The United States government has direct ownership of almost 650 million acres of land (2.63 million square kilometers) – nearly 30% of its total territory. These federal lands are used as military bases or testing grounds, nature parks and reserves and indian reservations, or are leased to the private sector for commercial exploitation (e.g. forestry, mining, agriculture). They are managed by different administrations, such as the Bureau of Land Management, the US Forest Service, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the US Department of Defense, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Bureau of Reclamation or the Tennessee Valley Authority.
This map details the percentage of state territory owned by the federal government. The top 10 list of states with the highest percentage of federally owned land looks like this:
- Nevada 84.5%
- Alaska 69.1%
- Utah 57.4%
- Oregon 53.1%
- Idaho 50.2%
- Arizona 48.1%
- California 45.3%
- Wyoming 42.3%
- New Mexico 41.8%
- Colorado 36.6%
Notable is that all these states are in the West (except Alaska, which strictly speaking is also a western state, albeit northwestern). Also notable is the contrast between the highest and the lowest percentages of federal land ownership. The US government owns a whopping 84.5% of Nevada, but only a puny 0.4% of Rhode Island and Connecticut. The lowest-percentage states are mainly in the East, but some are also in the Midwest and in the South:
- Connecticut 0.4%
- Rhode Island 0.4%
- Iowa 0.8%
- New York 0.8%
- Maine 1.1%
- Kansas 1.2%
- Nebraska 1.4%
- Alabama 1.6%
- Ohio 1.7%
- Illinois 1.8%
Even the 10th place is still below the two percent mark. One territory is not specified on the map: Washington D.C. It could be argued that this is the only main administrative division of US territory to be fully owned by the federal government. It could, but that would be wrong – and upsetting to those private citizens who own part of the nation’s capital in the form of their real estate. It would be more correct to state that the District of Columbia by default falls under the direct tutelage of the Federal Government.
Many thanks to Jonathan Leblang and Adam Hahn for signaling this map, which appeared as an illustration to ‘Can the West Lead Us To A Better Place?‘, an article in Stanford Magazine, a periodical for and about alumni from that university.
DC is not in fact 100% owned by the Federal government; large chunks are – the Mall downtown, Rock Creek Park, and various other government sites, but the city as a whole has plenty of privately owned land.
Comment by ps — June 17, 2008 @ 12:30 am
Especially interesting considering that the US constitution says the federal government cannot own more than five percent of the land in a state.
* Disclaimer: I have been told that by someone who I trust to know. Have not gone looking for the clause personally.
Comment by Joshua Kugler — June 17, 2008 @ 1:37 am
There is no such clause in the US Constitution (which, by the way, is very easy to find on the web and very short).
Comment by mythoclast — June 17, 2008 @ 2:04 am
How are reservations somehow owned by the federal government?
Comment by Matt Silb — June 17, 2008 @ 2:20 am
[...] Read it. [...]
Pingback by DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » Federal Lands in the US — June 17, 2008 @ 2:20 am
I don’t think it’s entirely accurate to describe Native lands as owned by the federal government — yes, American Indians are a federal responsibility, but the lands are largely administer by bands in a sovereign fashion.
Comment by Padraic — June 17, 2008 @ 2:25 am
As an occasional student of early federal and Western American history and as a one-time resident of Wyoming (state #8), I can verify that the federal government is Constitutionally allowed to own as much land as it wishes in any state with this caveat: The states must cede control to the federal government.
States and commonwealths that existed at the time the Constitution was written were given incentives to trade their western lands (think Ohio, Kentucky, Mississippi, etc.) to the federal government in exchange for debt relief and resettling native people. Texas entered the union with the provision that the state would control most of the land (which may be what Joshua’s friend was thinking of.)
Following the Louisiana purchase, the federal government considered itself the sole owner of previously “unimproved” and unclaimed western lands that it purchased or otherwise acquired; so the states were de facto and de jure wholly owned by the federal government, which over time used various incentives to get people to move there . . . or not.
A somewhat interesting recap of federal laws concerning federal land ownership is http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs/permalink/meta-crs-1009:1
Comment by Jeff Mather — June 17, 2008 @ 2:27 am
Oh, and the Marshall decision in Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831) made tribes “domestic dependent nations” subject to the will of the federal government. And Worcester v. Georgia the next year affirmed that the federal government and not states (nor the tribes themselves) had control over the land. The government has almost complete control through various policies over the “disposal” of native lands.
I wrote a paper about Worcester v. Georgia a while back that might be of interest to people who are interested in early American law policies concerning Native Americans and its intersection with the Nullification crisis: http://jeffmatherphotography.com/jeff/Worcester.html
Comment by Jeff Mather — June 17, 2008 @ 2:35 am
What, did Washington DC abolish private property? The share of federal ownership is far, far below 100%.
Comment by Jeff S. — June 17, 2008 @ 2:38 am
You confused Massachusetts for New Hampshire (NH) in your chart. Mass. is at 1.9%, NH is 13.4% As a NH resident, its interesting to note that NH has by a (relatively) wide margin the highest percentage of Federally owned land east of the Rockies.
Comment by Paul — June 17, 2008 @ 2:57 am
Paul – I presume that’s because of the White Mountains, which is probably one of the larger spans of virtually uninhabitable land east of the Rockies as well?
Comment by Nigel Watt — June 17, 2008 @ 3:20 am
you’re also forgetting – or not taking into account – state owned lands. New York, for instance, has Adirondack Park. to quote wikipedia, “The park covers some 6.1 million acres (24,700 km²), a land area about the size of Vermont, or of the Yellowstone, Yosemite, Grand Canyon, Glacier, and Great Smoky Mountains National Parks combined.”
Comment by jeremy — June 17, 2008 @ 3:45 am
I find it interesting that, with the exception of Alaska, all the smaller percentage versions of the states (the red areas) fit in the “real” states (the blue areas)
And Jeff @8: an interesting question: if the states do not control the land on Indian reserves (but rather the federal government), then is there an actual state quadripoint at the famous Four Corners, which rests on Indian land for many miles around?
Comment by David — June 17, 2008 @ 3:46 am
David: just because the state doesn’t “control” those areas doesn’t mean they don’t lie within the boundaries of those states. Indian law is a strange, confusing thing.
Comment by radinc — June 17, 2008 @ 4:12 am
David: Haven’t been there myself, so I’m not sure it really exists. :-)
Comment by Jeff Mather — June 17, 2008 @ 4:57 am
[...] Go to the author’s original blog: 291 – Federal Lands in the US [...]
Pingback by 291 - Federal Lands in the US — June 17, 2008 @ 6:37 am
Most of the federal land in the west of the lower 48 is not “military bases or testing grounds, nature parks and reserves and indian reservations” but administrated by the Bureau of Land Management and the US Forest Service. Both agencies have the primary purpose to organize private business’ use of that land, be it by forestry, grazing or mining. Federal ownership of the land does not mean it is takes out of economic use.
Comment by Marc B. — June 17, 2008 @ 6:52 am
I believe that most of this so-called “federal government-owned land” is not actually “owned” by the government at all — but is actually “owned” by “we the people” and is only “managed” by the government — hence the Bureau of Land Management.
At least that is the way it is supposed to be. With continued government encroachment on our rights and liberties — who can tell for sure.
Comment by ken davies — June 17, 2008 @ 6:59 am
[...] 291 – Federal Lands in the US « Strange Maps (tags: politicalmaps federal maps usa) [...]
Pingback by Seth Holladay » Links » links for 2008-06-17 — June 17, 2008 @ 7:31 am
I found this extremely interesting site, providing state-by-state maps of federally-owned lands: http://www.nationalatlas.gov/printable/fedlands.html#list
Looks like the high percentage in NH is almost entirely consumed by the White Mountains national forest, and NC’s percentage by several national forests.
I’m surprised South Carolina’s percentage isn’t higher, considering there are 3-4 national forests plus Fort Jackson and Parris Island in this state.
Comment by Ryan Hauck — June 17, 2008 @ 11:55 am
And boy do they sure like to make decisions that have long-lasting and often dreadful consequences about that land that they know little of! I guess if they Own It that’s okay?
Comment by maleesha — June 17, 2008 @ 12:08 pm
[...] A map. [...]
Pingback by Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e22v2 — June 17, 2008 @ 12:25 pm
you made several mistakes in your second top 10 list. it isn’t consistent with the map.
the right order is:
1. Connecticut 0.4%
1. Rhode Island 0.4%
3. Iowa 0.8%
3. New York 0.8%
5. Maine 1.1%
6. Kansas 1.2%
7. Nebraska 1.4%
8. Alabama 1.6%
9. Ohio 1.7%
10. Illinois 1.8%
11. Massachusetts 1.9%
11. Texas 1.9%
Comment by marc — June 17, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
A lot of private landowners will be stressed to learn that the federal government apparently owns their land in the District of Columbia. Perhaps you’re thinking 100% jurisdiction?
Comment by Andrew Leonard — June 17, 2008 @ 12:40 pm
[...] * From Strange Maps, an interesting look at federal land ownership. [...]
Pingback by The International House of Bacon » Blog Archive » Tuesday Morning Links — June 17, 2008 @ 1:17 pm
[...] Federal Lands in the US — Another interesting image from Strange Maps. [...]
Pingback by [links] Link salad for a Tuesday, climate change and Gitmo | jlake.com — June 17, 2008 @ 1:31 pm
Good to know that the west is not for sale …
Comment by Björn — June 17, 2008 @ 1:40 pm
Interesting map in an area of vast ignorance among most people. I was in a top-level meeting of a corporation that has many, small leaseholdings in every state. An issue with a Utah site near a National Forest came up, and I noted that the landholder proposed as a landlord was leasing the land from the NFS. You could have heard a pin drop. “You can’t lease land from the Federal Government.” I then noted that between state and federal holdings, more than 70% of Utah was held by governments, and said that leasing was a well-established practice.
The assisstant VP admonished me for injecting jocularity into the meeting. I let it ride.
D.C. is probably less “federally owned” than several of the 13 western “public lands” states. Over the years since the creation of the federal district, much of the land was ceded to private hands. The entire Virginia portion was ceded back to Virginia (which is why the District is no longer a square).
Yes, there is a spot where New Mexico, Arizona, Utah and Colorado come together, with a monument where one may literally lie down in four different states — the only place in the U.S. where that is possible. It’s a bit out of the way, it’s on the Navajo Reservation, but I’ve been there several times. I’m sure a photo exists on the web.
Ken, title for the land must vest somewhere. It vests with the federal government (though as someone sagely noted, Indian Reservation lands have a bizarro world much of their own).
The Adirondacks Park is the largest park in North America — perhaps the world. It’s ironic, and interesting, that it’s state owned and managed, and not federal. Due to history, it is also pocked with a lot more privately-owned land than most federal enclaves.
I’m sure there are maps out there that show the actual holdings, a pretty interesting piece in itself.
If nothing else, Strange Maps, you’ve done a marvelous job of puncturing a lot of little balloons of ignorance about public lands. Good show.
Comment by Ed Darrell — June 17, 2008 @ 1:44 pm
hey, you need to do some updating here. i live in DC, and the feds sure as hell don’t own 100% of the city. the own a lot of it, and we wish they’d cede control of a lot more than they’re willing to, but they don’t own everything.
Comment by IMGoph — June 17, 2008 @ 1:55 pm
[...] has information on the Federal Government’s huge masses of land owned in mostly Western [...]
Pingback by Who Owns The West? « The Political Inquirer — June 17, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
[...] How much (and where) does the Federal government own the most land? (strange maps) [...]
Pingback by Tuesday links: a prudent pile of cash « Abnormal Returns — June 17, 2008 @ 2:11 pm
Iowa at 0.8%? No wonder the Feds are letting it drown!
As for Texas’s very small portion at 1.9%, most of that is National Forest or places like Fort Hood, Fort Bliss, and other large military installations, and two very small Indian reservations. But Texas has a lot of (very good) State parks. Much of Texas is land grants, public and private (in fact most universities are from public land grants, Texas A & M for example, which is why it still has relatively lower tuition than, say, the University of Texas (Go Aggies!)
Comment by DL — June 17, 2008 @ 2:55 pm
DL,
The University of Texas and Texas A&M traditionally have the same (or very similar) tuition rates. It is interesting to note that at the time the Legislature established The University of Texas, it had very little in the way of cash to fund a school of that size. So instead of giving the school money, it gave it an enormous amount of land in the Permian Basin on which The University could graze cattle for income.
About forty years after The University of Texas was established, wildcatters struck oil on its land. As a result, it created the Permanent University Fund (”PUF”) to fund capital improvements. About thirty years ago, the Legislature decided that the UT system needed to split the PUF with the A&M system (with one-third going to the A&M system and two-thirds to the UT system).
Of course, all of that was state land because Texas and the United States accomplished annexation via a joint resolution of the two countries’ congresses. Had it been done via treaty, it would have been customary for the annexed nation’s (i.e., Texas) public land to be transferred to the annexing country (i.e., the USA). Instead, all of the Republic of Texas’ public land stayed in the hands of the State of Texas.
Comment by James — June 17, 2008 @ 3:51 pm
@ ed darrell:
I’m going to be a stickler for geographic accuracy on a geography site – Adirondacks Park, although large, is not the largest park in the U.S. or the world.
In the U.S.: Wrangell-St. Elias National Park is 53,000 km2
In the world: Northeast Greenland National Park is 972,000 km2. According to wikipedia, that’s larger than 163 countries.
Comment by James — June 17, 2008 @ 3:53 pm
Forgot to add:
Adirondacks State Park is about 25,000 km2
Comment by James — June 17, 2008 @ 3:55 pm
re DL: The feds aren’t “letting us drown”, any more than they are letting a car hit you at any random moment. This flood was so far beyond predictions or imagination that no one could have prepared properly for it.
So before you snark at the feds, make sure it’s one of the many, many, many valid snarks, instead of wasting time and energy on an invalid one.
Comment by Andrew in Cedar Rapids — June 17, 2008 @ 4:01 pm
“The Adirondacks Park is the largest park in North America — perhaps the world.”
Adirondack Park is 6.1 million acres, according to Wikipedia.
This makes it smaller than Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (13.2 million acres), Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve (8.5 million acres), and Noatak National Preserve (6.6 million acres).
Comment by Wally East — June 17, 2008 @ 4:01 pm
One reason I feel confident in posting about subjects I’m not an expert in (like this one) is that I’m sure the combined wisdom of the GOP (Great Online Public, that is) will correct me if, when and where I’m wrong.
ps (@1), Jeff S. (@9), Andrew Leonard (@24), IMGoph (@29): I agree my choice of words was unfortunate, and possibly upsetting to the home- and landowners in DC. I meant that, since DC is not subordinate to any other level of government, it must logically, by default, fall directly under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.
Jeff Mather (@7,8): thanks for the expert view on the matter, and the clarification of the status of Indian reservations.
Paul (@10): thanks for the correction and clarification.
Jeremy (@12): you’re right. This map only shows the percentage of federally owned lands per state, not including the state-owned ones.
Marc B. (@17): you’re right, an omission on my part. Correcting…
Ken Davies (@18): I sympathise with your frustration at the difference between ‘We, the people’ and ‘the Federal Government’ – but in a democracy, the latter is (or should be) an emanation of the will of the former.
Ryan Hauck (@20): thanks for that link!
Marc (@23): thanks for correcting that list…
Ed Darrell (@28): RE that assistant VP’s remark, it’s good to know you’ve now had the last laugh!
DL (@32): thanks for clarifying the Texas situation.
Comment by strangemaps — June 17, 2008 @ 4:06 pm
“I meant that, since DC is not subordinate to any other level of government, it must logically, by default, fall directly under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.”
This is true nationwide. So, does that mean that 100% of the USA is owned by the federal government?
Comment by ak — June 17, 2008 @ 4:31 pm
No, it’s not true nationwide.
Hartford, CT, for example, falls directly under the jurisdiction of the State of Connecticut. The state government could choose to dissolve the city and place it directly under state control. Sometimes when cities go bankrupt, they do come under the direct authority of the state government.
The District of Columbia is directly run by the federal government. It’s in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. Congress has delegated some of that authority to a municipal government, but they can change that whenever they feel the need to do so.
Comment by Wally East — June 17, 2008 @ 4:44 pm
Wally -
There’s a little thing in the Constitution known as the Supremacy Clause:
“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”
More on this here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause
Comment by ak — June 17, 2008 @ 4:47 pm
ak-
Sure, I’m familiar with it. No need to be condescending about it.
You’re missing the smaller picture.
The federal government has direct control over the District of Columbia. It does not have direct control over the states. Sure, states can’t issue their own money and have to integrate their schools, but if Oregon wants to make owning dogs illegal, it can since dog owners aren’t a protected class. Sure, there would be a fuss but it would be Oregon’s right to do so. If the federal government made a law allowing anyone the chance to own a dog, then Oregon’s law would be neutered (ha!).
Obviously, the District of Columbia is missing this layer of government. And that was the point in the first place. The federal government doesn’t have direct jurisdiction over Keystone City, Kansas, or Central City, Missouri, but the state governments in Topeka and Jefferson City, respectively, do.
Comment by Wally East — June 17, 2008 @ 5:23 pm
Perhaps you are older and wiser than I am, or at least older, since your comment would have been true in 1972, but not following the Home Rule Act. Mayor Adrian Fenty, the city council, and the neighborhood commissions are not amused by your oversight.
Comment by ak — June 17, 2008 @ 5:34 pm
Assuming that america is supposed to have “government of the people, by the people and for the people”, what evidence is there that the people actually support the idea of allowing the federal gov. to own 30% of the land mass? And how much more of this country is owned by the state governments? How much is owned by cities and counties? If you total it all up, it wouldn’t be at all surprising if 60% of “our” land mass is actually owned by the government. “Why is that a bad thing?”, you might ask. By far (according to government researchers) the worst managers of land are government agencies. Why? Because the individuals in charge suffer no consequences when things go wrong (ie wildfires, strip mining, habitat destruction, pollution etc). Conversely, private owners, for the most part don’t allow these negative outcomes to happen, and when they do; they suffer the consequences and learn from those mistakes. The truth is this: Private ownership of nearly all land should be the status quo in any country that claims to value economic freedom and property rights. Thanks for the map.
Comment by Larry McElhinney — June 17, 2008 @ 5:36 pm
Oh, ak, I mentioned that in the previous post I made on the subject. You remember the one. It was the first one you felt you had to reply to in a condescending manner.
“Congress has delegated some of that authority to a municipal government, but they can change that whenever they feel the need to do so.”
Comment by Wally East — June 17, 2008 @ 5:43 pm
As an Iowan, I suspect the reason so little is owned by the Federal Government is due to the huge percentage of the land being used for agriculture (which, as a general rule, tends to be fairly well subsidized by the government so…)
Comment by Scotty B — June 17, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
On a side note, are those pictures randomly generated?
Comment by Scotty B — June 17, 2008 @ 5:49 pm
Wally -
Wouldn’t it make sense to limit this discussion to what is, rather than what could be?
Comment by ak — June 17, 2008 @ 6:26 pm
ak-
Wouldn’t it make sense for you to say that you missed the point initially but see it now?
Comment by Wally East — June 17, 2008 @ 6:53 pm
For the record: as far as I can tell, about 27% of DC is Federal land in the same sense that we’re using for states.
Comment by DaveS — June 17, 2008 @ 7:36 pm
Hello
About government owned lands, Congress did pas that the lands were owned by the government, not the people as it should be.
Trouble is, and most do not know that this was just a cover up. People are just now beginning to find out about AGENDA 21! This agenda takes a lot of reading, and a lot of reading between the lines to understand, but if one takes enough time they will soon understand that ” WE THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SHAFTED ” our so called government lands BLM, USFS, National waterways, National Monuments, National Parks!
They have been mortgaged, YES MORTGAGED to the UN that is United Nations. But don’t take my word on this Look up Agenda 21, study it.
Thanks Dusty
Comment by dustyroad1 — June 17, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
Holy cow–a black helicopter just flew past my office!
Comment by James — June 17, 2008 @ 8:14 pm
[...] found this map to be very interesting. It shows all the states and what percentages of land the Federal [...]
Pingback by | The Unspun Zone — June 17, 2008 @ 8:25 pm
No need to panic, James. It’s just the One World Government coming to take your land, money, and guns. And children, if you have any.
Comment by Wally East — June 17, 2008 @ 8:26 pm
[...] Here is a map of the land owned by the government; disgusting. http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.c…s_the_west.jpg 291 – Federal Lands in the US Strange Maps [...]
Pingback by Petition Against Proposed US Automatic Weapons Ban! - Page 6 - World Affairs Board — June 17, 2008 @ 9:17 pm
thnks
çok güzel bir siteniz var.Sizinle link değişimi yapmak isterim tabi sizde isterseniz
Web sitem: http://jonturkler.wordpress.com/
Comment by jonturk — June 17, 2008 @ 9:41 pm
@47 Scotty B: I think they’re linked to your IP address, I always have that brownish thing next to my name when I post not only here, but at another friend’s blog on WordPress. Can’t find too much info of it on WordPress, but I admit I haven’t looked really diligently (though I’m as curious as you). So, it seems to be WordPress’s fault. (If I didn’t think my work would have something to say about my visiting blogs on company time I might try posting under my work’s IP to see if it is indeed linked to IP lilke I suspect.)
Of course, if you have a WordPress account, like comments #6, 21, 28, 51, and of course 38 I assume have, your picture is shown there instead.
Comment by David — June 17, 2008 @ 11:43 pm
I wonder what the situations are in the federal territories? None of them are very large (unless you count the seas surrounding them).
Comment by Lurker — June 17, 2008 @ 11:52 pm
No, Dusty, federal lands have not been mortgaged.
1. It’s against the UN Charter.
2. There is no authorizing legislation; there is no authority to mortgage federal lands.
3. Who’d want to lend money on the land between Milford, Utah, and Winnemucca, Nevada? That’s why it’s public land in the first place.
Larry worries:
There’s no clear authority for the federal government to buy the Louisiana Territory from France, nor accept the Mexican Cessions, nor purchase Alaska from Russia. The power is implied under other powers of the government. As for authority to hold on to the lands now held, there are a variety of organic laws passed by Congress, the representatives of the people in our republican form of government: The Northwest Ordinances, the act setting up the General Land Office (in 1812), the Preemption Act of 1841 (look it up before leaping to conclusions), the acts authorizing aid to the Transcontinental Railroad, the Homestead Act of 1862, the Antiquities Act (National Monuments), the organic acts for the National Park Service and the National Forest Service (circa 1905), the organic act for the BLM in 1946, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976. I’ll have a post up covering a bit of this history, with links for you, at Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub, shortly.
No, it won’t come close. Public lands are concentrated in those states noted on this map (see a map showing which agency owns what at Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub). Those states are also the greatest landowners among the states, generally, except for the Adirondack Preserve, much of which remains in private hands despite being part of the park. States and counties and cities generally own way, way, way less land than the federal government, just as a result of the history of land disposal.
Except for those landowners who clearcut their timber, leave wastes on their properties that pose massive nuisance issues (ever hear of the Superfund? You can look it up.), or allow their lands to be overgrazed. You raise a lot of the issues that were raised by the Sagebrush Rebellion and by wilderness legislation, and the quick answer is this: Who besides the federal government ever moved to protect Yosemite, Yellowstone, the Great Smokies, or Rainbow Bridge? (Very savvy land management historians will quickly answer “Laurance Rockefeller,” but that’s surely the exception to the rule.)
More than 230 million acres of public lands are public lands because private interests would not take them on as “too worthless” originally.
Private ownership is the norm in the U.S. Many special lands could not get private buyers in the U.S. For many reasons you could look up in history, these lands have been looked after, and in many cases looked after well, by the federal government. The private ownership interests you mention were established more clearly in FLPMA in 1976, once it became clear that federal management would be the norm.
But consider this: Most of our nation’s worst strip mining examples are on private lands, in West Virginia, Virginia and Pennsylvania. The forest that once was nearly unbroken from Boston Harbor to the Mississippi River is more than 90% destroyed — “waste” under English land law terms — due to private ownership. The extremely productive grasslands of the Great Plains are 99% destroyed in private ownership. Generally a landowner acts in his and the land’s interests, but not always.
If you’re really interested, you might want to look at recent proposals to modify the 1872 Mining Act which gives cheap, private ownership rights to mining companies, and we could use your voice in lobbying the federal government to put all monies collected from activities on public lands back into the management of those lands, especially mining revenues which alone would multiply the amount of money spent managing BLM and Forest Service lands.
You might also do well to pick up some history of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission (circa 1962), and the President’s Commission on Americans Outdoors (1987), both of which reports deal with these issues at length.
Before complaining, go visit Yosemite National Park, the Muir Woods, the Great Smokey Mountains N.P, the Adirondacks, Big Bend N.P. and Big Bend S.P., Yellowstone N.P, Teton N.P., Bryce Canyon N.P., Grand Canyon N.P., Glen Canyone National Recreation Area, and compare them to Cleveland and the Cuyahoga River, Lake George, New York, and Gatlinburg, Tennessee. Visit Evanston, Wyoming, and compare it to the public lands leading into it. You’ll begin to see the story has many facets.
Comment by Ed Darrell — June 18, 2008 @ 9:22 am
[...] hidden in plain sight Strange Maps features federally-owned lands. Those of us who grew up in the west tramping those federal lands, and those of us who worked [...]
Pingback by Geography hidden in plain sight « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub — June 18, 2008 @ 10:28 am
[...] own 2% of Indiana By Doug StrangeMaps brings us a map of federal land ownership in the United States. The federal government owns about 2% of land in [...]
Pingback by Masson’s Blog - A Citizen’s Guide to Indiana » Feds own 2% of Indiana — June 18, 2008 @ 11:58 am
An excellent map. Mind if I use it in a post I have coming up?
Comment by totaltransformation — June 18, 2008 @ 12:42 pm
[...] 291 – Federal Lands in the US "The United States government has direct ownership of almost 650 million acres of land (2.63 million square kilometers) – nearly 30% of its total territory." This entry was written by quinn, posted on June 18, 2008 at 12:01 pm, filed under del and tagged advice, askmetafilter, blogs, bmezine, body_modification, children, clothing, creationism, culture, design, economics, education, evolution, gender, geography, government, humor, jezebel, land, law, map, marriage, meta:blog, money, philosophy, rape, relationships, r_kelly, sex, sexual_abuse, tattoos, toread, tshirts, uk, us. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed. « New Kiribati [...]
Pingback by anthro.pophago.us » del.icio.us links for 2008.06.18 — June 18, 2008 @ 4:07 pm
our national parks are OWNED by the united nations, late 1990,s
Comment by gina — June 19, 2008 @ 11:49 pm
correction 1972
Comment by gina — June 19, 2008 @ 11:53 pm
Gina, the UN Charter prevents the UN from “owning” lands. Some of our parks are important enough gems that they have been listed as “World Heritage Sites” by the UN. That’s rather like a building being designated as an historic building. The UN has no land management duties or powers — but there’s a nice plaque to hang on the wall of the main lodge of the park.
With the partial exception of the land upon which the United Nations buildings stand in New York City, the UN owns no lands. And, as I recall, the UN buildings are on land leased to the organization in a ground lease.
Here are the salient portions of UNESCO’s Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage:
As you can see, no transfer of ownership, no enforcement provisions, just a general recognition that the sites are worthy of preservation.
In the case of all of our National Parks lands, that is why they are in the National Parks. There is no additional duty the U.S. gets from such designation, there is no privilege any other government including the UN gets.
You may see the entire treaty here:
http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/
Comment by Ed Darrell — June 20, 2008 @ 2:46 am
Thank you for you important insights here, Ed Darrell.
Comment by radinc — June 22, 2008 @ 3:31 pm
Ed D. – there are several parks in Alaska larger than the Adirondacks.
Comment by Jon — June 23, 2008 @ 1:32 am
I wonder why Washington (30.3%) has such a lower percentage than neighboring Oregon (53.1%) and Idaho (50.2%). I thought Washington had its share of parks, reservations and the like.
Comment by James M. — June 23, 2008 @ 1:36 am
You folks might find it interesting that the city of Richland, Washington was entirely owned by the Federal Government between 1943 and 1958. And when I say entirely, I mean they didn’t just own the land, they owned ALL the buildings and everything, including the schools, the stores, the houses, and even the churches (hows that for “seperation of church and state”?) (I believe this was also true for the city of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, but you would have to look that one up for yourself.) The Federal Government did all the maintenance of all the buildings (painting, electrical, plumbing, etc.) and even planted the trees in people’s yards. They watered and mowed the grass in all of the city parks and playgrounds, and at the schools, and even maintained the baseball fields the Little Leaguers played on. People joked that if you needed to have a light bulb changed, you just called up the Federal Government and they would send someone out with a new bulb. Although that wasn’t quite the case, it was pretty close. It was an interesting experience growing up in a “guv’ment town”, and one I shall never forget. Yup, Richland was my “home town” and it was a great place to be a kid.
Comment by Dave H. — June 23, 2008 @ 7:36 am
The Federal Government may not own all the land in DC, but it controls both land and people by the assertion of the unwarranted power arrogated to itself by Article I Section 8 Clause 17 of the Constitution: “[Congress shall have the Power] To exercise exclusive jurisdiction in all cases whatsoever over such Disrtict not more than ten miles square…”
In a nation founded on the concept that “Just (ie legitimate) power derives from the consent of the governed”, an unrepresented minority of the national population is subjugated “in all cases whatsoever” by the majority of the nation. That same circumstance, by the way, was also what was attempted by the British nation in 1766 with the promulgation of the Declaratory Act. Compare the two.
Comment by Gerry — June 24, 2008 @ 10:06 am
[...] Read more from Strange Maps.com Social Networking: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
Pingback by The Absurd Report » United States government’s ownership of land — June 24, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
[...] http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2008/06/17/291-federal-lands-in-the-us/ [...]
Pingback by Attack the System » Blog Archive » Updated News Digest June 29, 2008 — June 29, 2008 @ 2:04 pm
[...] particular selection details federal ownership of land across the United States. Private ownership-loving America holds about 30% of it’s total landmass in federal hands. [...]
Pingback by mike soron . com — Who owns the Western United States? — July 2, 2008 @ 7:21 pm
I agree with James M. #69, does anyone know how Washington State had less Federally controlled land? Perhaps more in State land? Seems like a lot of land is undeveloped.
Comment by Jim Grapes — July 6, 2008 @ 2:25 am
[...] http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/200…nds-in-the-us/ [...]
Pingback by 3 » Federal land ownership as a percentage of total state land — July 6, 2008 @ 9:08 am
You mean Land under the Bush Regime, or Bush Dictatorship dont you?
JT
http://www.FireMe.To/udi
Comment by Justin Watts — July 19, 2008 @ 12:33 am
Hey all,
The adirondack park in New York is not held by the state. Most of that land is owned by private individuals, however, there are very stringent restrictions on how the land can be used… you can’t build new structures on it, etc. (used to live near there)
Comment by Ken — July 19, 2008 @ 2:01 am
Strangemaps,
Regarding (@38), where you answer Ken Davies (@18), You are wrong………
America is NOT, nor has it ever been a Democracy. That is a very common and deliberate mistake.
America is a Republic and there is a huge difference.
Our type of Republic is a democratic one, but it is NOT a Democracy.
A Democracy is nothing more than a polished word for “Mob Rule”
Oh wait …………… maybe we have become a Democracy ………. what a shame !!!!
Chuck
Comment by Chuck — July 19, 2008 @ 2:57 am
I live in Colorado and appreciate all the National parks and recreation services, and state parks for that matter. If these forests were privately owned I wouldn’t have the opportunity to explore them and enjoy them.
Comment by walt — July 19, 2008 @ 4:04 am
[...] reserves and indian reservations, or are leased to the private sector for commercial exploitation.read more | digg [...]
Pingback by Warling does not need war! » Who Owns Most of the Land in the West? The US Government — July 19, 2008 @ 4:48 am
If the US government did not own that much of our land, god knows who could get their dirty mitts on it!
Comment by 800HighTech — July 19, 2008 @ 10:51 am
You don’t own your land, you rent it from the government. Try not paying your property rent(i.e. taxes) and you’ll see exactly who really owns it.
Comment by jim — July 19, 2008 @ 6:41 pm
I’m sorry, but I have to respectfully request that commenters stop making proper citations of laws, treaties and regulations in support of their comments. You are making it impossible for the rest of us to make our broad generalizations and conspiracy theories seem authoritative and believable.
——–
I think it’s hilarious some people are afraid of the U.N. taking over the world. The U.N. is so hopelessly bureaucratic and ineffective any attempt by the U.N. to take over would make the Bush administration’s response to Hurricane Katrina look like best practices governance.
Comment by Chris Johnson — July 19, 2008 @ 6:56 pm
[...] is an incredible site, here is a government land ownership map that they posted of [...]
Pingback by Link Dump: Movies/Blogs/Maps/Stuff at the.Hopeful.skeptic — July 20, 2008 @ 1:55 am
good
Comment by Video — July 28, 2008 @ 9:40 pm
[...] Blog Strange Maps dokumentiert eine Übersicht zu öffentlichem (=staatlichem) Landbesitz in den USA und [...]
Pingback by Wem gehöen die USA? Übersicht zum Bundesland : www.who-owns-the-world.org — August 20, 2008 @ 9:21 pm
Your blog is really great..
Check mine..
http://www.healthmad.com/Alternative/Eight-Health-Benefits-of-Stinging-Nettle.222373
Comment by Wulmin — September 4, 2008 @ 10:23 pm
So, do “we the people” own the land or not? Also, what happened to our individual sovereign rights we were given after the revolution? Did a “clause” take that away too?
Barry
Comment by Barry Dean — September 24, 2008 @ 1:19 am
Yes, the land is owned by “we the people,” held in trust by the government we created.
Citizens’ sovereign rights were improved and increased after the revolution. Are you concerned about one, Barry? Which one?
Comment by Ed Darrell — September 24, 2008 @ 9:10 am
[...] 27, 2008 · No Comments I found this interesting map here. Who Owns the [...]
Pingback by Federal Lands in the US « Naturally Interesting — September 27, 2008 @ 3:09 pm
[...] Original source:Federal Lands in the US — Strange Maps [...]
Pingback by ignorance != bliss » Federal Lands in the US — Strange Maps — October 6, 2008 @ 8:45 pm
[...] the Full Story: Federal Lands in the US — Strange Maps SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: “Federal Lands in the US — Strange Maps”, url: [...]
Pingback by ignorance != bliss » Federal Lands in the US — Strange Maps — October 10, 2008 @ 12:09 am
NO HOMESTEAD EXISTED WITHOUT A PUBLIC ROAD LEADING TO IT, AND IN MOST
CASES THROUGH IT, AND THERE CAN BE SEVERAL PUBLIC ROADS.
In order to understand road law of the 1800’s you have to understand the statement – WE THE
PEOPLE. We the people, own every square inch of land in the United States and its territories. That
is what we give our life, our blood, and our commitment to.
After the war of independence, every state owed huge debts to foreign governments, none of which
was being paid. In order to make a more stable union, Alexander Hamilton collected the debt and the
title to the lands pledged as collateral and placed them under the central government’s control. The
central government became liable for all these debts and was to sell the land and pay off the debt. This
is how the central government became land owner in the thirteen original States. The war between the
union and the secession states was fought over the principal of, WE THE PEOPLE. When the war
was over each of those secession states became territories with a military governor much as Japan did
after WWII. Each territory had to petition for statehood by filing corporation papers and bylaws which
became their constitution with the central government. Congress restricted states on making laws
governing Federal lands as they were not part of the state. The state controlled private lands and those
lands given to them by the central government. What was said in the 1851 law and the 1866 restriction
on the 1851 law was that title was removed from the land under the right of way and it became public,
not Federal or State. It was and is to be protected from abuse by the counties, but the title was in the
common man or, We the People, those guarantors of all property in the United States and its territories.
Comment by chip — October 13, 2008 @ 3:13 pm
Hi
There are 3 places in the World that has a City within a City, 1.London, 2.Washington DC~ and 3.Rome~Vatican, They have they own Flag and separate police stations.
“A city-state is a region controlled exclusively by a city, usually having sovereignty.”
“- Vatican City
Until 1870, the city of Rome had been controlled by the pope as part of his “papal states”. When King Victor Emmanuel II annexed the city in 1870, Pope Pius IX refused to recognize the newly-formed Kingdom of Italy. Because he could not travel through a place that he did not admit existed, Pius IX and his successors each claimed to be a “Prisoner in the Vatican”, unable to leave the 0.44 km² (0.17-square mile) papal enclave once they had ascended the papal throne.
The impasse was resolved in 1929 by the Lateran Treaties negotiated by the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini between King Victor Emmanuel III and Pope Pius XI. Under this treaty, the Vatican was recognized as an independent state, with the pope as its head. The Vatican City State has its own citizenship, diplomatic corps, flag, and postal system. With a population of less than 1000, it is by far the smallest sovereign country in the world, and widely recognized internationally as such.
Non-sovereign city states
- City of London
See also: City of London Corporation
Although the City of London is not commonly considered a city-state, it does have a unique political status (sui generis), a legacy of its uninterrupted integrity as a corporate city since the Anglo Saxon period and its singular relationship with the Crown. Historically its system of government was not unusual, but it was not reformed by the Municipal Reform Act 1835.
It is administered by the City of London Corporation, headed by the Lord Mayor of the City of London (not the same post as the more recent Mayor of London, who presides over Greater London). The City is a ceremonial county too, although instead of having its own Lord-Lieutenant, the City of London has a Commission, headed by the Lord Mayor, exercising this function.
- Washington, D.C.
Not being part of any U.S. state, Washington, D.C.’s government operates as a city and state combined, although it is not a US state of its own.”
Source and further information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City-state
City of London=Money
City of Columbia=Military
City of Vatican=Religion
Vatican has a Hugh Wealth with investments from the rothchild and oil companys like shell and general Electirc , Catholic church are the biggest Land Owners in the World posesing more material Wealth then any bank, that is why the pope is on off the richest men in the world, while he has that money people are starving to Death.
Comment by bluey — October 21, 2008 @ 1:02 pm
[...] Strange Maps: The United States government has direct ownership of almost 650 million acres of land (2.63 [...]
Pingback by Portland Oregon Real Estate Agent Blog » Where the Deer and the Antelope Play — October 30, 2008 @ 11:03 pm
[...] land, except for the huge amounts of land owned outright by governments, especially the enormous federal holdings in the western states and Alaska. But land taxation, land-use controls, and other regulations that [...]
Pingback by Are We There Yet? Let’s Check Marx and Engels’ List… » The Capitalist Digest — November 10, 2008 @ 11:36 pm
[...] MR post links to an article at a blog called Strange Maps, which uncovered the map from Stanford Magazine. Strange Maps [...]
Pingback by Who Owns the West? | Market Urbanism — November 13, 2008 @ 4:47 pm
[...] According to this map, the US government owns more than 50% of the land in some western states (Nevada 84.5%, Utah 57.4%, Oregon 53.1%, Arizona 48.1%, California 45.3%). [...]
Pingback by Horn Bar :: Buffalo :: November :: 2008 — November 13, 2008 @ 7:53 pm
[...] land in the Plains creating the world’s largest nature park, The Buffalo Commons. According to this map, the US government owns more than 50% of the land in some western states (Nevada 84.5%, Utah 57.4%, [...]
Pingback by The Buffalo Commons | iPod Mp3 Blog — November 13, 2008 @ 8:23 pm
[...] and Alaska. On top of that, it almost owns half of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Wyoming. See this map for the details. I think it is time to sell and help take care of the national [...]
Pingback by In Light of the Gospel » Blog Archive » Who Owns the West? — November 13, 2008 @ 10:01 pm
[...] Idaho and Alaska and it owns nearly half of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Wyoming. See the map for more. It is time for a sale. Selling even some western land could raise hundreds of [...]
Pingback by Etl World News | Now is the Time for the Buffalo Commons — November 13, 2008 @ 10:57 pm
[...] ran across this map in my readings and wanderings at an interesting blog site StrangeMaps . Surprising, to me at least, the percentages of the western states owned by the Federal [...]
Pingback by New York OA Trader | Who Owns the US? — November 14, 2008 @ 10:42 am
[...] Cowen at Marginal Revolution has been looking at this cool map over at Strange Maps and, being an economist, he naturally sees [...]
Pingback by Land of the Free … For Sale? - The Opinionator Blog - NYTimes.com — November 14, 2008 @ 7:33 pm
The nuts are crawling out of the woodwork now that the election is over.
Sell off the public lands? We’d make more money selling off the Pentagon, without crippling our oil, minerals, and livestock industries — not to mention tourism.
Have you seen the way California is doing so well managing wild lands? More than 600 homes went back to wilderness of a sort in the past week. Clearly this is a hot idea — hot in the sense of fire and brimstone, not in the sense of warmed by the fire of noble ideas and love of Mankind.
God save us from those who don’t have a clue what they do. Please. Now.
Comment by Ed Darrell — November 16, 2008 @ 6:38 pm
[...] Lands insanity Remember when Strange Maps “discovered” that so much of the 13 western states is owned by the Federal …? On the one hand, it was nice to see people paying attention to public lands in the west. At [...]
Pingback by Public Lands insanity « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub — November 16, 2008 @ 10:21 pm
[...] What’s the difference between “Primal” and “Paleo”? The definitive guide to Primal eating. Smart Fuel: Olives. Naturally reduce inflammation. Or….Maybe we’re wrong about the whole thing. Federal land in the U.S. [...]
Pingback by » Arlington, Virginia, Washington, DC Official Crossfit Affiliate - Group Personal Training — November 18, 2008 @ 1:01 am
[...] Strange Maps and The Volokh [...]
Pingback by Top 10 States With The Highest Level of Federal Land Ownership : The Real Estate Bloggers — January 24, 2009 @ 2:46 pm
[...] strangemaps, we get a breakdown of the percentage of land owned by the federal government. I’m shocked that the government, and thus the American taxpayer, own so much land in Nevada. [...]
Pingback by Federal Lands | Oklahoma Legal Issues — January 24, 2009 @ 7:31 pm
[...] Take a look at this map from the fabulous Strange Maps. [...]
Pingback by laissez fairy » an interesting map — February 2, 2009 @ 5:47 am
[...] Government ? No. ANSWER: Yes, 88% of Nevada State is owned by the U.S Federal government http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2008/06... Nevada – Wikipedia, the free [...]
Pingback by Is Nevada State a Federal State, owned by the Federal Government ? - Q&A WIKI — February 5, 2009 @ 7:13 am
So should we pay property taxes if “we the people” own the land?
Comment by student — February 10, 2009 @ 4:34 pm
I’m researching a persuasive essay and my topic is should we pay property taxes. I’m looking for some good arguments so if any one can help me, it’s greatly appreciated.
Comment by student — February 10, 2009 @ 4:36 pm
Property taxes support public schools in most jurisdictions in the U.S. So, if no property taxes, no schools.
That should win you votes with the under-18 crowd. Who are you trying to persuade?
Comment by Ed Darrell — February 11, 2009 @ 12:05 am
[...] National Geographic, 5 U.S. Agencies Sign Agreement to Embrace … [...]
Pingback by Indian Affairs Washington State Map Tribe Boundaries Tulalip Indian Tribe Ioway Iowa Indian Tribe | Benellilegacy — February 17, 2009 @ 11:50 am
thank you
Comment by Tony — May 4, 2009 @ 3:44 am
thanks for this map
good
luck
….
Comment by Solomon — May 11, 2009 @ 8:59 am
merci
Comment by aspicco . — May 17, 2009 @ 6:42 am
Good evening. You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. Help me! Need information about: Wall clock. I found only this – http://turbo-tax.biz/. Techmagnate is an seo services company based in delhi, india offering expert seo services at affordable rates. Delta creations, a baton rouge website design firm and bbb member, provides search engine optimization, seo and internet marketing services. Waiting for a reply :confused:, Miliani from Cyprus.
Comment by Miliani — May 21, 2009 @ 2:27 am
[...] (from Strange Maps) [...]
Pingback by Who owns the west? « Estately Blog — June 10, 2009 @ 9:56 pm
[...] I read the blog - strangemaps.wordpress.com – and thought it was [...]
Pingback by Who Really Owns Oregon? « ALL ABOUT…..Portland.Oregon.Real Estate — June 29, 2009 @ 8:06 am
[...] owns the West? Who Owns the West? More I found the source for your map __________________ Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to [...]
Pingback by Who owns the West? - Discussion Forums US — July 1, 2009 @ 12:18 pm
Vielen Dank
Comment by moon — July 3, 2009 @ 5:17 am
Muchas gracias
Comment by sun — July 4, 2009 @ 7:41 am
[...] recommended an interesting map that illustrates the ratio of Federal land to private land in the U.S.. (Click on it for a larger view.) BTW, I predict that some extensive tracts of Federal lands will [...]
Pingback by Odds ‘n Sods: | Theology Today — July 5, 2009 @ 10:21 pm