Networks of Obligation by Alejandro Loza

University of Minnesota College of Design School of Architecture GD3 Design Studio - Arch 8255 Fall 2019

1 Networks of Obligation

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Exist, Flourish, Evolveâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Territorial Care and the Upper Misi-ziibi

2 Networks of Obligation

CHAPTER CONTENTS

Introduction 3 Glossary of Terms

Property Origins

History of Property

Feudal Property Systems

8 10

Privatization of Land in Historic European Settlements

Indigenous Property Systems

Privatization of Land for Native Americans

Mnísóta, Mnißota, Minnesota

Indigenous Land Culture

Western Colonial Expansion

Minnesota Land History

Rules & Responsibilities of Property

Regulatory Systems

Nuisances

Environmental Nuisances

Private Land Boundaries

The Spectrum of Private vs Public

Federal Agencies + Public Land Relationships

Federal Land Systems

State Land Systems

What is Good Land Use?

New Modes of Property Rights

Property Networks and Obligations How Property Changes the Landscape

Chicken Ordinance

Industrial Air Pollution

Walleye Fishing

Beaver Dams

Tribal Ownership

Conclusions 62 Sources 64

Alejandro Loza, Ali Noormohammadi, Ashley Duggan, Jacob Ernst

The institution of property has historically been treated as an individualistic matter, one designed to maximize the potential for personal benefit, reinforced by legal mechanisms that prioritize the ownerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interests above all else, with no regard to the collateral damage caused by singular exploitative endeavor. What has been lesser known, or perhaps ignored, is how property simultaneously affects all facets of our physical, social, and environmental milieu.

The concept of property encapsulates various communicative forms, implied connotations, and standards of interaction between humans and their environment. In addition, property has also carried with it certain rights, obligations, and relationships that inform how we view the landscape. In its most elementary form, property can be described as ownership over a defined piece of land. Within this, property is subject to a number of laws, regulations, and social norms that govern its function and use. Furthermore, property has all types of value embedded and assigned to it, typically in the form of natural resources, both real and potential which can be extracted for the generation of capital and wealth. What is important to recognize however is that propertization creates interconnections between seemingly disparate things. What is done on one piece of property can affect the other properties around it, leading to physical consequences, while the governing systems that apply to one property may not apply to another, resulting in different outcomes. Our property organizational systems have formed complex interactive networks that have tangible effects on the way we define and utilize our landscape.

Any decision that we make in regards to the way we designate, use, and maintain property has both positive and negative consequences on the societal and environmental systems around us. The decision to subdivide a swath of land for farming purposes, to establish a

new suburban development in a forested area, or even put up a fence between neighboring properties all have ramifications that will change the organization of land, distribution of resources, and alter the countless ecological systems present in our world. In order to understand these networks of interaction, it is imperative to deconstruct the established conventions and perceptions behind property and examine the various physical, historical, legal, and conceptual components that come together to ultimately define what a property is.

The following research will present insights into the construct of the property and unpack some of the major ideas that define the notion of a property. Included in this body of research will be information on the history behind property rights, the regulatory systems that define its use, methods of management, and real world examples of the complex interactions that form as a result of propertization. This research will conclude with statements about the current state of the property institution and potential actions to consider that could potentially improve upon our notions of property and provide our society and environment with a more balanced, equitable approach to the institution of Property.

Networks of Obligation

4 Networks of Obligation

OWNERSHIP

REAL PROPERT Y/REAL ESTATE

Ownership is the state or fact of exclusive rights and control over property, including land, objects, resources, and intellectual property in perpetuity.

Real property consists of land itself, track materials annexed to the land, all buildings, structures, bridges, and other fixtures on it, all rights and privileges belonging or pertaining to the land, and all mines, quarries, fossils, and trees on or under it. Real estate is defined as any leasehold, fee simple, or other estate or interest in, over, or under land, including structures, fixtures, and other improvements and interests that by custom, usage, or law pass with a conveyance of land.

Ownership includes various bundled rights, collectively referred to as a title, which can be transferred, inherited, exchanged, separated, and held by various parties. Ownership of land does not necessarily mean ownership of the resources on, above, or below, that land, as these rights can be held and maintained separately. When a single entity holds all rights to a property, they have what is defined as a simple fee title, the most complete and absolute form of ownership.

Real property/real estate may include spaces with or without upper or lower boundaries, or spaces without physical boundaries.

ZONING Zoning is the ability for a municipality to control the development of land within its boundaries, both the types of structures built and the uses to which the land is put. Typically applied towards private development, zoning helps maintain the best use of land and property in a way that will not be detrimental to the prosperity, health, and welfare of local citizens.

TRACT, LOT, PARCEL , AND PIECE OR PARCEL

PUBLIC L AND

Tract, lot, parcel, and piece or parcel of land means any contiguous quantity of land in the possession of, owned by, or recorded as, the property of a given entity or entities.

Public land, as defined in the United States, is when a public entity such as a local or central government manages land that is not under private or individual ownership.

These areas of land may or may not be bounded by natural or physical barriers such as gates, fences, ditches, moats, roads, or other demarcating devices, visible or otherwise.

Examples of public land may include national parks, forests, trails, lakes and waterways, wildlife reserves, conservation areas, recreational parks, memorials, monuments, and historical sites.

An area of land can be subdivided into multiple parcels by the property owner if allowed by law and approved.

Public lands can be sold or leased to private entities for commercial purposes such as oil drilling or mining.

PUBLIC USE/PUBLIC PURPOSE A public use or purpose is the possession, occupation, ownership, and enjoyment of land and/or property by the general public or public agencies. In modern democracy, public land/property is owned by the people in general but entrusted to the government for common benefit. Public use examples may include activities such as visiting a monument or memorial, touring historical sites and battlefields, boating in a recreational park, and hiking through trails and conservation areas.

A property line is a legal boundary that denotes the extents of one’s individual property.

Trespass of land is interference with the possession of a specified property, including unlawful forcible entry or injury, above or below ground, onto another’s property, regardless of the condition of the land.

The extents of a property are determined through a land survey, which describe ownership boundaries, corners, features, topography, and improvements. Property is further defined through boundaries such as setbacks and easements that restrict where on one’s property a building, object, or other structure may be placed.

Trespassing can by committed by causing or permitting a thing to cross the boundary of a premise, such as casting material on, discharging pollutants into, allowing seepage onto, and physically entering upon, another’s land.

NUISANCE A nuisance is an activity that affects the right of an individual to enjoy the use of a specified property. According to Minnesota law, there are two general categories of nuisances. A public nuisance is an activity that unreasonably interferes with or obstructs a right that is conferred on the general public to enjoy the use of a property. A private nuisance is an activity that interferes with an individual’s right to enjoyment of some property or activity, but does not necessarily affect the general public as a whole.

CONDEMNATION

EMINENT DOMAIN

Condemnation is the authority by a governing agency to declare a property to be dangerous and uninhabitable for human occupation or use.

Eminent domain is the power of governing agencies to take private land for public use.

Federal and state constitutions require due process of law for condemnation and seizure of a property, including notices to property owners, opportunities to remedy issues in question, and the chance to fair court hearings and proceedings.

The ‘takings clause’ of the fifth amendment of the United States constitution prohibits the seizure of private land without just compensation. Minnesota law further clarifies that eminent domain may only be used for a public use or public purpose, and not solely for public benefits of economic development.

PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TA XES Payment in Lieu of Taxes occurs when land is not assigned to a private individual but is owned or cared for by the state and is considered to be tax exempt. The governing body sends payments to the local, state, or federal level to compensate for the tax revenue which is otherwise lost.

TRESPASS

Networks of Obligation

PROPERT Y LINE/BOUNDARY

6 Networks of Obligation

EARTH JURISPRUDENCE

REINVEST IN MINNESOTA (RIM)

A Philosophy that is based upon the relationship that the human species is a part of a larger community, and within this larger community that the health, happiness, and survival is dependent on the health of the earth.

A program established by state funds that focuses on maintaining healthy soil diversity, promoting a safe wildlife habitat, and replenish water resources in Minnesota. Farmers and landowners are given money instead of planting crops for a year or two to allow the soil to regain it’s natural nutrients and protect water tables. The land is placed under a conservation easement with a set of rules and regulations of what can be done to the land.

Human and law governance plays a huge role in understanding that these connections between humans, animals, plants, and the earth are all dependent on the actions made by communities who inhabit the earth. Earth Jurisprudence is not about the anthropocentric relationship but rather an earth-centric one. The ability for humans to exist, flourish, and evolve on earth should come from a sustainable regulation of human practices.

RIM applies to a wide variety of land types. These include riparian agricultural lands, wetland restoration areas, pastures, croplands, and groundwater areas.

MINNESOTA CONSERVATION RESERVE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM (MN CREP) Similar to the Reinvest in Minnesota (RIM) program, this is a voluntary program for landowners to permanently attach conservation easements onto their land. These easements help preserve and create habitats for species that depend on these areas to live, such as badgers and meadowlarks. Landowners enroll for a period of at least 14-15 years in conjunction with a Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and permanent RIM easement.

CROP EQUIVALENT RATING (CER)

WALK IN ACCESS ( WIA)

The Crop Equivalent Rating (CER) is a calculation that helps compare the diverse soil types of a parcel or tract of land and whether it is a viable peice of land for farming, crop yield, and what crops can be sucessfully grown on that land.

Walk In Access grants public citizens or hunters to enter private land and hunt. A landowner registers their land with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) to allow others to hunt on their land during hunting or trapping seasons.

The CER studies soil types, crop yeild patterns, costs, fertilizers used, presence of limestone and acid, drainage, and history of crop production operations.

Hunters are not allowed to bring motorized vehicles onto the private land and are meant to be respectful of the owner’s land. Landowners can opt out of the Walk In Access program at any time.

An example of a CER calculation is Soil Net Return Per Acre ($) divided by the Total Net Return of all Acres ($), multiply by CER value (100). 100 is the highest value amount.

L AND TENURE Land Tenure is a system of land property in common law areas. “Land” is overseen by an individual who has sole responsibility on what happens on the land, who can go on the land, and the conditions related to it. Often used in Feudal Times, the individual who owns the land is the monarch or lord, and those who live or rent the land are considered the tenant or sub-tenant. The tenant follows the rules of the land owner.

An Allodial Title refers to a property that is owned by an individual and there is no sovereign, governmental, or superior landowner who has any claim or governance on that property.

Right-of-Way states that an individual may pass through another’s property on a path or thoroughfare that leads to another’s property, land, or amenity that otherwise has no other public access or entrance. A Right-OfWay benefits an individual or business rather than the landowner or land.

A property that is associated with an Allodial Ttile is not subject to eminent domain or can be condemned. The property is not under any obligation to pay taxes, rent, or offer services to any corporation, government, or society.

APPURTENANCE An appurtenance is something that is part of or belongs to a bigger, central entity. It is a smaller subordinate piece of a bigger puzzle that always accompanies the larger entity. A fence, garage, pool, garden shed, or parcel behind a house count as an appurtenance to a property. The Supreme Court of Minnesota in 1919 ruled in the case Cohen versus Whitcomb, recognizes this definition of what an appurtenance as, “That which belongs to something else. Something annexed to another thing more worthy.”

MANORIALISM Manioralism is a system of property where all activities are centered around a manor house and its owner, the Lord. The Lord of the Manor oversees the management of pastures, fields, mills, work shops, church, barns and other structures on the property. Common in Feudal and early Renaissance periods, the Lord would rule over a population of serfs or peasants who would work in turn for lodging and food. Modern systems of Manorialism could be found throughout the world until the 1970’s.

In the United States, the Right-Of-Way is a form of easement. An example of a Right-Of-Way is a public path that leads to a beach and is situated between two private individual’s properties.

RIGHT- OF-WAY

Networks of Obligation

ALLODIAL TITLE

PROPERT Y ORIGINS

Networks of Obligation

History of Property Property is most often associated with the ownership of land, but can be defined as the possession of any amount of territory, buildings, objects, and/or other resources by a person, group, or other entity. Terms like plots, tracts, lots, parcels, and plats can be used to describe a portion of land defined by an enclosed boundary, physical or otherwise. Property claims and ownership rights are established through legal governing systems that recognize and grant exclusive rights to one’s use of a property. The use of property is typically controlled by a set of regulations in order to ensure that one’s use of a property does not infringe on another’s property. Property can be bought, sold, traded, subdivided, and developed by their respective owners within established legal boundaries. People can occupy property as owners, managers, tenants, renters, visitors, trespassers, surveyors, and the like.

Historically, America has had a particularly integral relationship with the concept of property rights. As the first European colonizers landed and gradually made inroads into North America, the mantra of Manifest Destiny enabled settlers to continuously expand their claims to the land, viewing it as their God-given right to explore the frontiers of the country and take the resources as their own property. Dogma by prominent intellectual thinkers further promoted the notion of ‘first possession’ and ‘improving’ the land for productive gain. Perhaps nowhere on Earth has the concept of property rights and ownership more enshrined than in America, especially considering that early drafts of what became the Constitution outlined the unalienable rights to “life, liberty, and property”.

Unfortunately, such an entitled view of property rights would have detrimental effects on other populations, more precisely Native Americans, who long practiced traditional, legitimate, yet legally unrecognized modes of property ownership and rights. Resources like land that are physically identifiable and quantifiable became the easiest to turn into property, while more complex, fluid forms of property ownership have been overridden or simply ignored. Land once belonging to indigenous communities was seized through the doctrine of discovery, coerced sales, violent conquest and more recently, records mismanagement, technicality exploitation, and eminent domain.

Today, the concept of property rights extends past simple definitions of a bounded piece of land, encompassing various adjacent systems and elements that are affected by, and have an effect on, the way we categorize, distribute, and ultimately exploit property and ownership rights.

9 Networks of Obligation John Gastâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s American Progress, Circa 1872 The painting depicts â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Colombiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; an allegorical figure of America, bringing elements of civilization to the Western world. Notice that the Natives are rendered as barbarians living in the dark, while the settlers are shown as productive and industrious peoples bringing forward progress and light to

the land. Widely distributed in its time, the image is a seminal example of the concept of Manifest Destiny, the idea that the European settlers were divinely ordained to expand west and take over the land as their own.

10 Networks of Obligation

A Lord managing his Serfs in the Fields

PROPERT Y ORIGINS Feudal Property Systems After the fall of the Roman Empire in the 5th century, the world experienced a decline in progress, regulations, and systems, with periods of chaos and war that ravaged Europe and other continents, causing cities, villages, and towns to operate independently. There was a need for order, and one solution was to create a system based off Roman property systems. The feudal system is comprised of three overarching hierarchical classes, the nobility, the clergy, and the peasantry. Within these classes there is another set of hierarchal classes.

Feudalism had a hierarchical system that was focused around one large structure, like a manor or castle, and small entities which contributed in running the large structure. The rules and responsibilities of each tier varied and was often an unbalanced system based on power, influence, money, and violence. The higher classes believed that their purpose was to rule and exert power over those who worked the lands and extracted the resources. The goal of the highest tier, often the Monarch, in an established country or a Lord in an unorganized state or region, was to control large populations of serfs or peasants who worked on the land, own a wealthy treasury, and maintain a sizable military.

Underneath the nobility, there are three classes of people: the Monarch, the Lord, and Esquire. The Monarch, or the King or Queen, is the overall ruler of large acreages of land. They have control over the

treasury, and assume the right to make all of the decisions. All classes below the Monarch report and follow the decisions of the Monarch.

The Lord is anointed by the Monarch into their position or gains influence to rule land under direction of the Monarch. The Lord often owns a manor which is surrounded by peasants, pastures, fields, and other resources. All of these structures are owned by the Lord and a tax on all goods produced is paid to the Monarch.

An Esquire is often regarded as a Knight of a country or area. These Knights serve the Monarch and protect the lands from attack. Knights pay taxes to the Monarch.

The clergy are members of organized religion, often Christianity. Churches and Parishes are found in the cities, villages, and towns where the Monarch and/ or Lords live. The clergy receives donations from the Monarch and Lords, but also pays a small fee to the Monarch.

The peasantry are the lowest class, and all pay taxes to their Lord. The Lord takes their earnings and pays it to the Monarch. Different classes of peasantry include Yeoman, Free Tenants, Serfs, Peasants, and Slaves. Peasants work for lodging and food provided by the Lord and make little wages, if any.

11 Networks of Obligation Jamestown, Virgina, the first English settlement in America

PROPERT Y ORIGINS Privatization of Land in Historic European Settlements Most colonies in early U.S. history, such as Jamestown, Plymouth, and Salt Lake City, began as communal settlements with a strong willed leader making the decisions. This is due to a number of factors, but most prominently because by working together, colonists could reduce individual risk. This was key since there were many external threats present and reducing individual risk as much as possible was key to survival. By grouping and working as a communal entity governed by one, colonies were able to make decisions quickly and effectively utilize the land.

While communal living worked initially throughout most colonies, the negative implications were soon to follow. Some colonists found that they could not put in as much work as others and still reap the equal benefits of society. This is encapsulated in a quote from Captain John Smith â&#x20AC;&#x153;When our people were fed out of the common store, and laboured jointly together, glad was he could slip from his labour, or slumber over his taske he cared not how, nay, the most honest among them would hardly take so much true paines in a weeke, as now for themselves they will doe in a day, neither cared they for the increase, presuming that howsoever the harvest prospered, the generall store must maintaine them, so that we reaped not so much Come from the labours of thirtie, as now three or foure doe provide for themselves.â&#x20AC;? To combat this potential attitude, colonies would divide the land equally amongst settlers, giving 3 acres to each, so that everyone could work to be

self-sufficient by getting out of their land what they put into it. This self-sufficiency allowed colonies to survive and prosper with increased responsibility, efficiency, and productivity, and the ability of making productive a piece of land became a major tenant of the American property institution.

Currently to this day, we operate off a similar system in which most property in the U.S. is privatized allowing for increased efficiency. The land, albeit privately owned, does not entitle to owner to do whatever they went with it. There are numerous laws, regulations, and government oversight enforcing a set of standards. This government oversight, exists for a similar fashion to why Jamestown was appointed Captain John Smith to oversee operations. Having a relatively unbiased governing body allows to large scale decisions to be implemented more quickly and to ensure a sense of fairness to all private parties so that one does not gain too much power and abuse it.

12 Networks of Obligation

PROPERT Y ORIGINS

Indigenous Property Systems

Privatization of Land for Native Americans

Native Americans have historically viewed land differently than Europeans. Land was seen as a gift to sustain life rather than a tool for progress. It was a delicate balance that must be kept and this purpose gave them a sense of identity. This is why historically, most Native Americans divided land rights between people in a more respectful pact with the existing environment. Rather than segmenting the land and giving ownership to each individual, Natives lived in more of a communal sense. This varied by tribe and region, but the majority had an overlapping commonality to their ways.

Unlike Europeans, Native Americans, prior to the late 1800’s held a different set of beliefs and values for their land. They saw the land and earth as something to value and something to nourish. To them, it was more of a simple means to sustain life and by caring for it, it provided a sense of identity. With these ideologies, a communal sense of land ownership worked just fine for them. The land was not being used efficiently, but it was enough to sustain them. This was their way of life until white settlers entered the picture. The settlers initially forced the Natives onto reservations where they were allowed to continue their practices for many years until the late 1800’s when a push to assimilate Natives into American society became the primary objective of the U.S. government. This led to the Dawes Act of 1887.

Native farmland typically required an initial startup investment of considerable time and resources, with the product reflecting the work put into it. Because of this, farm plots on tribal lands were often privately owned by families rather than the community at large. Other lands, without high yield farm potential, were often shared communally with tribal members. This included wooded areas, rocky terrain, and bodies of water. These areas were commonly used for hunting grounds.

Trapping, hunting, and fishing were common activitiestribal activities. Hunting parties would hunt as groups, with every hunter receiving a fair share of a catch. The share would be determined by who killed the animal or who invested most in the hunt. Fishing and trapping were slightly different in that they were more individual or small group activities. Every tribal member had equal access to the land and water, as long as they did not abuse the land or overtake their share of resources.

A Semi-Permanent Ojibwe Village

Under the terms of the Dawes Act, heads of family would receive a grant of 160 acres, a single person or orphan over 18 years of age would receive a grant of 80 acres, and persons under the age of 18 would receive 40 acres each. Upon the reciept of land, Natives would also receive U.S. citizenship, new rights, and become subject to taxes. However, these terms were designed to subtly dissolve and assimilate Natives into a Western culture and style of living.

Goals of the Dawes act included; - To break up tribes as a social units - To ‘civilize’ Natives through modernization - To open the land to white settlers for profit

13 Networks of Obligation Introduction of Western Influences on a Native Reservation

Many Native Americans took the U.S. government up on this offer for a variety of reasons. Some had adopted the ideals of the settlers and wanted to use land for profit more efficiently. Some accepted the terms out of fear that if they didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t assimilate into the dominant culture, they would be unable to survive in an ever expanding colonization of the landscape. And some thought that it would lead to a lessening of governmental supervision. Regardless, the Dawes Act allowed the United States to dismantle the ways of established life for Native cultures and slowly assimilate them into the dominant EuropeanAmerican culture.

Post Dawes Act, reservation land distribution is somewhat messy. Land originally allocated to heads of family was passed down to heirs throughout the generations, but the plots were never physically divided. This means that a plot of land can have multiple heirs. Some plots of land have thousands of owners, which makes it very difficult to determine what happens to the land since any action would need approval of every owner.

A common solution to the lack of singular ownership of land is that the plot gets leased out to private corporations by the tribe members. This provides an income source, but at the same time, companies typically do not pay high prices to lease this land, resulting in individuals sometimes receiving less than half a cent per month.

Most reservation land is held in a trust by the U.S. government. This also means that most of the land is owned communally by the tribe. Traditional american property rights are not always applicable on reservation land, making it difficult for tribes to assimilate into a capitalist society, as land can only be allocated to tribe members by tribal council. Since land canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be bought or sold to outside parties, this also means that natural resources and mineral rights cannot be leased out to companies.

Casinos are operated by the tribal government and typically exist on communal land. Indian gaming rights were granted to tribes in an attempt to stimulate tribal economies and are thus subject to regulations. Most of the profits from casinos go to tribal infrastructure which includes road systems, communal buildings, education, etc. Casinos are still subject to federal taxes on income despite being on reservation lands.

The First Nations Property Ownership Act is a proposed tribal legal framework which would give natives more property rights. Essentially this plan treats reservation land similar to a city in that a governing body has oversight of the general area, but individual property could be bought, sold, and leased to anyone without tribal consent. The idea is that this would create a free more competitive economy on reservation lands.

PROPERT Y ORIGINS

Networks of Obligation

Mnísóta, Mnißota, Minnesota Home to the headwaters of the Mississippi River, once prairie lands, old growth forests, bogs, lakes, rivers, bluffs, and the Iron Range, many forget the beginnings of who originally inhabited and named Minnesota. The name Minnesota comes from one of the Indigenous groups of people who have occupied this land for thousands of years. These Native Americans are called the Dakota. Minnesota derives from two Dakota words that pertain to water, Mnísóta and Mnißota or Mnissota. The Dakota Dictionary Online defines these two respectively, “clear blue water” and “cloudy water,” in reference to the changing states of the Minnesota river throughout the year. The definition of cloudy water has been debated and may refer to the mist which is formed by the differences of temperature between night and day during the summer months in Minnesota. Either way there is a strong connection to the water, which has been recognized by the Dakota or Chippewa, Ojibwe or Anishinabe, the colonial settlers, and present day Minnesotans.

Throughout Minnesota’s history, the land has played a pivotal role in how people and nature have interacted within the state. Rivers, lakes, and other geological features often formed boundaries that have been used to separate different stakeholders from one another. From Native Americans to Colonial Settlers to current land systems, there have been numerous examples of what thresholds and mapping that has determined where boundaries are. One example is how the St. Croix River separated the Minnesota Territory from the newly formed state of Wisconsin in 1848 and was further defined when Minnesota became a state in 1858. Mitakuye owasin . . . is an acknowledgment of all that has ever been created, in the entire universe, as your relative. To nod your head in acknowledgment to a rock or a blade of grass and to think of that rock or that blade of grass as your brother and to call him brother. — Tammy DeCoteau (Sisseton–Wahpeton Dakota), 2004

Seth Eastman, Dakota Summer Lodge, 1846-1848

Indigenous Culture Specific Indigenous Groups can be identified by the time in which they occupied the land we recognize as Minnesota today. Each era spanned hundreds of years and the reach of these groups have been pieced together from archaeological finds. Indigenous groups include the Dakota, Ojibwe, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Fox, Chippewa, Sauk, Iowa, Ponca, Huron, Otoe, Omaha, Winnebago, and Ottawa, with the most prominent being the Dakota and the Ojibwe. The boundaries of where the Dakota and Ojibwe lived can be defined by the separation of the Prairie and Forest areas. The Dakota reside in the Prairie lands of southern and western parts of the current state boundaries. Their lands encompass the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, St. Cloud, Rochester, and Red Wing. The Ojibwe reside more in the historically more forested lands of the north and northeastern areas of Minnesota. Their lands included the present day cities of Duluth, Brainerd, the headwaters of Itasca, and Lake of the Woods. In present day, through the actions of the Treaties between the United States Federal Government, the lands where the Dakota and Ojibwe can reside have been drastically reduced from their original landholdings.

Four distinct early indigenous groups, the Big Game, Eastern Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippian, occupied parts of Minnesota from before 5,000 B.C. to 1700 AD. The Big Game or Paleo-Indians lived across North America before 5,000 BC. This indigenous group was often transient, moving across the continent following game such as bison or deer. Big Game people preferred short term shelters, and focused on using fire and rock chipping for survival. The Eastern Archaic people were found in the region from 5,000 to 1,500 B.C. Like the Big Game, they moved from season to season, focusing on using copper and other precious metals for hunting.

Woodland Native Americans lived during 1,000 B.C. to 1,700 A.D. They cultivated wild rice, grew crops, sculpted pottery. The introduction of more permanent settlements came during this period. Mississippian Native Americans lived during this time as well. Mississippians made jewelry and established small villages of 600 to 800 along the Mississippi River. Francis Davis Millet, The Signing of the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux (detail), 1905. | Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

PROPERT Y ORIGINS Western Colonial Expansions

In Minnesota, most treaties between the Dakota or Objiwe with the US Government was signed during a 30 year period from 1837 to 1867. Even after Minnesota was recognized as a state by the US Government there were still acquisition treaties being coordinated and conducted. The first Treaty in Minnesota was signed between the Dakota and the US in 1805 over the area known as Pike Island, near St. Paul, where Fort Snelling stands today. This area, called Oheyawhi, was of great significance to the Dakota and was the site for many religious and spiritual events. Through research today it was determined that although a treaty was signed between the US Government and the Dakota, the land that was ceded never had a formal title attached to the Treaty putting the question into who the “owner” was of this land. One important aspect of Treaties is that the President of the United States has to proclaim any changes that has been made to the Treaty for it to be an official Treaty. In this case, an additional amount of cash was meant to be paid to the Dakota but was never recognized by the President. This means that many of the Treaties signed across the United States were never binding documents and that the accumulation of land by the Federal Government could still “belong” to Indigenous groups across the United States and not public land.

Networks of Obligation

As European Settlers began expanding to the West through land acquisitions and purchases, Indigenous groups were forced to move Westward or Northward away from the lands they previously presided in. The United States Government signed treaties with Indigenous groups in order to “buy” land from these groups in order for White settlers to move in and use the natural resources of the area. Most of the treaties agreements and promises about land use, resource sharing, property, and exchange of goods were never followed by the US Government. Along with a language barrier, many points of discussion were left out or not explained during conversations and treaties between the US Government and Indigenous groups. Many Indigenous groups were confused about the European model of property and what it meant to own, sell, or rent land. There was no policy in the culture and traditions of the Indigenous groups, as the concept did not exist.

Native American Land Ceded in MN. Courtesy of Minnesota Historical Society.

1866 Visit of Native American Delegates at the U.S. Capitol in Washington D.C. National Museum of the American Indian P10142

“The privilege of hunting, fishing, and gathering the wild rice, upon the lands, the rivers and the lakes included in the territory ceded, is guarantied [sic] to the Indians, during the pleasure of the President of the United States. “— Article 5, Treaty with the Chippewa, 1837 “I understand what you want . . . from the few words I have heard you speak. You want land.“ — Flat Mouth, chief of the Pillager Band of Chippewa, during treaty negotiations with U.S. officials, 1855 Seth Eastman, Watercolor, Pilot Knob, Mouth of St. Peters River (Pike Island), 1847.

THE SPECTRUM OF PRIVATE VS PUBLIC

Networks of Obligation

MINNESOTA LAND HISTORY OUTSIDE INFLUENCES 500 B.C~ Artifacts and Traditions of Minnesotan Indigenous groups are slowly being influenced by Illinois Hopewell. Historians believe this influence spread by travel up the Mississippi River.

PREHISTORIC PEOPLES 9000 B.C - 8000 B.C Big Game or Paleo-Indians lived in a territory that stretched across North America. They were a nomadic people who hunted mammoths and bison. The Browns Valley Man was discovered near the Western Border of Minnesota.

9000 B.C

8000 B.C

5000 B.C

1000 B.C

INDIGENOUS CULTURE, EXPANSION, SETTLEMENT ERA

EARLY SETTLEMENTS 5,000 B.C -1000 B.C Eastern Archaic Indigenous Groups begin building more permanent settlements and remains are found near Mille Lacs, Itasca State Park, and Central Minnesota. Early Indigenous Canoe Trip Down Mississippi River

WOODLAND + MISSISSIPPIAN 1000 B.C -1700 A.D Both Woodland and Mississippian Indigenous groups are making their mark on Minnesota. Settlements are constructed along the Mississippi River and expansion throughout Minnesota. Wild Rice cultivation begins, as well as trading between different groups.

COLONIAL CONTACT 1683 A.D France sends envoy, Father Louis Hennepin to Minnesota to make contact with Indigenous groups. He is captured by the Dakota while here. Description de la Louisiane is written about experiences.

1650 A.D

1700 A.D

Networks of Obligation

LAKE SUPERIOR EXPEDITIONS 1659-1660 A.D Resource Mapping begins, many French Fur Trappers begin to move to Minnesota + Wisconsin territory. Groseilliers and Radisson end up near the site of Duluth and Lake Superior.

SPANISH CONTROL 1763 A.D After the defeat of France and Spain in the Seven Years War, Spain gains control of the Louisiana Territory.

1787 A.D Maps of Minnesota drawn by David Thompson for the fur trading company, North West. Northwest Territories boundaries are redrawn, adding the eastern area of Minnesota.

1750 A.D

INDIGENOUS MOVE WEST 1745 A.D A war near Kathio and Mille Lacs between the Dakota and the Ojibwe ends with the Dakota moving west and south towards their current boundaries.

1800 A.D

REVOLUTIONARY WAR

US ACQUISITION 1783 A.D After the end of the Revolution War, the United States of America is awarded the eastern side of Minnesota from the United Kingdom.

FRENCH EXPLORATION 1673 A.D Marquette and Joliet, Explorers from France are tasked with exploring territory west of the Hudson Bay. The northern parts of the Mississippi River was discovered.

French Fur Traders trading with Indigenous Groups

Networks of Obligation

WISCONSIN’S STATEHOOD 1848 A.D The state of Wisconsin is formed and admitted to the United States as the 30th state. Leftover territory across the St. Croix River (Stillwater) is absorbed into the Minnesota Territory.

PIKE EXPEDITION 1805 A.D First US expedition made by Lieutenant Zebulon Montgomery Pike through Minnesota.

WISCONSIN TERRITORY 1836 A.D Creation of the Wisconsin Territory. Minnesota’s borders are forming to modern state lines.

1800 A.D

1820 A.D

1840 A.D

STATEHOOD 1858 A.D Minnesota is admitted into the United States as the 32nd state.

1860 A.D CIVIL WAR

BOUNDARY FORMING 1818 A.D The 49th parallel is set as Minnesota’s north boundary line. The first Indigenous agent of the US is appointed at Fort Snelling in what is now known as St. Paul. His name is Lawrence Taliaferro.

LOUISIANA PURCHASE 1803 A.D Louisiana Purchase is made between France and the United States. United States doubles its size. British Canada begins demanding fur trade rights, this goes on until 1818.

TRAVERSE DES SIOUX AND MENDOTA TREATIES 1850 A.D Significant land loss of the Dakota Tribe to the United States.Land ceded included Red Lake, Big Dakota, and Lake Traverse. All monetary compensation was used to pay off debts to White Traders instead of going towards education and daily life.

LAND-CESSION TREATIES 1837 A.D The US Federal Government signs Treaties with the Dakota and Chippewa for land near the St. Croix and Mississippi Rivers. This spurs the 30 year Treaty period between the Federal Government and Indigenous groups of Minnesota.

THE DAKOTA WAR 1862 A.D The Dakota begins war with the United States over treatment of the Treaties. 300 Dakota were sentenced to death with President Lincoln sending 261 to Prison. Due to the war, the government nullifies the 1851 Dakota treaty.

IRON RANGE EXTRACTION 1884 A.D The landscape in Northeastern Minnesota begins to change as the race to mine the iron range begins. Duluth and Superior Ports on Lake Superior are formed.

1880 A.D

1900 A.D WWI

Networks of Obligation

PRAIRIE INTO FARMLAND 1878 A.D By 1878, wheat was planted in 70% of all farmland in Minnesota. Farmland turns into Pastures after wheat production decline due to locusts.

Minneapolis and its current Development

1950 A.D

2000 A.D

WWII COLD WAR

LUMBER INDUSTRY ALTERS LANDSCAPE 1899 A.D Peak of the lumber industry in Minnesota. One Third of Minnesota is forested by 1930.

Locations of Indigenous Reservations and Public Lands

RULES & RESPONSIBILITIES OF PROPERT Y

In modern times, the realm of property has come to incorporate a whole host of laws, regulations, and modes of interaction that dictates its function, controls its management, and regulates how it can be used. Sometimes, in order for a landowner to develop a piece of private property, governing agencies may require the development of an Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, a report which outlines the affects a proposed project may have on the surrounding environment and identifies methods for reducing potentially adverse environmental effects. The EIS is a tool for used to regulate and control property development to ensure the safety and wellbeing of the environment and by extension the general public, especially if the project development in question is large, complex, and has a significant chance of interfering with and/or disrupting existing ecological environments and systems, like mining operations, oil pipelines, and highway infrastructure.

ensure that land is used in a way that promotes the prosperity, health, and wellbeing of the local population. Zoning is generally organized into 3 broad land use categories, including residential, commercial, and industrial, though numerous other designations and sub-designations exist as well depending on the complexity of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s zoning code and the size of the city itself.

The development of property is also controlled through a comprehensive set of zoning regulations enacted by municipalities, which specify what kinds of structures can be built on a certain property, and the allowable uses to which an area of land is utilized for. Municipalities use zoning as a tool to guide private development and

If an owner wants to pursue a use for their property that is different than what is allowed by code, they can apply for a variance, which can grant them the ability for an alternative use if approved by a governing authority. In cases where violations of a particular zoning or building code are discovered without having applied for the proper variance, governing authorities can have the power to legally force property owners to correct such offenses. One such mechanism through which this is achieved is by pressing financial, civil, and criminal penalties against a property owner unless the violation in question is remedied in a reasonable time frame. Another, more drastic method, is to condemn a property for being dangerous, usually due to conditions that may pose a health or life safety risk, and not allow anyone to use or occupy the property.

property line

easement

setback

building

adjacent property

property lot

adjacent property

buildable area

setback

Networks of Obligation

Regulatory Systems

public road

Zoning regulations can control, among other things; - Building height, location, setbacks, size, etc - Right-of-ways and easement requirements - Number of stories, density, and distribution - Percentage of lot space occupied - Soil and water supply use

Perhaps the most forceful tool governing entities have at their disposal is the use of eminent domain, which allows governmental authorities the power to take control over privately held property. Generally, this is done for the development of a public use project, while giving the property owner financial compensation that is determined to be just, though this has not always been the case in reality. Since this practice has often been abused and contested in court, some states have adopted regulations that limit the blanket use and power of eminent domain. The state of Minnesota for instance has adopted a clause saying that eminent domain can only be used for a legitimate public-use project or purpose, and not for projects that would otherwise be privately developed, even if the benefits of such a private project would be made public.

Diagram Of Basic Private Property Regulations Municipalities can regulate how a private landowner can develop and use their property through zoning and building ordinances, which can dictate how large a structure may be built on a particular property, how far from the property line a structure may be, and require portions of the property to

be held as easement right-of-ways for future public utilities. Additional regulations can include building mass setbacks, composure of the facade, and building material requirements.

21 residential single family

downtown office-residence commercial industrial

City of Minneapolis Zoning Map Municipal can dictate what types of developments can be built in certain areas through zoning ordinances. As an approval/ disapproval mechanism, zoning regulates private development by reserving land for specific programmatic uses. Zoning is meant to prevent detrimental conditions that could

arise from the improper development and use of property in areas that would negatively affect the living conditions of the surrounding population. Zoning codes can vary in scope depending on how robust the municipality is.

Networks of Obligation

residential multi family

22 Networks of Obligation

Catalogue Of Nuisance Behaviors Property owners and dwellers have a responsibility set forth by legislative laws to avoid behavior that could be classified as a nuisance to others. While there are various types of nuisances that could be classified as either public or private, each carries with it potential legal action against the person

committing the nuisance, or the owner of the property in which the nuisance is taking place. More and more, nuisances that are detrimental to the environment are being given precedence over property based nuisances.

RULES & RESPONSIBILITIES OF PROPERT Y

Moreover, ownership and use of property by title holders requires them to abide by a series of nuisance laws, established to allow them to use their property without interfering or infringing on the rights of others to use and enjoy their properties. In Minnesota law, there are various types of activities and practices classified as nuisances but they can generally be broken down into two broad types; a public nuisance and private nuisance. A public nuisance is one that interferes with the general population’s ability to enjoy the use of a given property. Examples may include playing loud music in a public area late at night, sleeping in a public park, and any dangerous activity that threatens the health and safety of the public, intentional or otherwise. A private nuisance on the other hand is an activity that interferes with an individual’s right to enjoy the use of a property without affecting the general public as a whole. An example may include an overgrown tree whose branches that crosses into another’s property, excessive litter and junk in someone’s yard, and excessive odors and fumes emanating from a property. Certain actions can be labeled as nuisances if they are found to be against the peace, affecting morals, against the quality of life, or affecting public health.

Major nuisance categories include those regarding: - Noise - Weeds, tress, and long grass - Streets and sidewalks - Motor vehicles - Fires and smoke - Animals - Water - Building and property condition - Hazardous and vacant properties

permitting, and registration, as well as inspections by code officials and property inspectors, to help monitor compliance.

Among the nuisances that courts in Minnesota have found to be public nuisances include; - Accumulation of junk and filth - Excessive noise - Offensive odors - Hazardous buildings - Obstructed sidewalks and driveways - Pollution of public streets and bodies of water - Pollution emissions from industrial smokestacks - Discharge of pollutants onto adjacent lands

Nuisance behavior can be classified as a criminal offence and legal action can be taken against those who are found to be in violation of a nuisance ordinance. Civil action can also be brought forth as a faster way to achieve compliance without seeking criminal penalties. In particular cases, both a property owner on which a nuisance is occurring, and the person or entity who is committing the nuisance can be found liable and prosecuted for nuisances. Nuisances can be also be remedied voluntarily or through judicial injunction and abatement orders, which require the end of a particular harmful action or the removal of a harmful condition from the property. Administrative enforcement measures may also be taken to ensure nuisance conditions are dealt with, and if violations are found, financial penalties can be incurred until the nuisance is eliminated. In extreme cases, the demolition of property can be ordered if a nuisance is found to be irrevocably reparable, as is the case with hazardous or abandoned buildings.

- Consumption of police services Environmental Nuisance Governing authorities have the ability to define and regulate public nuisances through the adoption of ordinances which make particular nuisance activities illegal. As they primarily regulate and focus on addressing public nuisances, municipalities typically do not intervene or have the authority to abate private nuisances, as it falls on the person/entity who is affected by the nuisance to address the issue, though if numerous complaints about a particular nuisance are documented, the municipality may follow up and declare a nuisance to be affecting the public sphere. Certain nuisance issues can be addressed through common regulatory means such as licensing,

Some nuisances can be considered environmental nuisances if they cause detrimental effects to the natural environment itself. While contemporary nuisance laws typically concern individual-to-individual activity, there is an ever-growing movement to apply the same set of regulations on individual-to-landscape activity. In fact, Minnesota courts have ruled in certain cases that the act of polluting a property, such as discharging waste water onto adjacent lands or allowing gas and oil to flow into a neighboring property, qualifies as a trespass and is subject to the same set of legal consequences, a critical development in the realm of environmental rights and the ability for a piece of land to be free of interference from human activity.

Networks of Obligation

Nuisance Behavior

RULES & RESPONSIBILITIES OF PROPERT Y

Networks of Obligation

Private Land Boundaries According to Federal law, land owners have the right to both the air above their property and the earth below. The limits on the depth of their property are theoretically limitless, while the airspace above has a rough limit of around 500-1000 feet. The right to airspace is loosely defined as having enough airspace to reasonably enjoy the land below that air. This gray area has been a point of contention in lawsuits over the years and will likely be explored in detail over the coming years.

Minerals + Soils While a land owner may have the rights to a piece of land, they may not own the soils or minerals beneath the property. Occasionally, the rights to the minerals and resources within a piece of land are sold separately from the land itself, resulting in different owners fr the same location of land. For example, if a property sits on top of an oil reserve, you may not have the right to extract or use the oil underneath. This has led to many disputes over the years as some property owners may inherit or otherwise acquire a piece of land not realizing the soil and mineral rights belong to someone else. Large drilling and mining businesses have an interest in owning and exploiting mineral and soil rights.

Mineral rights can be recognized independent of land rights

Animals + Wildlife Both state and federal law allow property owners to hunt and/or allow others to hunt on privately held land. With a proper permit/license, they typically have the right to hunt a variety of animal species like deer, pheasants, waterfowl, unless they are endangered or protected by the Environmental Protection Agency. Minnesotan Hunters must follow all laws enforced by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) which establishes proper hunting practices, season durations, tag limits, licensing, etc.

The same rules apply for fishing or any water life activity which may be adjacent to a property. Individual lakes and rivers may also have specific regulations regarding fishing limitations and allowable fish capture. One must check to make sure they are in compliance with local laws and regulations to prevent unintentional violations of animal and wildlife laws.

Wildlife, such as deer, may be hunted with a permit

Vegetation

Networks of Obligation

Depending on local laws, property owners usually have full jurisdiction over the full range of vegetation on their land, though there can be some exceptions to this. Like animals and wildlife, an owner cannot remove and otherwise harm endangered or protected species. Some counties require property owners to obtain permits to alter the naturally occurring vegetation on their land, while others do not allow a owner to disturb the natural landscape within certain setbacks, especially around bodies of water.

A property owner is legally responsible for maintaining a property. This maintenance includes mowing grass if it becomes unsightly and trimming any vegetation that impedes on a neighboring property. Failure to properly maintain vegetation growth could classified as either a public or private nuisance, with corrective and legal actions potentially occurring to resolve such issues.

Some species of vegetation may be protected under law

Riparian Rights Riparian rights are those pertaining to the ownership of shoreline that permit an owner to use and enjoy the water. These rights include the ability to swim, fish (within regulations), build a dock into a body of water, etc.

Note that in Minnesota, a body of water, either above or below the surface of the landscape, is considered to belong to the State and by extension is classified as public property. If there is any piece of shoreline along a body of water that is public property, then the body of water can be freely accessed by the general public. This extends to all lakes, steams, rivers, and oceans that do not start and stop within a specified property.

And when it comes to flowing bodies of water, such as rivers, property owners are forbidden to alter or otherwise impede the natural flow of water on your property as this could prevent water from reaching other properties downstream or cause potential flooding that could disrupt the natural ecosystems near the site.

Bodies of water and waterways are considered to be public

: IGHT Y HE PERT PRO ,000FT 1 500-

Networks of Obligation

SEE ON-SITE VEGETATION

EP TY D PER PRO EFINED UND

EAS

PER

PRIV ATE P

MIN

ROP

ERA

ENT

PRO

TH:

SEE

DY BO R TE K WA TBAC E S

L RI

GHT S

Diagram of private property boundaries and rights Land owners are entitled access to a certain amount of resources on the extents of their property, ranging from air rights, mineral rights, access to water bodies, and the like, though some of these resources may be separately owned by other entities or off limits entirely, such as protected wildlife.

ERT

TY L

INE

27 Networks of Obligation

SEE WETLAND LAWS SEE REPARIAN RIGHTS

STA TE P

ROP

ERT

THE SPECTRUM OF PRIVATE VS PUBLIC

Networks of Obligation

Federal Agencies + Public Land Relationships Broadly speaking, property can be classified into two distinct ownership categories; public property and private property. Public property is that which is allocated for use and enjoyment by the general public at large, and is typically owned and managed by a governing authority which can include institutions at the municipal, county, state, and federal level. Examples of public property can include city parks, national forests, state universities, and the like. Private property meanwhile is that which is allocated for personal use and enjoyment, typically owned by a single individual or entity. Private property can include residential homes, commercial businesses, etc.

Public and private lands have different classifications and rules regarding those who use or inhabit the lands, i.e owners, tenants, and visitors. Public lands often have governmental agencies who look after the land and employ personnel to run and manage the developed or undeveloped areas. Developed public lands are often used for public utilities, prisons, public schools, or other spaces which are funded by the Federal, State, or Local Government and Municipalities. Often developed public lands have an acting entity, in the case of a public school, a school district, superintendent, and board of directors manage the building and land upon which the school is placed but the Government still holds the rights to the land itself. Undeveloped public lands are those that are typically untouched and are used as research grounds, wildlife management and habitats, protection of natural resources such as minerals, headwaters and watersheds, and any activity that is not marked with a large developed campus of buildings. Undeveloped public lands include National and State Parks, Wildlife Reserves, or areas that are meant to be protected from developers and private landowners.

Minnesota Land Ownership by Governing Entity. Courtesy of MN DNR.

Native American Reservations and Landholdings can be considered under the public or private property sphere as Tribal Governments manage the land that was given by the United States Government

The term “public” has been applied to many forms of property within the United States but with little definition. Citizens know that they are often able to go to these lands that are publicly owned but are confused who owns or looks after these lands. Let’s define the word public from the lens of the United States. A public space, place, or land in the United States that isn’t tied to a corporate company or private individual are supervised by the Federal, State, or Local Government and open to the public for use. Different types of public lands include National Parks, State Parks, Wildlife Reserves, Lakes, and more. There are opportunities for citizens to lease land from the Federal Government to plant crops or obtain a hunting license to hunt animals during certain times of the year. Hunting Licenses allow the Government to control the populations of deer, geese, ducks, bears, fish, and wild turkeys.

Public Property or Lands are comprised of many intricate relationships between a variety of entities. There is a hierarchy to how each system operates and interacts with one another. The Federal Government is the overarching entity which dictates how the Departments, Organizations, State and Local Governments involved should enforce or implement how Public Lands should be managed

The Federal Government is the overarching entity who governs and maintains lands that fall under the jurisdiction of public land or public domain. The Federal Government has many of the responsibilities as an Individual would have for Private Property.

The Homestead Act of 1862 was a way for the United States to give settlers the opportunity to own their own piece of land which was acquired after the westward expansion. Americans could put in a claim to own up to 160 acres of land that was not owned by another Private or Corporate Entity, and was under jurisdiction of the Federal Government. There was too much land for the government to hand out and Settlers gravitated towards land that was optimized for agriculture or commercial pursuits. As a result of the Homestead Act, the United States Government claimed the excess lands and created the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to oversee the maintenance and responsibility of these lands. The BLM gave State Governments large tracts of this land where there were abundant resources, watersheds, geographical anomalies, dense forests, and other attributes that were not previously developed.

29 Networks of Obligation Map of State Owned Land Percentages By County. Courtesy of Minnesota State Government. Most publicly owned land by the state is located in the northwestern region of Minnesota, as much as 50% in certain counties. 95% percent of State owned public land was given to the State to maintain by the Federal Government. In many cases, this land and all rights to the land is still ‘owned’ by the

Federal Government who sends ordinances and permissions to the State’s government.

30 Networks of Obligation

88%

94% 6% 12%

Massachusetts

Nevada

11% 24%

89%

76% Missouri Minnesota 2%

18%

98%

82% Iowa Wisconsin 8%

9% 91% North Dakota 95% percent of State owned public land was given to the State to maintain by the Federal Government. In many cases, this land and all rights to the land is still â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;ownedâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; by the Federal Government who sends ordinances and permissions to the Stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s government to enforce.

92% South Dakota In Minnesota, 8.4 million acres or 17% of the 25 percent of the public land is owned by the Minnesota State Government. While the Federal Government governs 3.4 million acres or 7%. Natural resources, forests, wildlife management areas, park lands, and conservation land

31 Networks of Obligation

Private

Public A comprehensive look into the percentages of Public versus Private land in the United States.

fall under both Federal and State Public Lands. Looking at the map above, the comparison of private vs. public land is disproportionate to one another. In the East, there are high percentages of private land due to colonization beginning in the 1600â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s. No emphasis was

put on conservation of lands for the public. The Midwest is more diverse in private vs. public percentages. The farther West, more land was placed under Federal management due to the recognized significance of natural resources and geographical elements unique to the US.

THE SPECTRUM OF PRIVATE VS PUBLIC

Networks of Obligation

Federal Land Systems National Parks are managed by the National Park Service (NPS). Congress is the only entity of the Federal Government which can create National Parks. These parks are designated and protected through laws and acts passed by Congress in order to allow present and future generations to visit these places and enjoy the unique geological features of the area. National Parks comprise over 84 million acres of land, with 60 officially recognized National Parks. There are 417 smaller National Park areas that are not considered to be official National Parks but are still managed by the NPS. The purpose of National Parks is to conserve areas of the United States with rare geographical features while also protecting natural resources and areas with cultural and historical significance. National Parks include sites that are geographic but also include historic structures or Native American burial grounds that are significant to the history of the United States and its people.

In the Upper Mississippi Watershed states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri, there are 17 National Parks, of which Minnesota has four: Grand Portage National Monument, Mississippi National River and Recreation Area, Pipestone National Monument, and Voyageurs National Park.

Abraham Lincolnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s House - National Monument

Regarding National Forests in the United States, there are over 150 national forests and 20 grasslands under supervision by the United States Forest Service (USFS). National Forests were created to limit expansion, clear-cutting, and development of the forests after the lumber trade declined in the early Nineteenth-Century. The USFS allows individuals and companies to come into National Forests and extract resources that are either damaged, diseased, or otherwise harmful to the growth of healthy species of trees, shrubs, or plants within the boundaries.

In the Upper Mississippi Watershed, there are dozens of National Forests. These include . One located near the headwaters of the Mississippi is Chippewa National Forest. Chippewa National Forest covers acres of land in Northwestern Minnesota with a purpose to conserve and protect some of the old growth forest which could be found throughout much of the upper Midwest until the middle of the 19th century. Extreme logging has reduced the prominence of some old growth species which could have been found throughout much of the area. White Pines are one example of an old growth species.

Chippewa National Forest

National Conservation Lands are managed by the Bureau of Land Management and are classified as â&#x20AC;&#x153;areas of particular beauty or biological diversity.â&#x20AC;? These areas are given more levels of security and protection then some of the other types of Federally managed land. No extraction of resources are allowed on these grounds by any entity. Most of these areas permit recreation activities but only by foot. Biking, driving motorized vehicles, and any other damaging activity is prohibited.

Networks of Obligation

National Monuments can be classified under the National Park designation. These are sites or buildings with societal significance. These could include unique ecologies that cannot be found anywhere else in the United States, or throughout the world. Monuments are critical to understand how the earth has physically evolved or how the country has evolved. For example Abraham Lincolnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s home in Springfield, Illinois is considered to be a National Monument as it was the home of one of the Presidents of the United States. This home is significant to preserve at a Federal level since Lincoln was a President of the United States and abolished Slavery. National Cemeteries and Battlefields also fall under this jurisdiction. National Monuments are managed by the National Park Service (NPS).

Wild Rice Fields fall under National Conservation Lands

National Wildlife Refuges are managed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. These protected areas are the environments and habitats of a variety of endangered species of plants and animals. Migration pathways and rest stops are also protected within Wildlife Refuges. Wildlife Refuges are mostly comprised of wetlands and the intent is to protect birds and aquatic species.

Native American Reservations fall under the management of the United States Federal Government. However, each reservation has its own Tribal Government which works in tandem with the Federal Government on rules, regulations, obligations, and treasuries. Reservations were lands given back to Indigenous populations after the failure of keeping Treaty Promises, though indigenous groups have usually gotten a fraction of land of which they had before. Public access is granted on some reservations but there are special rules to follow when visiting.

Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe canoing on Leech Lake

THE SPECTRUM OF PRIVATE VS PUBLIC

Networks of Obligation

State Land Systems When a State was admitted into the United States, the Federal Government would give them a portion of federally managed land located within the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s boundaries for them to operate. These lands would form the State Forests, State Wildlife Management Areas, State Parks, Local Parks, and more. The State also reserves a small portion of these areas to be used for extraction and selling of resources. Revenue raised from these areas are put into the public educational systems of that state.

State managed lands fall underneath public domain and some can be open to timber production, mineral development, and recreation. Recreation includes visitors coming to state lands to hunt, fish, hike, and watch the wildlife. If an individual wanted to hunt on state managed public property, they would go to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the state entity who manages these areas, and get a WalkIn-Access or state permit to hunt on these lands. They must follow the rules and obligations that protect the environment and other species inhabiting the space. Linde, a State Wildlife Management Area

45 percent of all state managed lands are school trust fund lands, which benefit the public education system in Minnesota. Mineral extraction royalties, timber and land sales profit are placed within the Permanent School Fund (PSF), used to fund annual school budgets. These lands comprise 5 percent of all acreage in Minnesota.

State Governments are given tax relief in the form of Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) from the Federal Government. The Federal Government recognizes that much of this land does not generate tax revenue for the management of these areas, so they give a percentage of money from the state to the local municipality level.

Conservation areas make up 28 percent of land managed by the DNR and are separate from federally managed conservation lands. These areas were obtained during the 1920â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and 1930â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s due to tax forfeiture. Many of these areas can be visited by the public.

Northwest Angle, a State Forest

State Forests are protected areas of natural growth forests that are important in understanding the diverse ecological systems found in Minnesota. State Wildlife Management Areas protect habitats, species, and wetlands from development and harm.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM)

Department of the Interior (DOI)

National Park Service (NPS)

United States Forest Service (USFS)

Department of Agriculture (USDA)

Bureau of Indian Affairs

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

STATE OF MINNESOTA Department of Natural Resources (DNR)

Preservation

State Governments

Public Education

Recreation

Wildlife

Local Governments

Wilderness

The hierarchical structure for management is typical across many Stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Public Land holdings. For a majority of or all acreage of Publicly Owned State Land, the Department of Natural Resources or DNR is the primary management facilitator. Other Departments who help

the DNR include the Department of Transportation (DOT), University of Minnesota, Military Divisions, Governmental Administrations, and Minnesota State Universities and Colleges.

35 Networks of Obligation

UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

THE SPECTRUM OF PRIVATE VS PUBLIC

WHAT IS GOOD LAND USE? FROM RIGHTS TO RELATIONSHIP

Networks of Obligation

PETER BURDON

Present a big challenge to global food security and environmental health

Shaping the future of farming and land use by

A steady increase in the consumption of food and fiber produced by agriculture

A deepening environmental crisis and the loss of healthy farming land

Private property entailed the right to use the land more intensely than had been practiced by previous generations.

Industrial There is two visions of land

The private property

The legal-philosophical concept

Agrarian

Idea Institution

Focuses on interactions between people, rather than with physical nature

Individualism and Preference Satisfaction

Private property received its first definition in the Roman concept of â&#x20AC;&#x153;dominiumâ&#x20AC;?.

Separating People from Place

Singer notes that property concerns legal relations among people regarding control and disposition of valued resources.

Fragmentation of Landscape

This vision is supported by the liberal idea of private property, which is an individual right and provides owners with distinct 'bundles of rights' over land. Owners have no obligation to use the land in a manner that is consistent with or provides benefits to living systems.

The smallest category of farm 'produced $15,104 per hectare and netted about $2,902 per acre.' The largest farms, 'averaging 15,581 hectares, yielded $249 per hectare and netted about $52 per hectare.'

Example

the meaning Developed

Small-scale agrarian farming is more productive than large-scale industrial agriculture. The smaller farm can grow several crops utilizing different root depths, plant heights, or nutrients on the same piece of land simultaneously. It is this "polyculture" that offers the small farm's productivity advantage.

Kirkpatrick Sale, this is the most important element of good land use: The kinds of soils and rocks under our feet; the source of the waters we drink; the meaning of the different kinds of winds; the common insects, birds, mammals, plants, and trees; the particular cycles of the seasons; the times to plant and harvest and forage - these are the things that are necessary to know. The limits of its resources; the carrying capacities of its lands and waters; the places where it must not be stressed; the places where its bounties can best be developed; the treasures it holds and the treasures it withholds - these are the things that must be understood. And the cultures of the people, of the populations native to the land and of those who have grown up with it, the human social and economic arrangements shaped by and adapted to the geomorphic ones, in both urban and rural settings - these are the things that must be appreciated.

37 Soil erosion Poisoned groundwater

Produce of Consequences

Loss of biodiversity

Toxic chemicals in food and fiber Loss of beauty

Industries could draw more water and even pollute the system

Examples

Waterwheels disrupted the migration of fish

Tall buildings blocked sunlight

Land should be in Land use is good if

Good vision of land use if

Land will be removed

It increases production and maximizes profit

To achieve these goals

Large-scale monocultures Machinery Genetic technology and inorganic pest control

Farming methods concentrate on small-scale polycultures and seek to shape human practice to fit the contours, climate and attributes of the land.

Private property separates people from place and provides no legal reason for 'relationship'

Lordship', a 'sovereign, ultimate, During or "absolute" right to claim title and hence the possession and The agricultural enjoyment of a thing.' revolution

The principles most commonly associated with liberal theory include freedom, toleration, autonomy and individual rights

This is crucial, because without a relationship to the land, a farmer cannot appreciate and respond to its ecological limits. Instead, we are left with what Berry terms a culture of the 'one-night stand'.

As Singer notes: â&#x20AC;&#x153; Indeed, if private property is conceived of as individual ownership, and ownership means power without obligation, we have fashioned a framework which advances the owner above all else.â&#x20AC;?

The ownership model encourages landowners to use their property with no regard for the needs of others and focuses on self-interest

The pervasive use of toxic products employed by industrial landowners.

Examples

The Human Community Future generations

Ethical Considerations

Today, toxic can be found everywhere: 'in most of the major rivers and groundwater; "lodged in the bodies of fish, birds, reptiles and domestic and wild animals"; "stored in the bodies of the vast majority of human beings"; found even in that most sacred nectar, mother's milk.' The Unites States Geological Survey states that '[n]early every pesticide that has been investigated has been detected in air, rain, snow, or fog across the Nation at different times of year.

The moral worth of nature itself

The Land Diagram of Private Property Connections

Networks of Obligation

Changing from Agrarian and local food systems to industrialised and mono cultural agricultural production

THE SPECTRUM OF PRIVATE VS PUBLIC

Networks of Obligation

New Modes of Property Rights With increasing recognition of the historical injustices and ecological instability that traditional structures of property and ownership produce, alternative systems have been proposed to better address the issues around equitable access and use. One of the leading solutions proposed by property scholars is the idea of Limited Common Property, or LCP. Simply put, an LCP proposes that a particular resource be treated as a ‘commons’, easily available for use, but limited to a group of insider entities who are free to share it amongst one another. Essentially, LCP’s treat resources as exclusive private property from the outside, but shared public property on the inside. This method of property ownership ensures accessibility to a common resource and the benefits of collective contribution while balancing protective and privacy considerations. Though the push for LCP systems is more prevalent in matters of the online realm, particularly in debates about intellectual property, a similar counterpart exists in discussions of environmental resource management known as Hybrid Property.

Hybrid Property is a system in which rights to a particular resource are shared and limited to a group of individuals or entities through regulatory measures. With respect to the environment, the goal is to maintain and preserve finite natural resources such as air, water, and wildlife. Typically, this is achieved through designated ‘caps’ that define how much of a particular resource can be extracted. Within these caps, allocations are given to invested individuals or entities who can then choose

to buy, sell, or trade their portions of a property right to others. In effect, this helps prevent a run-away exploitation of an in-demand resource, while also allowing for flexibility in the way rights to property are claimed and distributed among a common group. Transferable development rights are an early predecessor of this system, though hybrid property mainly concerns itself with existing quantities rather than proposed ones. Hybrid property systems are already prevalent in the form of hunting licenses, fishing quotas, even permissible emission rights, and will likely become more common place in the foreseeable future as resources become more strained and access to these resources more contested. In some ways, much of what we currently define as individually owned property can be considered hybrid in nature, as claims of rights have to be recorded, registered, and regulated by a separate governing authority.

In addition, there is also traction among environmentalists and environmental scholars in the idea of moving from an individualistic notion of property ownership to a more communal one, in which land and resources are managed at a community-based level. The idea being that this allows for greater efficiencies in regards to the waste and overlap that is inherent in singularly-focused concerns, while fostering shared responsibilities and rights that will benefit the community as a whole. Some even argue that certain property resources should only be reserved for localized populations, especially indigenous ones, that have had a verifiable history of having a sustainable, symbiotic relationship with the land.

extent of finite resource

allowable resource extraction a.t.r finite resource

a.t.r

a.t.r a.t.r

shared common resource

a.t.r

Limited Common Property Concept Diagram Limited Common Property, or LCP, proposes that a limit be set on the amount of a particular resource that can be exploited. Within that limit, rights of access can be split, shared, traded, and the like within members of a community or group of entities who can self regulate their shares to the resource.

a.t.r

access to resource

39 Networks of Obligation

shared agricultural land rights

available agricultural land

shared water access rights

available water

shared mineral access rights

available minerals

available community property

Resource Sharing Through The Limited Common Property Model With a Limited Common Property, or LCP, all members of a particular community can have shared access to a common resource, on which an overarching extraction limit is set. These common resources can include anything from minerals, water, and agricultural land, among other things.

PROPERT Y NET WORKS AND OBLIGATIONS

Networks of Obligation

How Property Changes The Landscape Land that has been propertized, especially by private entities, is often changed from its natural state in some way. Whether itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s used to build a house upon, altered to accommodate a roadway, or simply cleared for a potential future use, propertizing land inevitably means altering its physical and spatial characteristics. Placing powerlines through a landscape often alters the vegetative characteristics of the surrounding area. Building out a dock into a lake is another alteration that changes the accessibility, and thus the use of, a body of water. Even something simple like putting up a fence becomes an alteration that divides one portion of land from another portion of land through a physical barrier. And even if the landscape itself is not immediately changed, it can become bounded, controlled, taxed, and regulated through the medium of property by intangible systems at various levels of public and private authority. The simple act of naming a remote lake is a way that land becomes recognized as a property, even if the land itself remains physically untouched.

Historically, the propertization of land by humans for industrial, commercial, and even residential purposes has had a consequential effect on the integrity of surrounding geographical environments and the

A fence could be considered the most rudimentary form of property-based intervention upon a landscape

countless biological ecosystems that are supported by it. Pollution is often cited as the worst result of such human interference. For example, rivers, lakes, aquifers and other bodies of water can become contaminated with trash, run-off, chemicals, and other waste from water adjacent industrial operations that ruin the integrity of these water bodies, making it unsuitable for aquatic life and disrupting the ecosystems that depend on water systems for survival. Mining and drilling activities penetrate and carve away the ground for extraction purposes, and what is often left behind is an uninhabitable wasteland, brownfields that can no longer support any form of vegetative or animal life. Logging and agricultural activities clear large swaths of land previously populated with forests, wetlands, and other natural features to exploit the resource potential of such areas. And in developed urban areas, natural landscapes have been reshaped and paved over to become artificial landscapes, while introducing less conventional forms of pollution like noise, light, and other emissions.

Nicollet Island in Minneapolis stands in stark contrast to the heavily developed downtown area

Though resources of the land bring forth valuable opportunities to enrich the conditions of society, the same cannot be said about societyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s contributions to the landscape. Our notion of property and its functions are more often than not detrimental to the conditions of the environment, and ultimately by extension the human population.

41 Networks of Obligation lakes/rivers forests/wetlands agricultural/grasslands urban/developed

Map of Primary Minnesota Ecologies The effects of property division and development are reflected in this map. As a result, Minnesota can be considered to have four main ecologies; the lakes/rivers, the forests/wetlands, the agricultural/grasslands, and the urban/developed. Most agricultural activity is concentrated along the western

and southern regions of Minnesota, while most forests and wetlands are concentrated towards the northeast. Bodies of water are common from central Minnesota and up towards the northeast, while various developed areas, from rural to metropolitan, are located throughout the state.

42 Networks of Obligation

Superior National Forest, MN Alteration of Land by Nature In areas of little to no human population or infrastructure, natural features like lakes and forests primarily shape the land, though it is not unusual to see a road or pathway that allows one to navigate the area. Property in a remote location like this is typically under the jurisdiction of a governing entity, but otherwise undefined.

Fond Du Lac Reservation, MN Alteration of Land by Native Reservations Land belonging to Native American communities is typically less developed, though small, concentrated centers of industry and commerce can exist to support local populations. Property here is treated more communally and with respect to the context and natural features of the landscape, being minimally intrusive.

43 Networks of Obligation Superior National Forest Parcel Map

Fond Du Lac Reservation Parcel Map

44 Networks of Obligation

Tabor, MN Alteration of Land by Agriculture The agricultural industry dedicates huge swaths of land for farming purposes in Minnesota, especially in the western portion of the state. Agricultural property is normally divided into near identical, economically efficient, rectilinear forms, and can range in size from a small lot to numerous acres.

Mountain Iron, MN Alteration of Land by Mining Mining operations physically alter the landscape on which they take place, carving it to such an extent it becomes unrecognizable from what it was before. Though parcels here are organized by a grid, the extents of mining activity itself is highly irregular, with the value of property located underground where valuable minerals, metals, and other resources are likely to exist.

45 Networks of Obligation Tabor Parcel Map

Mountain Iron Parcel Map

46 Networks of Obligation

Crookston, Greenfield, MN MN Alteration of Land by Dispersed Rural Development In rural developments, land is typically cleared and reserved for agricultural based development, though patterns of suburban development can also crop up, especially in locations closer to metropolitan centers. Property here is normally rectilinear and grid based, but smaller, curvilinear subdivisions can exist within broad parcels.

Crookston, MN Alteration of Land by Concentrated Rural Development Likewise, rural developments can also develop into highly concentrated, agriculturally based, urbanized communities, though not necessarily metropolitan. Parcels of property in such locations can be small within the extent of the urbanized center, while becoming larger as one moves out to the surrounding agricultural landscape.

47 Networks of Obligation Greenfield Parcel Map

Crookston Parcel Map

48 Networks of Obligation

Duluth - Superior Harbor, MN/WI Alteration of Land by Dockyards The shipping industry has altered the geography of shores through the development of harbors, rerouting of water bodies, and creation of shoreline berms. Ports can be the property of both public and private entities, though ports in Minnesota are mostly privately operated terminals, serving large industrial enterprises.

Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport, MN Alteration of Land by Airports Aviation industries develop moderate to large swaths of land for aircraft related activity, with most of it being dedicated to the placement of airplane runways. Airport properties are typically public, being owned by local, regional, or state authorities for use by the general public, and highly regulative of surrounding property, in particular the height of structures.

49 Networks of Obligation Duluth - Superior Harbor Parcel Map

Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Parcel Map

50 Networks of Obligation

Eden Prairie/Minnetonka, MN Alteration of Land by Suburban Development The growth of suburbs has led to a sprawling takeover of land outside compact urban centers, especially around the Twin Cities. Property here, though typically regulated, can be quite large, irregular but repetitive in form, and be organized in context to both artificial and natural features like roads and lakes.

Minneapolis, MN Alteration of Land by Urban Development The development of metropolitan areas like the Twin Cities have resulted in an increasingly dense urban environment, usually as a result of industries, both historic and contemporary, that support the formation of such large populations. Individual property here is highly regulated, typically organized by a grid system, and relatively small in size.

51 Networks of Obligation Eden Prairie/Minnetonka, Parcel Map

Minneapolis Parcel Map

PROPERT Y NET WORKS AND OBLIGATIONS

Networks of Obligation

Chicken Ordinance Given the broad amount of legal, environmental, social, and cultural norms that dictate how a property can be utilized, a complex network of interactions and responsibilities arise between different people, objects, organizations, infrastructures, laws, and the like, each dealing with particular aspects of land use and resource management.

In Maplewood for instance, if a citizen wants to raise and keep poultry on their residential property, they have to abide by the rules of the city’s ‘chicken ordinance’. The ordinance states that residents are allowed to keep up to ten hens on a single-family residential property (excluding the smallest zoning lot type) with a permit that must be renewed every year. In addition, the property owner must receive consent from 100% of adjacent property owners in order to host the chickens, while the chickens themselves must be tagged with leg bands and housed in a chicken coop designed to code compliant standards. Plans for the design of the chicken coop must be submitted to the city for approval, and once built, inspected by codes officials to ensure proper compliance and maintenance. Similar ordinances have been established in White Bear Lake, Roseville, Shoreview, Vadnais Heights, Minneapolis, and St. Paul, to allow owners the ability to have chickens, though some municipalities have banned them outright. Many of these laws

Residential Neighborhood in Maplewood, MN

have been passed after numerous news reports bought attention to the practice of raising chickens in residential areas, usually spurred by a dispute between the owner who may not have been aware of proper chicken keeping practices, and unidentified neighbors who saw the chickens as a nuisance and wanted them removed. This example shows how the practice of hosting chickens on one’s private property must take into consideration the impact on the immediate public sphere, dictated by a set of laws created and codified by the city, for the ownership of livestock in a residentially zoned area. Issues of proper livestock management, nuisance issues, zoning, and code compliances are at play in this particular practice.

53 Networks of Obligation

10X

Chicken Ordinance Network In order to keep livestock like chickens on oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s private residential property, a set of policies by the municipality dictates that a homeowner must receive approval from all adjacent neighbors in order to proceed and quell any fears of the chickens becoming a potential nuisance. Up to 10 chickens may

be kept on a single property, and the design of the coop itself must abide by all building and code regulations to ensure humane treatment of the livestock.

PROPERT Y NET WORKS AND OBLIGATIONS

Networks of Obligation

Industrial Air Pollution Another instance of regulatory action for the benefit of protecting resources includes the air quality control monitoring around industrial silica processing and mining facilities. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, or MPCA, sets the regulations revolving around air, water, and waste pollution quality standards meant to protect the safety of the environment and human health. A recent project that the MPCA conducted after receiving numerous public concerns was monitoring the levels of airborne crystalline silica at four silica sand facilities throughout Minnesota to determine if measured pollutant concentrations were beyond allowable air quality standards that would otherwise affect the general public’s health. After placing ambient air monitors outside these facilities and taking measurements over 24-hour periods every 6 days for a year, their data did not find air particulate concentrations levels above the inhalation health benchmark for respirable crystalline silica. A lot of MPCA’s work has helped ensure the quality of land-adjacent resources such as air, but the precedent for maintaining clean air environments goes back even further in Minnesota history.

In the Minnesota Supreme Court Case Brede vs Minnesota Crushed Stone Co., a limestone quarry mining operation was sued by a neighbor over the company’s blasting activities that gave off excessive noise, odors, and dust which was carried into their adjacent property.

Industrial Sillica Sands Production Site in Shakopee, MN

When brought before the courts, they ruled that the activities of the quarry operation constituted a nuisance and ordered them to improve the conditions of their operations. In a later case brought by a different plaintiff against the same company, the Minnesota supreme court ruled ‘the rights of habitation are superior to the rights of trade and whenever they conflict the latter must yield’, an extraordinary ruling that placed the concerns of public health and wellbeing above private interests, and has subsequently been cited in numerous court cases involving similar property disruption/quality of life cases. These exemplify how private commercial enterprises must be cognizant of how their operations can disrupt the quality of life for nearby populations, and abide by standards established by state agencies and upheld by legal courts in regards to baseline quality measures. Pollution monitoring, business activity standards, and court rulings all play a part in shaping how this network becomes developed.

55 Networks of Obligation A i r Po l l u t i o n

R i ver Pol l uti on

E nv i ro n m e n t a l P ro te c t i o n L aw s

Mine

E nv i r o n m e n t a l degradation

Ov e ru se & Po llu t io n o f Un d erg ro u n d Wa t er

Industrial Air Pollution Network The activities of private industrial companies may be considered a public nuisance if it negatively affects the quality of life for the surrounding population. This activity may include harmful acts such as degrading the air quality, producing excessive noise, and polluting the groundwater. Regulatory

agencies like the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency set standards that ensure that the quality of land adjacent resources are kept safe and clean.

PROPERT Y NET WORKS AND OBLIGATIONS

Networks of Obligation

Walleye Fishing Another notable example of a property network are the fishing regulations placed on Lake Mille Lacs. The area is a popular tourist destination within Minnesota and the location of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe reservation. On this lake, a fishing cap was enacted in order to stem the drastic reduction of aquatic species due to changes in the lake’s ecosystem and excessive fishing, in particular of the Walleye fish for which Lake Mille Lacs is known for. In response to a decades long decline in Lake Mille Lacs aquatic population, the Minnesota DNR enacted a special set of fishing regulations for the lake, differing from statewide regulations, which dictate what fish species one can and can’t catch, how many one can catch and keep, what size fish can be caught or kept, and even what kind of bait can be used to catch. For 2019, the state and Ojibwe tribal authorities negotiated and agreed to a total Walleye fishing limit of 87,800 lbs for licensed state anglers and 62,200 lbs for tribal fishers.

Because fishing on the lake is so popular, the DNR has had to completely restrict the capture of any Walleye in some years, even ending standard fishing seasons early in order for the lake’s aquatic population to recoup. Most recently, the DNR placed a restriction on the fishing of Walleye from early September 2019 though the end of

Walleye Fishing Site on Lake Mille Lacs, MN

November after the allotted Walleye fishing quota for the season was reached early; all Walleye incidentally caught must be released back into the waters. The set of regulations outlined by the DNR have played a part in helping restore the population of Walleye and other aquatic species in Lake Mille Lacs from its low in the late 2000’s. This case example shows how people participating in an activity like fishing on native lands must abide by a set of regulations enacted by a state agency on the proper use and management of aquatic wildlife from a public body of water. Proper resource management and relationships between different governing authorities are among the most notable in this resource network.

57 Networks of Obligation Housing density

Fishing

Marketing

Dem

F is h

pop

u la t

and

io n

Po p

u la

t io n

g ro

wth

Walleye Fishing Network A recreational activity like fishing on a lake can be subject to numerous governmental regulations to ensure the integrity of the lake is protected, including the health and diversity of aquatic wildlife. Caps can imposed on the capture of a certain species to maintain an appropriate population level that will

continue to support the biodiversity of a water body while managing the needs of the recreational market, and honoring agreements made between different authoritative entities.

PROPERT Y NET WORKS AND OBLIGATIONS

Networks of Obligation

Beaver Dams An interesting case regarding a property network involves the court case of Chase v. Tusia, in which a beaver had built a dam in a pond on Tusia’s property in Connecticut. This dam caused the pond levels to rise and flood part of Chase’s property, leading to a court battle in May of 2011. The case was complicated on numerous fronts because of the history of the site as well as the pond area being classified as a wetland. Tusia wanted to maintain a natural ecosystem of the classified wetland and allow the beavers to live their lives undisturbed. He carried this argument to the superior court of Connecticut, whom ultimately ruled that, although ordinarily the Tusia’s could not be liable for a nuisance resulting from a natural condition on their land, the dam was not natural because the beavers were attracted to the artificial conditions on the land.

As it turns out, before the Tusia’s bought the property, the previous owner had built up a berm along the pond boundary. This bern was deemed an inappropriate disruption of natural water flow originally and thus had to be opened up. The beavers in turn utilized this gap in the berm to construct their dam. The court ruled that Tusia was guilty of negligent nuisance and fined $100 in punitive damages. After the case, the Tusia’s considered trapping the beavers or destroying the dam, though the

Beaver Dam in Dayville, CT

following year, the beavers migrated elsewhere and vacated the dam. The dam has since deteriorated and the pond has returned to normal levels. If this had not been the case, the Tusia’s most likely would have been forced to file for a permit with the environmental branch of the city’s legislation in order to remove the beaver dam since it was located in a natural wetland. This case shows how human intervention in a natural landscape can alter wildlife behavior in a way that leads to legal consequences for private property owners, an unconventional network born from accident.

59 Networks of Obligation Private Property Private Property Floading Zone

Wetland Private Property

Wetland

Natural forces Dam

Beaver Dam Network A natural feature like a dam found in the environment can have various consequences for the land and property owners who are around it, especially if it bursts. Additionally, their ability to interfere with the dam may be limited depending

on local environmental laws that prohibit people from doing so, even if the natural feature in contention is found on oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s private property.

PROPERT Y NET WORKS AND OBLIGATIONS

Networks of Obligation

Land Reclamations Through Tribal Leases The Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe reside on a reservation allotted to them by the United States Federal Government. What people may not know is that a large majority of the land is not owned by the tribe, but rather to various of different entities. When tribe members were unable to pay their taxes they often would lease out their land to other individuals or corporations, resulting in a complex network of ownership.

In 2017, the Ojibwe decided to reclaim land they were leasing along the shore of the lakes located within the boundaries of their Reservation from the lessee, about 300 lots of leased land with structures on 75 of them. There is an increasingly high amount of homelessness of Ojibwe Native Americans and the tribe wanted to give the land back to their members to reduce the number of those without homes or land. Many of the people, mostly white, who leased this land had cabins along these lakes for many years. When the leases were started there was a clause stating that the land belonged to the Ojibwe and that any structure placed or built on that land was the leasee’s. For example, if an individual bought a cabin on land that was leased from the Ojibwe, then the individual could treat the cabin as their own, making improvements and maintaining the structure. After the notification to the lesees, the 275 who had cabins or structures on the land were given different options on

Housing on Leech Lake, MN

how they wanted to proceed. The lessee’s could either sell their structure to an Ojibwe member, Ojibwe tribe, or move to another piece of land which the leaser owned.

On the Ojibwe Tribe’ website there are listings for properties that are located on the Reservation. Of the five listings, there are two which are only eligible for members of the Ojibwe Tribe, and three are up to the Tribal Council on who is able to occupy the property. Reclaiming land for homeless Ojibwe members has been a challenge since much of the opposition from those who owned cabins but leased land are taking their structures from the land and leaving it in disarray.

61 Networks of Obligation Home Cabin Ownerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Property

Federal Land managed by

Tribes Property

Tribal Memberâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Property

River

Boundary

Land Reclaimation Network An interesting condition can form as the result of separate owners retaining control over various portions of the same space. For cabin owners whose property was located on a site leased to them by Native tribes, a dispute can arise as to who gets to have the ultimate authority with what happens

with the property. Similarly with Native American populations whose property is located on Federal lands, the same kind of questions arise as to who has final say over a propertyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s status.

62 Networks of Obligation

Concluding Remarks As Earth’s natural habitats and resources become more and more depleted, impacting the stability of our environments, new approaches in how we recognize, establish, and use property will become a critical component in our ability to manage and distribute limited assets in sustainable and equitable ways. Everything we extract, expel, and employ on the landscape ultimately affects a multitude of other environmental, historical, economical, political, social, and cultural networks in beneficial and detrimental ways. In this sense, property can never truly be an individualistic concern or right. Ecological systems are complex and intertwined with each other, and proper care must be exercised to ensure that notions of property preserve the integrity of common resources and environments, recognizing that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

STATEMENTS Humans have altered all aspects of the landscape, even areas where physical intervention has yet to happen, through systems that segregate and delineate land through physical and non-physical means, and assigning perceived monetary value to both land and resources. How can we reassess our systems of land management and perceptions of worth in order to relinquish control over land while establishing value in leaving natural landscapes undeveloped and autonomous?

While the commodification and exploitation of natural resources has led to a massive generation of wealth and advancement of living standards, it has also created an unsustainable model, one in which the short term needs of a capitalist society are prioritized over the long term health and integrity of the environment. How could we rework the complex order of perpetual ecological exploitation we currently maintain in order to create a regenerative equilibrium between the needs of the environmental realm and modern society, one that doesn’t infringe on another’s ability to prosper?

Regarding indigenous populations, there is a huge disparity in the amount of land, resources, and capital they have rights and access to in comparison to the general population, in part due to the United State’s history in the systematic takeover and suppression of native communities from their homelands. What legal, environmental, or architectural intervention can be implemented to restore the rights and access of indigenous communities to what was historically theirs while reconciling the fact that modern societies have already been heavily developed?

Property ownership rights have historically been established through regulatory mechanisms that delineate, recognize, and reinforce its use by the individual owner for personal benefit, leaving non-owners and users without the same beneficial access. How can a notion of property be established that is not individualistic or defined by legal regulation, but rather based on shared commonality, local responsibility, and equitable benefit?

Networks of Obligation

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

Networks of Obligation

Carol M. Rose, “The Several Futures of Property”, 1998, 1-33 Ellen Meiksins Wood, “The Agragarian Origin of Capitalism”, 95-121 Edward T. Price “Dividing the Land: Early American Beginnings of Our Private Property Mosaic”, 1-25 Joseph William Singer, “Original Acquisition of Property: From Conquest & Posession to Democracy & Equal Opportunity”, 1-16 National Geographic Inside the Medieval World Single Issue Magazine – March 3, 2017 by National Geographic Special - 2017-3-3 SIP (Author), Meredith (Contributor) Abels, Richard (2009). “The Historiography of a Construct: “Feudalism” and the Medieval Historian”. History Compass. 7 (3): 1008–1031. doi:10.1111/j.1478-0542.2009.00610.x. Dwanna L. Robertson, “The Myth of Indian Casino Riches, Indian Country Today”, Apr 19, 2017.

high-catch-rates-high-angling-pressure-end-of-millelacs-lake-walleye-fishing-open-water-season/5470322/ https://www.pca.state.mn.us/air/air-monitoring-minnesota-silica-sand-facilities#general-959a795d dents-make-the-case-for-chickens/article_a115ae0c5e7a-11e6-8e74-13ba5f27991a.html http://www.startribune.com/study-median-price-of-minnesota-farmland-continues-to-slide/410683005/ https://www.ereferencedesk.com/resources/state-early-history/minnesota.html http://historyofusastates.blogspot.com/2013/12/minnesota-historical-timeline.html http://treatiesmatter.org/exhibit/ welcome/u-s-american-indian-treaties-in-minnesota/ https://www.ereferencedesk.com/resources/state-history-timeline/minnesota.html

David Bollier, “Private Property vs. Tribal Commons”, Boiler Organization, Jan 03, 2013.

https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2017/10/12/ leech-lake-tribal-leases/

Naomi Schaefer Riley, “One Way to Help Native Americans: Property Rights”, The Atlantic, Jul 30, 2016.

https://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/usstates/mntimeln.htm

United States Department of Agriculture, “Easements”, 2019 Environmental Law & Policy Center, “Mississippi River”, 2019 Cass County, “FAQ’s About What I Can Do With My Property”, 2019 Zachariah Parry, “How Far Above and Below the Ground Do my Property Rights Extend?”, Parry & PFAU, Nov 17, 2015. MN Department of Natural Resources, “Water Law Basics”, 2019 The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Dawes General Allotment Act”, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Aug 28, 2019 https://www.presspubs.com/shoreview/news/resi http://www.umrba.org/ https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/ the-early-republic/age-of-jackson/a/manifest-destiny https://maplewoodmn.gov/1012/Raising-Chickens https://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/chouse/land_own_ property.html https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fishing/millelacs.html https://kstp.com/news/

http://treatiesmatter.org/exhibit/ welcome/a-deep-connection-to-place/ https://www.leechlakenews.com/2018/04/20/leechlake-band-of-ojibwe-reservation-restoration-act-introduced-in-u-s-congress/ https://www.ruralmn.org/the-state-of-rural-2019/ https://web.archive.org/web/20170525200616/ https://filemaker.cla.umn.edu/dakota/browserecord. php?-action=browse&-recid=1631 https://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/chouse/cer_status_ map.html https://www.ruralmn.org/the-state-of-rural-2019/ https://www.mda.state.mn.us/organic https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/rlp/regulations/hunting/ deer_map.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=bookmarks https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/deer/map.html https://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/sssoland.pdf https://claycountymn.gov/347/ Reinvest-in-Minnesota-RIM-Reserve-Progra

https://bwsr.state.mn.us/mn-crep-landowners https://www.fs.fed.us/managing-land/private-land https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/08/31/ minnesota-public-lands-day-by-the-numbers https://bwsr.state.mn.us/rim-handbook https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/tips/locations. html https://www.outsideonline.com/2396716/ public-lands-america-explained

https://www.leechlakenews.com/2019/06/18/ on-this-day-herbst-vs-llbo-decision-affirms-tribal-jurisdiction-over-natural-resources/ https://www.mprnews.org/story/2017/10/12/ leech-lake-band-retakes-minnesota-waterfront-land https://narf.org/nill/codes/MN_chippewa_leech_lake/ index.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Chippewa_National_Forest

https://fee.org/articles/ lords-and-serfs-in-medieval-europe/

https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/wmas/detail_report. html?id=WMA0900400

http://www.llojibwe.org/drm/property.html https://www.walkermn.com/news/trust-land-leases-on-leech-other-lakes-will-be-reevaluated/article_7652a61f-4650-5559-914e-2c0a15c58336.html

https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/wmas/detail_report. html?id=WMA0152600 http://www.llojibwe.org/drm/land/land.html

https://lptv.org/tenants-must-move-off-land-as-leechlake-band-declines-to-renew-leases/

http://www.llojibwe.org/drm/land/landleases.html http://www.llojibwe.org/drm/land/landprobate.html

https://www.kvrr.com/2017/10/12/ non-tribal-cabin-owners-forced-leech-lake-properties/

http://www.llojibwe.org/drm/land/landusepermits.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Acts

https://mn.gov/portal/government/tribal/ mn-indian-tribes/

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25042018/ minnesota-oil-pipeline-enbridge-line-3-route-map-tarsands-native-american-tribal-sovereignty-leech-lakefond-du-lac https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/08/31/ minnesota-public-lands-day-by-the-numbers https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/tips/locations. html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Leech_Lake_Indian_Reservation https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/s2599/BILLS115s2599es.pdf http://www.llojibwe.org/court/tcCodes/tc_coTITLE14UtilityServRightsWayTrespass_Ordinance.pdf http://llboha.org/assets/tc_counlawfuldetainer-evictioncode2.pdf https://www.ruralmn.org/rmj/rmj_winter2014/ rmj2014q3-land-control-dilemma/ https://www.macalester.edu/geography/wp-content/ uploads/sites/18/2012/03/iltf.pdf

https://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/sstola. pdf https://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/indiangb. pdf https://www.senate.mn/departments/scr/report/bands/ Sovereign.htm https://www.bia.gov/frequently-asked-questions https://www.doi.gov/blog/ americas-public-lands-explained https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1671/national-parks-in-themidwest.htm http://www.startribune.com/guide-to-minnesota-s-13-national-wildlife-refuges/277134331/ Dalrymple, John. An Essay towards a General History of Feudal Property in Great Britain : under the Following Heads, I. History of the Introduction of the Feudal System into Great Britain, II. History of Tenures, III. History of the Alienation of Land Property, IV. History of Entails, V. History of the Laws of Succession or Descent, VI. History of the Forms of Conveyance, VII. History of Jurisdictions, and of the Forms of Procedure in Courts, VIII. History of the Constitution of Parliament. 2nd ed., corr. and enl.. ed., Printed for A. Millar, 1758.

https://www.senate.mn/departments/scr/report/bands/ tax.htm

Networks of Obligation

https://bwsr.state.mn.us/reinvest-minnesota-overview

Networks of Obligation