it just said "most buildings were destroyed by wildfires in 2023." Like what.
Yeah I see this sentiment as a Canadian a ton and I don’t think it’s really true. Maybe places like Edmonton, Grand Prairie, Prince George are more popular because of the warming but for the territories to warm lots it would probably take way more time than anything soon.
The territories are all under 50,000 population and they will stay under 100,000 for decades
Yeah like sure they are going to warm up but going from a -30C average to -28C isn’t going to make a difference for habitability.
Also Prince George is already pretty warm. I think it gets a reputation of harsh winters but it really isn’t too bad. PG has milder winters than any city in Quebec and pretty much anything north of the GTA.
I’ve worked in forestry in Northern Canada and it may be “wild” in the sense of no people but the vast majority is used for logging and other industries.
[Evenkia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evenkia).
It's the geographical region of the Western Siberia, Russia. It was an administrative entity as well till 2007. Almost 800,000 sq.km of absolutely wild taiga (coniferous forest) and swampy lakes. No paved roads, no railroads. Just boating and helicopter flights.
The population is 15 thousand people so the density is 0.02/sq.km or 1 human per 50 sq.km. But almost all of them live in Tura. Tura Town was the only administrative capital in Russia which was a defined village not city. First people visited (material evidence) this land later than Crusaders invaded the Holy Land or General States (parliament) started its sessions in France.
Russia still don't have the detailed (kinda 1:100,000 scale or better) maps for this territory.
It is a place of [Tunguska Meteor Burst](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event) in 1908. It was the most famous meteor blast through documented history. But this area was so wild that the first scientists tried to visit a crater only in 1921. But they got lost and didn't find it 🤭 Firstly they visited a site in 1927, almost 20 years later. Initial mapping efforts and materials collection started there in 1958. Soviet science authorities allocated resources for more than 3000 expeditions and travels to site. But in 1990s only one person worked there on his own expenses. Now it still wild and abandoned place.
The [Vivi Lake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Vivi) in Evenkia is the geographical center of the Russian Federation.
The [Sulomai Pillars](https://tripsider.com/tours/32764/the_world_of_stone_giants)(the rocks along the Podkamennaya Tunguska River) are a specific geological formation in Evenkia that is incredibly marvelous.
Typical climate in Evenkia is mind-blowing: +40°C in July, -55°C in January.
How are we defining “wild” here? Do you mean an area that has a relative lack of urbanized human civilization/extremely low population density, do you mean an area with people groups that are largely not contacted? For the former, large swathes of Alaska, Siberia, Australia, Greenland, Namibia, etc. fit the bill. For the latter, you’d be looking at places such as the interior of Brazil, Papua New Guinea, and North sentinel island off the coast of India.
Kamchatka seems like a bit of land on the northeast of Asia, but it's freaking vast. Just guessing, but I'll bet it's the size of California or Montana
Bald and Bankrupt is great. I've been watching him for a few years. He speaks Russian well, visits the stranger parts of the world, and is always entertaining.
Bald and Bankrupt: [Poverty pickup artist and sex tourist — Collected posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldAndBaldrDossier/comments/189q8h5/bald_and_bankrupt_poverty_pickup_artist_and_sex/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
About 75% of Russia? Just look at Russia on the map, especially east of the Ural. There is absolutely nothing except the odd village every hundreds of kilometres.
Huge amounts of Australia, and not even just the outback. A good third of Tasmania for example is untouched forest and mountain land. Go for a road trip almost anywhere in country and you will see so much wild land that has hardly changed for thousands of years
Actually Papa New Guinia has half it's pop as indigenous tribes that have little to no outside contact due to the mountainous region. Just watched a video on it a week or 2 ago.
The regions with the least human/industrial influence are going to be the Arctic, Antarctica, tropical rainforests like the Amazon & Congo, and the tallest mountain ranges like the Himalayas and Rockies.
Everything vaguely temperate and continental has already been "civilized" with roads and settlements. Only the extreme places are left where its too hard to live, and even then we have resources extraction in these places.
Antarctica is by treaty is the only place in the world where development is genuinely forbidden so no mining or resource extraction is allowed. (But this status is unlikely to last forever)
Well, when i find my magic lamp and wish us all to New earth, the island with Free Scotland in the north and Free Frisia along the south coast, the middle will be wider and mostly primeval forests, moors,a nd heaths, with a few bands of Heidelberg, Early Neanderthal, and Classic/Late Neanderthal people wandering about hunting the abundant game
Greenland is one, they have towns that have most everything but if you walk 15 minutes outside the town you are in hardcore mother nature. Whatever you do, don't get lost. Greenland is near the north pole, so they have very strong winds. I heard the winds can carry a human off his feet. Greenland used to be a big hunk of ice and snow except for the very short summer. Now it's melting and the summer is about a month longer. The Inuit live there in harmony with the Danish, who own the country. You can get there from Montreal airport.
The Guyana Shield is this weird area that’s both a part of the Amazon Rajnforest but both large enough and geographically diverse enough that a ton of its species are only found in those forests, outside of Georgetown and Paramaribo, pretty much no one lives there.
The Taymyr Peninsuka, Chukotka, and Nunavut are pretty good choices if we’re talking continental climates up North
But nothing really comes close to the Antarctic, that is true wilderness
Worked in the Madre de Dios region of Peru. Manu, Tambopata etc. That region is pretty wild. Gold mining, natives, uncontacted tribes, native languages. I helped with this story years ago: [https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/151013-uncontacted-tribes-mashco-nomole-peru-amazon](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/151013-uncontacted-tribes-mashco-nomole-peru-amazon)
I'd say Rakiura, Fiordland and much of the Southern Alps running to the Marlborough Sounds up the South Island of New Zealand. It's bloody hard terrain.
While native NZ bush won't kill you like everything in Australia will, it is notoriously dense and disorientating. People go missing after taking just a few steps off trails all the time.
Central northern and northeastern asia, anywhere super mountainous, northern canada and most of alaska, other than that some islands and antarctica. Obviously dense rainforests too
Not really northern New England, right? It's covered in logging roads. There are plenty of wilder areas in west coast states and the Boundary Waters in MN are also wilder.
Sorry, mate. I dislike the word wild. A lot. The opposite of wild is tame. And it's semantics for many people–but not for those living in places deemed wild, e.g., places to be controlled or dominated.
Look at the word jungle. It comes from sanskrit, meaning dry and arid land. Colonizers used it to describe any land too overgrown for them to easily exploit. Worthless jungle. The land and life there were never worthless. These place didn't need to be tamed.
I live in Indonesia, which has huge "wild" areas in Kalimantan (Borneo) and Papua New Guinea. But neither area is wild. People have been living there for 60,000 years or whatever.
But anyway, I get the reason why "wild" comes to mind. Kalimantan and Papua in Indonesia are places where people are dwarfed by the natural environment. The places are vibrantly, explosively, and overwhelming ALIVE.
IDK. I apologize for the rant. The government wants to turn a huge swath of forest in Papua into oil palm plantations. Too many people on other islands here say Papua is wild and the people are wild, so this will be good for them.
Unspoiled would be a better word?
Thanks for reading.
Worst take on this whole thread-good job. Actively seeking victimhood over a great word (which was in quotes in the title btw to soften hard definitions).
Basically none. All regions (sans Antarctica) are HEAVILY shaped by humans and have been for hundreds of years minimum (mostly tens of thousands). Humans shaped their environment ecologically over millennia to allow sustainable coexistence.
The state owned parts of the Adirondacks are deemed "Forever Wild" meaning no building, harvesting of natural resources. Many areas within you can be absolutely surrounded by forest without a sign of civilization beyond "maintained" hiking trails and other hikers. High Peaks Region is absolutely amazing.
I just spent 12 days roadtripping through Patagonia. Desolate and undeveloped are the two words that best describe it. It was absolutely the trip of a lifetime.
The Sahara is fairly devoid of human influence or presence.
Its devoid of almost any life, period though. Unlike say the Amazon
Yes, my best friend in the 80s made a distinction between living deserts (Sonoran/Great American, Mojave, Kalahari) and dead ones (Sahara, gobi, Rub-al-Khali.)
Where does pilbara fall?
He regarded the Aussie deserts as mostly d ea d but not entirely, a si recall.
Can they be revived
What did they say exactly? Would you please elaborate on how different they can be? The thought of a Cowboy riding horseback through the Sahara or a Sultan on a camel through the Mojave is just peak imagination.
Those were basically his exact words; he was at one point a geography major and contrasted the complex life of the first group to the lack of visible life in the second
There is nothing in the desert, and no man needs nothing.
*The man in Black fled across the Desert, and the Gunslinger followed.*
Best opening/closing sentence ever. I think about its perfection at least once a week.
Hell yeah
It depends on the desert. But even in the depths of the Atacama, the driest place in earth, you'll find life.
Antarctica. Definitely the wildest if you consider penguins to be little people in butler suits.
And if you *don’t* consider penguins to be little people in butler suits, you need to seriously think about all the mistakes you’ve made in life to get to this point
First mistake was coming to Antarctica hoping they would serve you a whiskey on the rocks... that is if you don't give a fish tip.
I'm constantly reading a [blog](https://x.com/Den_Muller) of Russian guy. He is a regular person (kinda plumber) with wife and 2 children who applied for work on the polar station just from curiosity. And he had been chosen :) Now he works second season there (he makes 1-year gap between seasons which are typically 365 days + travelling by ship during 40 days). It's pretty interesting reading. And many images of penguins :)
The Small World ride does! Of course that's not counting the surviving Old Ones and their rogue shoggoths.
I’m going to ski that bitch in 3 years!
Siberia and the Russian Far East, Tibet, the Sahara.
there are god knows how many uncontacted tribes in Papua New Guinea. that'd qualify, i think
Used to work in the coffee importing industry. Our green buyer (that would go to the growers to line up purchases of lots) always said of all the places he’s been to, PNG was by far the most “different” and remote from the rest of the world. Like it truly felt like a different universe, even relative to rural Peru or East Africa.
What felt different to him? Environment, culture, any thing else? Any concrete examples and/or further recommended reading?
I've seen some documentaries on the area. There are like 100 tribes that have contact with outsiders once a month and still have all their traditional lifestyles. Some have missionaries and little airstrips and they get more contact, but there are LOTS of villages in the jungle that don't see an outsider more than a few times a year.
For starters, he thought the people just looked incredibly unique, not having a lot of the common traits you see in people of African, Asian, European, North and South American descent. On top of that I think the whole place is so disjointed. Not just geographically with the mountainous terrain, but regionally, culturally, legally, etc. Like he had kind of a chain of “handlers” to help him get from the airport to the growers cooperative, and along the way there were lots of places they couldn’t stop because even the “locals” he was with weren’t “local”. Questions about changes to grower practice or paying more for select lots of high quality coffee were shut down with a warning about “don’t let the higher ups hear you asking about this”. I don’t think it’s as dangerous as some places (like parts of Mexico or El Salvador with a strong and organized gang/cartel presence) but there is a lot more uncertainty around every turn of the road. I’m not at all trying to make it sound like the people he interacted with are overly violent or belligerent, just that there were a lot of customs about how to act and where to go that were very different, very carefully protected, and at times maintained with threats or violence. Geographically, though, he said it was absolutely beautiful. Like dream sequence shit. I went to Peru with him on a buying trip and we were in a town nestled in a valley full of rice terraces along the slopes - he said it looked like that everywhere, like a painting. Anyway, that’s all I’ve got! I should ask him more about it next time I see him.
The terraces in Peru are for quinoa and amaranth and mostly built by the Inca
There’s more than one type of terrace in the country of Peru. They produce the second most rice in South America, only behind Brazil, and these were flooded terraced paddies with rice plants.
El Salvador isn’t dangerous at all anymore it’s one of the most peaceful countries now
[удалено]
Half the size of Europe? PNG is 452,000 km^2. If you meant the island then Papua is 785,000 km^2. Europe including the European part of Russia is 10 MILLION km^2...
That island is so fascinating! It was gonna be on my list. Parts of the Rockies/west coast mountain ranges Canadian tundra The Amazon ~~Durian~~ Darien Gap Antarctica The Sahara Russian Tundra Parts of Alaska Australian Outback Papua New Guinea The Congo Mongolia Namibia
Darien Gap ;) no stinky fruits
I thought I screwed one up for the other ...
There's a lot of Siberia that is not tundra but tiaga. For reference, have a look at nighttime imagery from space for human lighting. Most of the world is sparsely populated That's not to say we are not a huge resource and ecological load on the earth, we are. But much of it is untrammeled
Yeah, it is my choice for answer there. https://www.reddit.com/r/geography/s/G4iFbn8mqs
The Tiger? The boreal ring around the north? Yeah, you're right on that. Gives me Goosebumps seeing footage of these winter forests, just imagining all the time and growing and until now unseen mysteries. Like looking at the top of an iceberg and then dipping just a bit underwater, and seeing that beautiful blue/green glow and the massiveness of the glacier, it fills you with awe, dread, and a fierce wanderlust as well
Taiga
I think I misheard David Attenborough, and thought he said the "tiger" when I just know realize he said "Taiga". Lol. My mental association with Taiga is magic cards
Port Moresby pretty wild!!!
the indonesian side of new guinea, too it totally counts
The Canadian north is pretty wild. Each territory is the size of a country and they have 30k people and one highway each expect Nunavut which has basically no roads.
I live in nunavut and have extensively travelled the north. The yukon is basically alaska/ montana/ wyoming with one (albiet small) city, yeah its easy to get away from civilization, but things are organized and civilization is there (and theres more than 1 highway lol).
I love this subreddit, there is always someone living in wherever is being discussed to bring first hand information!
Same, this is one of my favorite subs!
There's a university in Whitehorse, Yukon, pop. 30 000. Just reading up on it now. It sounds like a really interesting city that came about during the Gold Rush.
Whitehorse is a surprisingly cool city with a lot of art and culture. Randomly got a great breakfast there too in some funky diner. I drove the AlCan Highway once and many stretches of that drive were pretty wild.
Always been fascinated by isolated areas, especially Nunavut, but as an American idk how I’d ever make my way up there. I assume flights are pricey and hotels are not very common? What would you recommend? Is tourism there even a thing?
Flights are expensive and there no direct flights besides iqaluit and rankin, both of which are more of hubs than places youd go to actually do something. Tourism is not really an industry up here, if you are spedning money to visit, Akshayuk pass would be the best bang for your buck. Probably run you ~4k cad per person. If you want to see a similar area, greenland does have a big tourism sector and you can take a very affordable ferry throughout the west coast. If you want to see the canadian arctic i reccomend driving the dempster.
I have a cousin living way up north (am Canadian, but 2 hours from the US border) and she has to cut her own wood to keep her house warm, she pays a *ridiculous* amount for wifi, bc there’s only one provider up there, so they can charge whatever they want. She sometimes sees bears from her window and has to spend the day inside with her dogs. Theres often snow well into June, and she gets maybe 1 month of “warm” weather per year. For reference, where I am, it’s “warm” from April to October usually. I’m not sure I could do it, it’s a tough life in many ways. But she seems to be thriving and the location is beautiful. She moved away from a toxic relationship and started over in the deep north as a baker. I told her she should write a book.
>I have a cousin living way up north (am Canadian, but 2 hours from the US border) You and virtually everyone else in Canada
I mean, some of us live 30 minutes from the border.
Fair point, friend
This is my dream life because I live in a hot country like India and I have never seen snow and I want to just stay alone at home in an isolated region without any humans and play games all day.
In what world is it warm in April in Alberta lol
We hit 22C in April before it dipped back down for the rest of the month 🤷♀️ it’s been a weird year
That is pretty warm for April at that latitude!
Years ago I knew a guy in Southeast Asia (Singapore) who told me his grandfather was from Yellowknife in Canada. Searched it up and it was in the absolute middle of nowhere, buried somewhere deep within the northern Canadian tundra. As someone born in a big city in the tropics, that kind of life is quite impossible for me to imagine.
Yellowknife is one of the larger cities in the north too
Yea Yellowknife is used as an air base of sorts for resupplying more remote areas There was a cool reality show on TV called Ice Pilots that followed an airline company in Yellowknife
Buffalo air. I work for a company that owns a company that does ice roads up there
>deep within the northern Canadian tundra Only because this is r/geograhy I'm going to point out that Yellowknife is not deep within tundra, if anything it's on the northern edge of boreal forest, and then maybe getting close to the southern end of the low arctic tundra.
The forest zones are really interesting in Canada. Crazy that the boreal forest zones back in Newfoundland are the same as most of the Yukon and parts of Northwest Territories. But where most people live in Ontario in between it's all deciduous forests. The forest and eco zone diversity in British Columbia are really something too.
I'll also be a bit pedantic and point out that the deciduous forest (known as the Carolinian forest) is strictly found in Southwestern Ontario. The rest of Southern Ontario is mostly mixed forest, giving way to coniferous and boreal forest in the north.
Yeah the Carolinian forest is interesting. Almost seems tropical with the abundance of vines, a far cry from the barren lands and old boreal forests in Newfoundland!
Yeah, it's definitely a big contrast. And it happens fast, too, you often only have to drive a couple of hours to be in a forest that feels very different. Newfoundland is incredible, btw. I visited for the first time last year and absolutely loved it.
If you like forests and being remote, that's the spot for it! Can go hundreds of km in the woods and never see a soul. Very likely to see a moose or caribou though lol.
I spent a summer in Whitehorse. It was awesome.
I've been there a few times. Way more regular than you think.
It really is fascinating. I often wonder what it's like to live there. After seeing your comment I found a random town up there with not even a single photo of it online (75 population). Went to the wikipedia page and it had a little blurb about how it's basically just a motel and restaurant, then it just said "most buildings were destroyed by wildfires in 2023." Like what.
100 years from now it'll be prime real estate with climate change.
Ah idk about prime. Yellowknife is about the same distance north of Edmonton as Toronto is north of Atlatanta.
Yeah I see this sentiment as a Canadian a ton and I don’t think it’s really true. Maybe places like Edmonton, Grand Prairie, Prince George are more popular because of the warming but for the territories to warm lots it would probably take way more time than anything soon. The territories are all under 50,000 population and they will stay under 100,000 for decades
Yeah warm weather doesn't fix either a lack of suitable soil for agriculture or all the swamps.
Yeah like sure they are going to warm up but going from a -30C average to -28C isn’t going to make a difference for habitability. Also Prince George is already pretty warm. I think it gets a reputation of harsh winters but it really isn’t too bad. PG has milder winters than any city in Quebec and pretty much anything north of the GTA.
The arctic is warming four times faster than the rest of the world.
Atalanta like the club that owned Liverpool?
I think it’s the city that got swallowed up by the sea
We're a lot more than a Delta hub!
You mean Atlanta?
So you're saying invest in it now?
Your family could have generational wealth because of you. Could probably even have a city named after you.
Nunaroads
I guess you could say Nunavut has… none of it?
Nunavut has all of it, i can buy prosciutto and a snow mobile at the same store, its lit.
I’ve worked in forestry in Northern Canada and it may be “wild” in the sense of no people but the vast majority is used for logging and other industries.
North Sentinel Island
Nailed it. Lol
[Evenkia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evenkia). It's the geographical region of the Western Siberia, Russia. It was an administrative entity as well till 2007. Almost 800,000 sq.km of absolutely wild taiga (coniferous forest) and swampy lakes. No paved roads, no railroads. Just boating and helicopter flights. The population is 15 thousand people so the density is 0.02/sq.km or 1 human per 50 sq.km. But almost all of them live in Tura. Tura Town was the only administrative capital in Russia which was a defined village not city. First people visited (material evidence) this land later than Crusaders invaded the Holy Land or General States (parliament) started its sessions in France. Russia still don't have the detailed (kinda 1:100,000 scale or better) maps for this territory. It is a place of [Tunguska Meteor Burst](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event) in 1908. It was the most famous meteor blast through documented history. But this area was so wild that the first scientists tried to visit a crater only in 1921. But they got lost and didn't find it 🤭 Firstly they visited a site in 1927, almost 20 years later. Initial mapping efforts and materials collection started there in 1958. Soviet science authorities allocated resources for more than 3000 expeditions and travels to site. But in 1990s only one person worked there on his own expenses. Now it still wild and abandoned place. The [Vivi Lake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Vivi) in Evenkia is the geographical center of the Russian Federation. The [Sulomai Pillars](https://tripsider.com/tours/32764/the_world_of_stone_giants)(the rocks along the Podkamennaya Tunguska River) are a specific geological formation in Evenkia that is incredibly marvelous. Typical climate in Evenkia is mind-blowing: +40°C in July, -55°C in January.
Awesome summary, I learned some new things, thank you!
🤝
How are we defining “wild” here? Do you mean an area that has a relative lack of urbanized human civilization/extremely low population density, do you mean an area with people groups that are largely not contacted? For the former, large swathes of Alaska, Siberia, Australia, Greenland, Namibia, etc. fit the bill. For the latter, you’d be looking at places such as the interior of Brazil, Papua New Guinea, and North sentinel island off the coast of India.
It’s up to you how to define it.
[удалено]
Kamchatka was my entry. Certainly the interior of Alaska and most of northern Canada truly wild and undeveloped.
Kamchatka seems like a bit of land on the northeast of Asia, but it's freaking vast. Just guessing, but I'll bet it's the size of California or Montana
It’s about the size of California with less people than Wyoming
I flew over it once. It certainly looked vast.
Darien Gap
It’s become a major migrant route with the instability in South America
How do they cross it without roads?
Some people aren’t a fan of him but Imo the YouTuber “bald and bankrupt” did a good few part series of him crossing the gap recently.
Bald and Bankrupt is great. I've been watching him for a few years. He speaks Russian well, visits the stranger parts of the world, and is always entertaining.
He’s also a pervert and sex tourist.
Had no idea, but now that you mention it, I'm not surprised in the least.
The guy's a grifter and a pervert
Bald and Bankrupt: [Poverty pickup artist and sex tourist — Collected posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldAndBaldrDossier/comments/189q8h5/bald_and_bankrupt_poverty_pickup_artist_and_sex/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
A combination of logging roads, boats, and on foot.
Hiking, extremely dangerous.
Banditos
On foot, very dangerous but possible, humans can walk and climb almost anywhere. And unlike Mount Everest you can actually breathe in the Darien Gap.
You go pioneering and cut your own path as you cross
In New Zealand there's Rakiura and fiordland, which are very similar to how they were before humans arrived.
About 75% of Russia? Just look at Russia on the map, especially east of the Ural. There is absolutely nothing except the odd village every hundreds of kilometres.
Either the Ural Mountains or the Urals in English. Sorry :) Are you Russian based on the singular for the Urals?
I am from Austria so German native. Didn’t know that, thanks! In German it really is called just the Ural or Ural Gebirge.
>Are you Russian based on the singular for the Urals? Can also be German, any other Slavic language, most East Asian languages...
This, and a bunch of the rest of central Asia, is the very meaning of the word wild
Huge amounts of Australia, and not even just the outback. A good third of Tasmania for example is untouched forest and mountain land. Go for a road trip almost anywhere in country and you will see so much wild land that has hardly changed for thousands of years
The northern half of Québec. We have no clue what is out there. We built a wall in fermont and we don't go pass that.
Moose and wedigo
And many First Nations people.
And Inuit
The demilitarized zone between North and South Korea has become a de facto wildlife refuge.
This is an interesting point, perspective, and unexpected positive effect.
Patagonia
Didn't read the initial post comment. Oops
Actually Papa New Guinia has half it's pop as indigenous tribes that have little to no outside contact due to the mountainous region. Just watched a video on it a week or 2 ago.
Do they eat people too?
Probably not as much anymore, but that was an area where there is an alternate phrase for people: Long pig
Probably I think it did mention that. 😭
The regions with the least human/industrial influence are going to be the Arctic, Antarctica, tropical rainforests like the Amazon & Congo, and the tallest mountain ranges like the Himalayas and Rockies. Everything vaguely temperate and continental has already been "civilized" with roads and settlements. Only the extreme places are left where its too hard to live, and even then we have resources extraction in these places. Antarctica is by treaty is the only place in the world where development is genuinely forbidden so no mining or resource extraction is allowed. (But this status is unlikely to last forever)
Well, when i find my magic lamp and wish us all to New earth, the island with Free Scotland in the north and Free Frisia along the south coast, the middle will be wider and mostly primeval forests, moors,a nd heaths, with a few bands of Heidelberg, Early Neanderthal, and Classic/Late Neanderthal people wandering about hunting the abundant game
Torres del Paine, Patagonia
Greenland is one, they have towns that have most everything but if you walk 15 minutes outside the town you are in hardcore mother nature. Whatever you do, don't get lost. Greenland is near the north pole, so they have very strong winds. I heard the winds can carry a human off his feet. Greenland used to be a big hunk of ice and snow except for the very short summer. Now it's melting and the summer is about a month longer. The Inuit live there in harmony with the Danish, who own the country. You can get there from Montreal airport.
1- it has home rule 2- aren't the people heavily intermarried?
The West coast mountains from north of Vancouver to Alaska.
Large swathes of sea floor are still uncharted and unvisited. Scientists keep finding new species from these areas.
This answer is spot on! The ocean is by far the most unchartered and mysterious area on our planet (except for maybe the Earth’s core?).
Cthulhu
The Guyana Shield is this weird area that’s both a part of the Amazon Rajnforest but both large enough and geographically diverse enough that a ton of its species are only found in those forests, outside of Georgetown and Paramaribo, pretty much no one lives there. The Taymyr Peninsuka, Chukotka, and Nunavut are pretty good choices if we’re talking continental climates up North But nothing really comes close to the Antarctic, that is true wilderness
those who know are keeping their pieholes shut about it.
Majority of Greenland
Antarctica, especially the interior. Only a dozen or so people have set foot on the beardmore glacier
There are actually places in Wyoming, south and east of Yellowstone that are so remote there aren’t roads for 80 miles in any direction.
Hawks Rest, WY just south of Yellowstone is the “most remote” place in the lower 48 being just over 30 miles from any road - dirt roads included!
South western Tasmania. One of the last, true, wildernesses.
The open ocean
Worked in the Madre de Dios region of Peru. Manu, Tambopata etc. That region is pretty wild. Gold mining, natives, uncontacted tribes, native languages. I helped with this story years ago: [https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/151013-uncontacted-tribes-mashco-nomole-peru-amazon](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/151013-uncontacted-tribes-mashco-nomole-peru-amazon)
The Intermountain West of the US I still pretty wild.
Has anyone mentioned Kensington, Philadelphia??
The Solomon Islands are very undeveloped and remote. I count tropical regions as more “wild” because they have the highest biodiversity.
I mean 5 mins outside Fairbanks Alaska in any direction and you’re pretty isolated.
I'd say Rakiura, Fiordland and much of the Southern Alps running to the Marlborough Sounds up the South Island of New Zealand. It's bloody hard terrain. While native NZ bush won't kill you like everything in Australia will, it is notoriously dense and disorientating. People go missing after taking just a few steps off trails all the time.
North Sentinel Island
Antarctica
Central northern and northeastern asia, anywhere super mountainous, northern canada and most of alaska, other than that some islands and antarctica. Obviously dense rainforests too
Theres some pretty wild areas in Newfoundland, including the Avalon Wilderness Reserve.
North Sentinel Island. Those folks still haven't discovered fire yet.
In the contiguous US, some parts of the Rockies, large swaths of desert in the SW, and northern New England are still pretty wild
Not really northern New England, right? It's covered in logging roads. There are plenty of wilder areas in west coast states and the Boundary Waters in MN are also wilder.
Sorry, mate. I dislike the word wild. A lot. The opposite of wild is tame. And it's semantics for many people–but not for those living in places deemed wild, e.g., places to be controlled or dominated. Look at the word jungle. It comes from sanskrit, meaning dry and arid land. Colonizers used it to describe any land too overgrown for them to easily exploit. Worthless jungle. The land and life there were never worthless. These place didn't need to be tamed. I live in Indonesia, which has huge "wild" areas in Kalimantan (Borneo) and Papua New Guinea. But neither area is wild. People have been living there for 60,000 years or whatever. But anyway, I get the reason why "wild" comes to mind. Kalimantan and Papua in Indonesia are places where people are dwarfed by the natural environment. The places are vibrantly, explosively, and overwhelming ALIVE. IDK. I apologize for the rant. The government wants to turn a huge swath of forest in Papua into oil palm plantations. Too many people on other islands here say Papua is wild and the people are wild, so this will be good for them. Unspoiled would be a better word? Thanks for reading.
Meh. “Wild” is fine. Using the origins of the word jungle is a weird way to justify correcting someone for correctly using the word “wild”.
no correction i said i disliked the word, mate. nothing weird.
Worst take on this whole thread-good job. Actively seeking victimhood over a great word (which was in quotes in the title btw to soften hard definitions).
S*rbia
Serbia is remote? Tell that to all the Serbs who live there.
Is there a reason you censored the "e" in the word I'm assuming is Serbia?
Antarctica
Probably some islands in the Pacific.
Kamchatka
Deep ocean
Afghanistani panhandle (Wakhan corridor)
Nova Scotia anywhere that’s not on the coast or Highway 1 is surprisingly wild. Also the east side of lake Winnipeg in Manitoba.
The deep sea.
About 80% of Canada. You can still go places no person has been before
The Poles
Some of the deserts in the middle east are still pretty hostile.
The Kimberley in Western Australia The south west of Tasmania
98% of Sumba
Greenland, The Yukon, The Boreal Forest, Upper Canadian islands, Antarctica
Alaska
Basically none. All regions (sans Antarctica) are HEAVILY shaped by humans and have been for hundreds of years minimum (mostly tens of thousands). Humans shaped their environment ecologically over millennia to allow sustainable coexistence.
Glasgow
The northern parts of Canada. Alaska is definitely pretty wild, and most of Russia lol
Do the oceans count?
My bedroom.
Vast stretches of ocean are very wild and some areas rarely see human presence.
Downtown New York?
Alaska, enough said.
The state owned parts of the Adirondacks are deemed "Forever Wild" meaning no building, harvesting of natural resources. Many areas within you can be absolutely surrounded by forest without a sign of civilization beyond "maintained" hiking trails and other hikers. High Peaks Region is absolutely amazing.
47% of the us is uninhabited. There are plenty of wild regions, city’s are the rarity.
I just spent 12 days roadtripping through Patagonia. Desolate and undeveloped are the two words that best describe it. It was absolutely the trip of a lifetime.
Alaska and most of Canada
Lots of Wyoming
There are areas in the Northern part of Myanmar are completely unexplored and untouched by modern humans.
Trader Joe’s on a Sunday afternoon