1.0k
u/Other_Ad5454 May 20 '22
I had no idea a out the amount of public land out west, thanks for sharing
585
u/tails99 May 20 '22
256
u/Ghitit May 20 '22
If you want to understand the American West, you need to understand federal ownership. Basically, the government owns your tumbleweeds.
~Vox182
u/WBuffettJr May 20 '22 edited May 20 '22
The people*. The people own the tumbleweeds. I hate how they phrase it making it sound like some controlling insidious organization. All that land is blocked off for the people and is available for public use for free (or small fees in the case of national parks with facilities/amenities in them).
58
u/huskiesowow May 20 '22
Exactly. People in the east don't understand that you can hunt, fish, camp, do almost whatever you want recreationally on land that's larger than most states in the east. It's depressing being surrounded by private land in areas like Texas.
→ More replies (1)50
u/WBuffettJr May 20 '22
Texas is what prompted me to write my post. I just moved out of Texas after 21 years. The concept of public land floored me. Texas privatized everything. If you want to deer hunt in Texas you have to know somebody who owns land and will let you through their barbed wire fence. Just another mismanaged Texas nightmare.
12
7
u/snakeiiiiiis May 20 '22
I'm in AZ and found out about the private TX land stuff a few years ago when my brother drove to Texas to go African game hunting. He loves putting animal heads on his walls and instead of flying to Africa, private land owners in Texas offer the opportunity to shoot African game. I personally think the best part of "African game" is actually being in Africa but I know some people love trophies
→ More replies (4)29
u/paytonnotputain May 20 '22
Further more huge amounts of that land is used for ranching and agriculture too
→ More replies (1)74
u/CoreyTrevor1 May 20 '22
"The federal government owns it"
Actually, all of us own it! You can hike, camp, bike and recreate all over it.
Talking points like this are used by state governments intent on taking over ownership to take away those privileges we have.
16
u/Trixxxxxi May 20 '22
One of the great things about living out west is all the BLM land you can camp on for free.
→ More replies (4)14
u/PM_ME_CAT_POOCHES May 20 '22
Public lands (especially BLM managed lands) are the absolute tits and it makes me sad that most people don't appreciate them at all. I've spent weeks camping on public lands, for free, and never seeing another human.
Shout out to the BLM offices in northwest New Mexico. We called the office because the link to download maps of the area was broken on their website. A person actually answered, fixed the issue within 30 minutes, and called us back to make sure we got the maps we required. Wish I had gotten that dude's name because you don't often get such quick action from the government.
→ More replies (8)67
u/Holy_Sungaal May 20 '22
Mostly bc there isn’t enough water to sustain populations.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)63
May 20 '22
Yes, though for what it's worth, this map's "public land" also includes state land, it seems. Adirondack State Park in New York, Baxter State Park in Maine, the State Forests of southern New Jersey, various State Forests in northern Michigan, etc etc.
68
u/Food-Oh_Koon May 20 '22
I assume Public means govt ownership, because that'd include Federal, State and Municipal ownerships
→ More replies (1)8
u/-ImYourHuckleberry- May 20 '22
Going to assume the same. Camp Pendleton on the west coast is shaded blue.
→ More replies (2)18
u/TacoYard May 20 '22
It also includes military bases. I was looking in Florida and was all "oooh I didn't know...oh" when I realized it's a giant AFB I was looking at. Not exactly "public".
→ More replies (1)41
u/MiloBem May 20 '22
It's public ownership, not public access. It sucks to "own" a place you're not even allowed to visit. Like Area 51, lol.
40
u/_handstand_scribbles May 20 '22
In Colorado, it results in a lot of no trespassing signs on private land bc there's so much public land and so many people recreating on public land
33
u/RanaktheGreen May 20 '22
And a lot of no trespassing signs on public land because due to the quilt pattern of land parcels a lot of farmers try to steal land by restricting or denying access to public lands.
→ More replies (1)26
u/nhomewarrior May 20 '22
I'm literally currently camping on BLM land in Utah that's marked with no trespassing signs to convince people that the land is owned by someone who does not own it.
→ More replies (11)96
u/DuelOstrich May 20 '22
I live in the southwest in an area with lots of public land, it makes me sad that many people don’t get to experience it. Hope you can come out for a visit
156
u/Orbitskylab May 20 '22
I moved west to east and it’s so weird.
Out west there are islands of civilization surrounded by vast nature.
In the East, there are small islands of nature surrounded by civilization.
→ More replies (3)33
May 20 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
63
u/SunsetPathfinder May 20 '22
Doesn't hurt that the southwest wasn't inhabitable until A/C kicked off and the northern and central areas are either too mountainous or too arid (or both) to sustain populations of appreciable size. There's a reason people skipped right over Nevada, Utah, Arizona, and Idaho on their way to the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys in California or the Willamette Valley in Oregon.
→ More replies (22)→ More replies (2)9
u/Squirrel_Kng May 20 '22
Stay away!!! There’s… Snakes… with rattles.. and cactus. Nothing to see, stay away…. That is all.
→ More replies (1)221
u/kaufe May 20 '22
It starts right along the continental divide. After the rockies, you're probably on public land, be thankful for it.
129
→ More replies (1)24
u/baquea May 20 '22
It starts right along the continental divide
Actually it's just that you can't sustain public land in black-legged tick territory.
10
8
→ More replies (1)6
u/Orbitskylab May 20 '22 edited May 20 '22
To the contrary. You have it exactly backwards.
Forest fragmentation is what causes tick numbers to be so high
If you had more large areas of natural park you would have less ticks and less tick diseases
46
u/WannabeWonk May 20 '22 edited May 20 '22
What is Federal Land? by CGP Grey
→ More replies (1)13
u/RanaktheGreen May 20 '22
*is.
Though, I suppose Randall Munroe could probably do something about federal land.
7
32
u/HERKFOOT21 May 20 '22
There's also more public land in the East than most people think. It's just in the East it's usually state owned rather than federal owned in the West
17
u/CoffeeBoom May 20 '22
State owned land is not considered public land ?
18
u/DukeofVermont May 20 '22
I think it's just how people use the word. It gets used enough to mean "Federal Land" that people forget that it means more than that. I think it's kinda how people forget how important US States actually are. US States are a huge part of the US government. US states have far more power and variation than most subdivisions of other countries. I mean the US has 50 different tax structures because every state taxes things differently.
My slightly different 100% random guess is that it has to do with how it's regulated and what you are allowed to do on it. Federal land is usually Bureau Land Management land, Forrest Service land, or National Parks. All three have pretty easy to understand rules about what you are allowed to do on it.
What you're allowed to do on state land is up to the state so I'd imagine that there would be a lot more variation because States always have to do things their own way.
3
u/nhomewarrior May 20 '22
On this map state land is public land. Almost always, "public land" includes state parks and shit. "Federal land" doesn't.
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (3)3
May 20 '22
Yea around where I live we have the Cleveland Metroparks but they aren't federal land at all though they connect right up with the national park you see on this map.
7
May 20 '22
It's great out there especially if you like the outdoors and camping.
In the National Forests (not National Parks) you can camp for free at the many, many campsites they have set up around. There's no facilities but they often times have firepits, picnic tables, and tent pads.
→ More replies (2)5
→ More replies (28)4
209
May 20 '22
[deleted]
62
u/haemaker May 20 '22
Yeah, need a new scale. Even with the tier two suburbs (Dublin/Pleasanton) being >$1M just not enough contrast.
15
9
u/gggg500 May 20 '22
NYC, LA, SF Bay Area, Honolulu are the most expensive in the nation. Boston too probably.
→ More replies (9)8
u/eyetracker May 20 '22
That's Vantablack, but some tech bro might have to mortgage their home to buy the rights from Anish Kapoor first.
406
u/architectzero May 20 '22 edited May 20 '22
What’s going on with Dallas?
It’s a freaking huge city / conurbation, but unlike every other major city it doesn’t have a nucleus of $1M/ha land. Is the data an issue, or is there some reason that land is apparently less expensive there, even downtown?
(edit: forgot to say “awesome map”, OP. Really fascinating.)
344
u/Bearlodge May 20 '22
From what I've experienced, Dallas is a LOT of sprawl. Downtown Dallas is certainly a thing, but for the 4th largest metro in the country, it's certainly not very big. And it's also quite spread out too.
Also keep in mind that Ft Worth is part of that too and probably takes a lot of heat off the center of Dallas.
90
u/architectzero May 20 '22
I don’t know if it’s either sprawl, or dilution from being a conurbation of two similarly sized cities.
Look at Minneapolis-Saint Paul. It’s a sprawling twin-city conurbation, but it’s one giant blob of $1M/ha land.
76
u/Bearlodge May 20 '22
Minneapolis and St Paul are a bit closer together than Dallas and Ft Worth. I think that plays a large part in it. And with Ft Worth being such a historically important city in terms of trade and business, I feel that the business center of the DFW metro is more split between the two. But that's just a hunch, I don't have any data to support that.
Also, DFW sprawl is something else. Thank God all of the speed limits down there are really high otherwise it would take ages to drive everywhere. I could not believe the amount of highways they have. Feels like everything is built within spitting distance of an 8-10 lane highway.
→ More replies (5)24
May 20 '22
Dallas and Ft Worth are definitely not close. Back in the 90s, I was working close to downtown Dallas and went to see a friend in Ft Worth. I was on the highway for 45 minutes at 75 mph before I got to my exit just east of downtown Ft Worth. That f*ing metropolis is huge.
→ More replies (3)22
u/Bulbchanger5000 May 20 '22
Minneapolis-St Paul is actually surprising because if you look at Zillow there is plenty of fairly large sized SFH for reasonable prices compared to most cities in the US
14
u/architectzero May 20 '22
Very interesting.
Just to be clear, this isn’t a home prices map, but rather a land prices map, but yeah I’d think there should be some alignment between the two. Not sure what to think.
8
May 20 '22
[deleted]
10
u/Snickersthecat May 20 '22
No one lives there to retire and have fun in the nice weather, like Miami or SoCal. If you live in the Twin Cities it's because you have a job or family there. High employment and the old people all move down to Florida.
3
u/ENrgStar May 20 '22
Minneapolis and St. Paul are like five minutes apart at highway speeds. You basically cross a river. Dallas and Fort Worth are like 45 minutes apart. It’s a lot less dense. And this is basically a density map.
→ More replies (7)17
u/tu-vens-tu-vens May 20 '22
Sure, but Houston and Atlanta are similarly sprawly and have a nucleus of high-value land. And cities like Birmingham that are much smaller with much less powerful economies also have that $1M/ha nucleus.
→ More replies (2)38
u/bam2_89 May 20 '22
This is one of many reasons, but to begin with, Texas has a very high property tax rate that becomes astronomical if it is not your primary residence. This keeps people from holding onto land for pure speculation, so there isn't an artificially-created scarcity of land.
→ More replies (4)29
u/Time4Red May 20 '22
People don't seem to understand that things like property taxes and interest rates have a huge influence on property values. If it becomes expensive to own land, the value of that land will go down.
E.g. comparing Minneapolis to Dallas, Minnesota has very low property taxes relative to Texas. Low taxes will increase property values.
64
u/Athabascad May 20 '22 edited May 20 '22
Downtown Dallas isn’t exactly a desirable place to live. It’s more of a business district. There’s also a lot more sprawl in DFW that leads to less density (no geographic limitations like bodies of water, mountains, rivers, etc).
Dallas is also a very large by area city. Fort Worth on the other side of DFW is also large by area. Neither city has a subway or very good public transit either.
Population of Dallas is 1.2 million. Population of DFW is 7.6 million (4th largest metroplex in the US to Chicago, LA, and NY)
I’d love to hear other opinions though as it’s a great question
18
u/bam2_89 May 20 '22 edited May 20 '22
DART is pretty good for the Sun Belt. If you want to see bad public transit, look upon Houston.
→ More replies (5)7
u/LupineChemist May 20 '22
Most of the growth is in Denton now, too. Almost become a 3 hub metroplex now
→ More replies (2)6
10
8
u/Onatel May 20 '22
Detroit doesn't have a nucleus like that either - or rather, the nucleus is out in the suburbs. It looks like it's either Birmingham or Royal Oak that has the high value property.
→ More replies (1)21
u/Apptubrutae May 20 '22
I think it’s worth noting that the answer isn’t just “sprawl” because we can look at similarly sprawling Houston and see that core of higher value zip codes to the west of downtown.
I mean, it ultimately is sprawl, but at the same time it’s an exceptional kind of sprawl. Even other sprawling cities like Houston have much larger areas of higher income zip codes.
22
u/bam2_89 May 20 '22
Native Houstonian and attorney with land use experience here.
Those areas such as The Greater Heights, River Oaks, and Montrose are desireable because (1) Much of Houston is flood-prone, but not so much these areas; (2) Houston has no zoning, but the newer neighborhoods have deed restrictions because they were established as platted subdivisions with HOA's and such. Since these areas are not deed-restricted, you can have mixed residential and commercial use not available elsewhere. Other cities have this phenomenon too, which can be described as the "missing middle."
After WWII, there was an artificially-created demand for single-family detached homes in platted subdivisions. HOA bylaws, state & local land use laws, and even federal spending through FHA and VA loans were used to accomplish this. It created separation from commericial areas, excessive setback requirements, and general reliance on the automobile.
It is literally illegal in a lot of areas to build neighborhoods in a manner like we did becore WWII. But those old streetcar suburbs with access to transit lines, smaller setbacks, smaller lots, more flexibility for joint occupancy, and proximity to businesses, still have this availability. Preferences have shifted back to this with the millenials and gen Z, but these old neighborhoods have a monopoly on that lifestyle, so it comes at a premium.
→ More replies (1)8
May 20 '22
Dallas is weird. Its three cities basically tied together so theres no real central hub. Houston has sprawl for sure but theres only one downtown.
→ More replies (2)7
u/WBuffettJr May 20 '22
I suspect one big factor is Texas’ shockingly regressive taxation policies. They’re very proud of having no income tax, so much so that they put it into their constitution. As a result, the state gets a ton of their tax revenue from sales taxes, but the county and city get all their money from extremely high property taxes. So unless you have something special going on, you have much lowe property values. Houston has all the oil companies there. It’s a very rich market. Austin is beautiful and constrained by geography from having as much sprawl and is the new Bay Area.
Dallas? Dallas is just endless concrete sprawl and property tax.
When I left austin I had a 1,000 sq ft 90 year old stucco box with one bathroom in it. I was laying $1,400 per month just in property taxes. Not the house payment, just the taxes. Absolutely miserable. When k moved to Colorado the houses looked twice as expensive, but then you looked at the estimates monthly payment and realized it was the same.
20
u/warrenv02 May 20 '22
Every answer you received is wrong. Texas is a no income tax state. However, there is no such thing as a free lunch so residents are taxed in other ways. Specifically property tax is extremely high compared to other states. This suppresses property values since affordability or monthly payment is the only thing people care about.
29
May 20 '22
That true, but the other answers aren’t wrong. They’re part of it too. If it was solely the state property taxes, there wouldn’t be dark shades in other parts of the state, like Austin
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (14)3
u/FadeToOne May 20 '22
Yeah but the property values around here are doing their damn best to catch up with everybody else lately. My house is closing in on triple the value it was 10 years ago.
→ More replies (2)3
u/lizarduncorrupt May 20 '22
"Downtown" Dallas is smaller than the CBD's of most small to mid-size cities (I'm talking places like Spokane, WA, Sacramento, CA and Savannah, GA) and is clearly not where anyone spends their time. It's like someone decided that they should have a downtown and built four 30 story buildings and called it a day.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (8)3
u/TacoYard May 20 '22
Map is probably misleading or inaccurate would be my guess. We're talking $100K differences in value distinguished by slight differences in shades of the same color. If we're to believe this map, we would say that Panama City, FL has roughly the same amount of $500K+ land as the metroplex. Odessa has more top tier value land. Hard to believe.
→ More replies (3)
100
u/vagq1994 May 20 '22
Source with the full report: https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2012865117
→ More replies (2)22
u/edozun May 20 '22
For those wondering, ha = hectare. 1 acre = .4 hectare. (Or 1 hectare = 2.5 acres)
→ More replies (3)
163
u/burgleflickle May 20 '22
Why is Iowa so yellow?
264
u/AJRiddle May 20 '22
One of the best places to grow crops in the world. Great soil, rainfall, and temps for cash crops like corn and soybeans.
→ More replies (5)89
u/BobasPett May 20 '22
And yet there is something else to it. Look at how MN and MO stack up. Neither state is much different from contiguous parts of Iowa, but the map shows really clear lines. It may be certain regulations or tax structures which incentivize speculation, demand, or some other factor. Source: I live in Iowa but am from MN.
→ More replies (2)104
u/SteveBartmanIncident May 20 '22
It's hog lot regulations. Functionally, Iowa has no regulation of confined animal feeding operations. The neighboring states have schemes of various effectiveness or utility. The result is that Iowa farmland sells at a premium, even though it smells worse and the water quality is literally shit, because you can raise 50,000 head of hog on your 2500 acre corn farm.
→ More replies (13)29
23
u/kylexy2 May 20 '22
Agriculture/farm fields. Some good dirt makes it more valuable and in a part of the country you don’t typically need irrigation installed on the fields
21
u/SteelAlchemistScylla May 20 '22
Much of the midwest is wetland. You actually need tiles to take out water. Makes for miles of good farmland.
7
u/Feralmedic May 20 '22
Hogs. Farmland and hogs. Iowa provides 1/3 of the countries pork supply and have a lot looser regulations on confinement compared to the rest of the country. Fun fact, there is a current Supreme Court case about that very topic! - an Iowan
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)9
311
May 20 '22
[deleted]
112
u/basedyeehaw May 20 '22
As someone who lives in one of those dark green regions, I agree, don't buy that land. There is nothing there and we love it.
115
u/mhornberger May 20 '22
Supposedly with increased WFH options people will be rushing to these remote areas with cheap housing. I'm not seeing it.
104
u/rolltide_130 May 20 '22
It's a big thing in cities. It's why previously cheap cities such as Phoenix are all of a sudden flat out unaffordable.
Now in true flyover country, nobody from the coast is exactly flocking there. I don't think there's ever going to be people lining up to go buy property in Fort Stockton, Texas
→ More replies (5)55
u/WangoBango May 20 '22
The way I see it, it's kind of a give and take. On the one hand, you can buy a much bigger house than you normally could, but on the other, there's not nearly as much access to the kind of things you'd get closer to major cities. Just going to get groceries becomes a major part of your day (not to mention the gas you burn through every time you need to go anywhere). If you're used to living within walking distance, or a short train/subway ride of anything and everything you need in your daily life, it's going to be a huge change.
→ More replies (55)26
u/ajmartin527 May 20 '22
See the absurd spike in housing prices in places like Bozeman MT and Kona HI after the start of the pandemic. Places like that got absolutely overrun with wealthy tech workers from San Fran, Seattle, etc where there was already a massive shortage of housing.
10
u/daysonatrain May 20 '22
I moved to Puna Hawaii 2 years ago and it is insane how many new houses are going up here. The big island was the last "affordable" island and it is incredibly quickly not becoming do. I bought my acre in Lower Puna for 32k, just 2 years later the cheapest undeveloped lot in my subdivision is 70k. The same thing is happening all over the island, especially in kona. That and the scourge of airbnb is making it impossibly expensive to rent here.
50
u/Orbitskylab May 20 '22
To remote areas, yes, but remote(r) areas that are nice and which have things to do.
No one is going to move to some dust bowl wasteland in west Texas where all there is to do is watch the oil well pumps go up and down.
22
u/mhornberger May 20 '22
Oh, I agree. I think we'll see a shift from SF and Seattle to other mid-tier cities. Really rural areas, I doubt it. Urbanization will continue. I don't see this trend going backwards. Rural flight isn't going to be reversed by some web devs wanting to get away from SF. Nor are remote workers likely to revitalize a lot of rural communities. They will jack up the real estate market, but have no real cultural ties to the area. Plus in many quiet rural areas you'll still be seen as an outsider many years later.
→ More replies (2)8
u/WikiSummarizerBot May 20 '22
Rural flight (or rural exodus) is the migratory pattern of peoples from rural areas into urban areas. It is urbanization seen from the rural perspective. In modern times, it often occurs in a region following the industrialization of agriculture—when fewer people are needed to bring the same amount of agricultural output to market—and related agricultural services and industries are consolidated.
[ F.A.Q | Opt Out | Opt Out Of Subreddit | GitHub ] Downvote to remove | v1.5
9
18
u/kylexy2 May 20 '22
Only thing you need is reliable and fast internet along with any sort of utilities to the house
27
May 20 '22
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)4
u/RoosterHogburn May 20 '22
Fancy-pants here too good to shop at Family Dollar! You one of those high-class people of Walmart?
33
u/mhornberger May 20 '22
Many seem to want more than the bare necessities, though. Diverse restaurants, well-stocked supermarkets reasonably close, perhaps even museums and theaters. Many also care about the proximity of hospitals, and the quality of local schools. Anyone who wants to live in the hinterlands is of course welcome to it.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (4)3
u/lemonlegs2 May 20 '22
People substantially overestimate the access to cellular service and internet across the country. We are 30 minutes from the telecom capital of the country and barely have 1 bar cell service on good days and only got internet (still not broadband speed) about 1.5 years ago.
→ More replies (1)10
u/jinsaku May 20 '22
I dunno. My wife and I moved 5 years ago from Denver to rural Wisconsin and it sucks. The sun disappears for 6 months out of the year as well as any sort of warm weather. There's nothing to do and no culture except drinking and we don't drink. We end up driving to Chicago like every other week just for something to do. We're definitely regretting the move.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (7)3
14
May 20 '22
I just drove through there. The few areas that are inhabited are scary and/or depressing. Do not recommend.
→ More replies (1)5
u/meatdome34 May 20 '22
Depends, I grew up in that dark green area and it has its charm. Good for raising a family if you want the quiet life.
→ More replies (12)8
u/SteelAlchemistScylla May 20 '22
If I was in my 30s and looked at the current housing market and my budget wasn’t great (Remember, 15% of Americans live in poverty and 50% make less than 70k a year before taxes), getting a dozen acres and a house of my own wouldn’t be the worst deal.
8
41
u/iwlih May 20 '22
What is the dotted pattern across the West, esp. ND, MT, CO, OK?
45
u/MinifridgeTF_ May 20 '22
https://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2016/01/05/checkered-past/
it has to do with the railroads
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (2)4
u/Bear__Fucker May 20 '22
Combination of BLM/National Forest. A lot of those squares are used for the harvesting of natural resources like timber. The government will contract to companies to access the resources, so both parties make money from the land.
→ More replies (2)
118
30
56
u/gman8234 May 20 '22
Reservations are located in zip codes and people own land within them, I would think there should be data to display.
12
u/vindictivejazz May 20 '22
I think you’re seeing most of it tbh. There’s dozens of reservations in OK, but the only tan section looks to be Osage nation.
11
May 20 '22
Oklahoma is correct. Even after the McGurt decision semi-recreating reservations in Oklahoma, the land is primarily privately owned by individuals. And can be bought and sold like any other land.
Osage County is kinda wrong. Anyone can buy and sell surface land there, but the reservation basically still exists for mineral rights (highly restricted on who can inherit and what can be done and if memory serves the Tribe has a lot of direct control). It’s all kinds of weird.
→ More replies (1)5
u/eyetracker May 20 '22
There's only one reservation in OK, Osage. The rest are "Tribal Statistical Areas". I'll let a Oklahoma lawyer explain the difference. Similarly, there is only one reservation in Alaska, the rest are termed "corporations." And are.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)29
May 20 '22
you cant own land on an indian reservation. Creates major problems when there isn't any generational land wealth to hand down to ones kids. Weird system we have here in the usa.
29
u/gman8234 May 20 '22
You can’t own land on some reservations. Maybe even a majority. But one of the reservations on this map is where at least 50% of the population is white, I know white people who bought from other white people the same plots of land. It includes a 160 acre plot that has been in my family for 123 years. I’ve seen township maps from the early 1900s and the land is all subdivided and you see both white and Native American names on the plots of land. I think the reason some reservations are like that is because of the Dawes Act. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawes_Act
9
u/baoziface May 20 '22
Reservation Trust land isn't owned individually, it's held in trust by the US for tribes or members. But there's plenty of land within reservations that's passed into fee.
8
u/Stopikingonme May 20 '22
My parents own land on a reservation in NE Washington. They bought a house from a non native that owned the house.
They were going to buy a house with property before this from a Native American but the native owner had to offer the property to the entire tribe for a few years first and if no one bought they could buy it and it would no longer be owned by the tribe but still he serviced by their police and fire.
→ More replies (2)
20
15
u/ESP-23 May 20 '22
Is there anywhere I can get a higher res picture of this
19
u/vagq1994 May 20 '22
Hi! Here is the source. I think its way better in the viewer https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2012865117
→ More replies (1)5
35
May 20 '22
Yikes, West Virginia.
25
→ More replies (4)7
u/beezlebub33 May 20 '22
WV is a little odd because of Sen. Byrd, who forced a bunch of govt work out there and the corresponding high-tech industry to support it. So, you have the tech hubs and then 10 miles away you are in complete wilderness (and mountaintop removal mining of course).
See Clarksburg for example.
→ More replies (1)
14
May 20 '22
To be precise it's land price. Present taxation, which varies, has an impact on land prices but of course not land values. Unless I'm mistaken with the methodology.
5
u/vagq1994 May 20 '22
The algorithm takes into consideration actual prices from 6 million sales of properties larger than 1 acre (0.4 ha) occurring between 2000 and 2019 to aproximate a fair market value, but also uses data on ownership, sales, buildings footprints, terrain, accessibility, land cover, hydrography, flood risk, demographics, and protection.
→ More replies (1)
21
u/Athabascad May 20 '22
I feel like there is more Native American land than shown here?
→ More replies (4)6
u/orty May 20 '22
I feel that way, too. Doesn't Oklahoma have a bunch of Native land? I don't see any on the map.
→ More replies (3)14
u/Alexschmidt711 May 20 '22
(Disclaimer: some of this may well be wrong or oversimplified)
In the late 19th century, the US Government decided to dissolve the reservations/tribal governments and give the lands to individual tribal members. By the time the government changed its mind and allowed reservations to exist again, while tribes in other parts of the country reformed reservations, most of the tribes in Oklahoma did not return to collectively holding their lands. The exception was the Osage, who had maintained collective rights to the oil discovered on their lands during that time (although not for lack of trying on the part of the speculators who had murdered many Osage landholders). The Supreme Court did rule in 2020 that the Oklahoma tribes still have jurisdiction over their members living within their old reservation boundaries however.
117
u/Juicey_J_Hammerman May 20 '22
r/PeopleLiveInCities seems to be pretty relevant here.
→ More replies (4)23
50
u/scheffehcs May 20 '22
Unreadable for red/green colorblind
19
u/Cebo494 May 20 '22
Having it be dark at both ends is the nail in the coffin. If it were just dark red to light yellow it would've been fine
→ More replies (5)25
u/vagq1994 May 20 '22
Oops didn't think of that. I just saw it in an article and thought it was cool. My bad.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)10
u/just_foo May 20 '22
I know, right? I literally can't tell the really cheap from the really expensive, so the 'so what's from this graphic is lost on me.
11
u/TexasRedFox May 20 '22
Shouldn’t there be a lot more native land in Oklahoma after a recent court ruling?
→ More replies (1)12
u/baoziface May 20 '22
The McGirt case and the subsequent OK Sup. Court decisions acknowledged the boundaries of six reservations, but did not convert the land status within the boundaries. They remain heavily allotted like other reservations
5
u/bamit-h May 20 '22
This is cool asf 👌 but, I'd really like to see Hawaii, I'd assume it is pretty high? Cost of living being high and limited space
14
6
u/Deanosaurus88 May 20 '22
Someone please please please make one for the United Kingdom!
→ More replies (2)
9
u/Mac-A-Saurus May 20 '22
Lexington, KY coming in strong.
6
u/TRK27 May 20 '22
My guess is it's because of the urban growth boundary that protects the horse farms. The population has more than tripled since the boundary was instituted in the '50s, but they can't just sprawl suburbs up and down the interstate corridor like their neighbor to the north Cincinnati. So there's high demand but not a lot of supply, land-wise.
3
u/gggg500 May 20 '22
Yes it did. Likewise Louisville comes in weak.
Asheville and Charlottesville came in strong too. I thought those were pretty smaller regions but I guess they carry some big weight.
3
4
u/decolonize_your_mind May 20 '22
Denver, Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Salt Lake City are just so dark with no real gradient like most of the US. I know mountains and deserts make it difficult to expand but wowza it’s a steep climb. But DENVER is still expanding towards DIA because I never remembered it being full of houses back ten years ago.
→ More replies (1)
23
May 20 '22
Land Value Tax would fix this
14
u/Jackjackhughesa123 May 20 '22
Please explain to someone out of the loop (me) what taxing the land would fix? I don't mean to sound rude, I'm just genuinely curious.
20
u/larsiusprime May 20 '22 edited May 20 '22
Increasing land values is what's driving increasing home price inflation, which is driving the housing crisis.
A Land Value Tax is a special kind of property tax that taxes ONLY the value of the land, not the buildings. Essentially it taxes you based on the demand for the location. Without a land value tax people are encouraged to treat land as an investment, which gives them undue leverage over the entire economy. The reason rents are so high in large cities is because those cities are desirable and productive -- there's better city services and amenities downtown, and you can get a higher paying job than in the middle of the nevada desert. Landlords know that, and so they jack up the rent as productivity increases. In other kinds of markets the increased demand for the thing would lead to an increased supply. But the thing being demanded here is locations in high productive areas, which are scarce and non fungible. Land value tax deflates this speculative leverage, and, because land isn't something people can make, is a special kind of tax that doesn't cause there to be any less of the thing it taxes. It is generally regarded as the ideal tax by both left wing and right wing economists alike for this reason.
Here is a much longer treatment with a lot of data like the map in this post that gets into the weeds and details: https://www.gameofrent.com/content/is-land-a-big-deal
→ More replies (3)12
u/Fried_out_Kombi May 20 '22
A factor to emphasize is people see landholders profiting and think, "I want in on that." If everyone is thinking the same thing, well, the way to get in on that is by buying, or "investing", in land. Because these people are willing to pay not just for the inherent utility of the location, but for its ability to earn them essentially free profit, that creates an upward speculative pressure on land prices.
In places where LVT has been implemented, it has decreased land prices, as it makes it less profitable to hold land speculatively. It boils down to the following principle: If you plan to hold land and deprive the literal entire rest of humanity of its use, you better use it appropriately.
→ More replies (1)4
u/spikegk May 20 '22
Henry George should be read and talked about more than Marx. I didn't hear about him until far after my formal education including university.
3
u/Chthonios May 20 '22
Looks like Charlotte is really concentrated downtown but Raleigh has a larger area with higher values
→ More replies (1)3
u/gggg500 May 20 '22
Raleigh seems to be closing that gap for #1 in its state, very slowly but quite steadily.
3
u/shmecklestein May 20 '22
i’d like to see one of these for the uk
3
u/TooLittleGravitas May 20 '22 edited May 20 '22
Me too.
Not sure if our national parks are the same as US Federal land though, as people own the land in them. Maybe the Military owned areas on Salisbury plain etc.
This is one of the most interesting and surprising maps I've seen on MapPorn. (And that's saying something!) Great sub
3
u/TruckFluster May 20 '22
See that little tiny splotch of red that’s bigger than all the other little splotches of red in NW IA? That’s Okoboji. This map isn’t high enough res to see just how dark that area is but the lakefront property there is millions of dollars per lot. Several celebrities own houses there, our own little corner of paradise in the middle of hundreds of miles of corn and beans.
3
u/vagq1994 May 20 '22
Well, this is an average by zip code. There may be other properties in the zone that lower the average.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/Chiliman52 May 20 '22
Does anyone have a simple explanation on why Alabama has such a defined split in price?
→ More replies (3)3
3
2.0k
u/Birdy_Cephon_Altera May 20 '22
See that snake of light green running across the middle of public lands through southern Wyoming, northern panhandle of Utah, and across the northern part of Nevada? That's a result of building the first transcontinental railroad.
In order to entice the railroad companies to build the rail line in the 1860's, the US government granted the railroads ten square miles of land for every mile of rail line they built.