Is there land no one owns?

Hard to understand what you consider 'ownership'..but there are millions of acres in the United States that have never been patented to any private interest and title is held by the sovereign.

I'm in a colonial state and way back when I was young I heard the old tale of the surveyor finding a gap between property and somehow acquiring title.
The proprietors of East and West Jersey used to own new or unclaimed land so it never made sense to me.
But both entities closed shop.
As I said I'm not a boundary surveyor. I was just wondering if there's some theoretical scenario under which a piece of land could be not owned privately or publicly.

There is something that comes to mind along those lines. There has been found substantial gaps between PLSS surveys that show to be contiguous on paper. The courts have ruled the "unsurveyed" lands between the two surveys still belong to the government. Same with islands within bodies of water that were missed or overlooked during the original survey. So basically, at least within portions of the U.S. that fall under the Public Land Survey System, everything not defined is still owned by the government.

There is a parcel adjoining my property that was part of a larger tract that was subdivided. This parcel was left out of the subdivision, and is of course vacant (wooded). The development company went out of business in the early 70's. No taxes were paid on it since then. Sometime in the past it was "sold" to a tax collection company along with 100's of other tax delinquent properties in the county. I don't think they actually own the property, just a tax lien on it. So who does own it?

My father acquired (circa 1972) 3.5 acres between two Penn Patents. There were two overlaps and one gore. The Commonwealth left the overlaps up to the landowners, but the gore was theirs to dispose of. I never checked on the results of the overlaps. If I recall correctly, one had an earlier warrant, the other an earlier patent. I guess it would be worthwhile to research. Both large tracts and my fathers were acquired for a residential development. Since it was in Carbon County, maybe I should research the mineral rights.

In my belief all title flows from the Sovereign and I am aware of no written transfers from above. Some parol evidence still exists, one example being the Hebrew Bible.

Paul in PA

The US government owns nothing. It does hold in trust lands of the people of the United States as a whole. Results in other nations may vary.

Paul in PA

John Hamilton, post: 345025, member: 640 wrote: ..The development company went out of business in the early 70's. No taxes were paid on it since then. Sometime in the past it was "sold" to a tax collection company along with 100's of other tax delinquent properties in the county. I don't think they actually own the property, just a tax lien on it. So who does own it?

Around here if a Sheriff's Tax Deed has not been issued, the heirs and/ or assigns of the ancient underlying fee possess what is considered "color (or claim) of title". Although not actually titled ownership, it can be defended in the courts after the satisfaction of any liens, encumbrances or possessive claims.

I can't speak to all situations, but pretty much every time I have seen a gap it was unintentional. The geometry was bad so the intended deed lines didn't meet, but they were supposed to. Those could be cleared by looking at the intent of the parties and Jr/Sr rights.

I have never had a gore on one of my surveys which would be related to larger boundaries or municipal boundaries that seem to deliberately exclude an area to which no one has title. I recently had a filed map that called out an "apparent gore", but I believe it to be a gap. Actually, I believe the old deeds even called the adjoining lands, so I don't know what that guy was thinking. Obviously in that case the monuments if any would control the location of the line.

I suppose if you went back far enough it would have belonged to someone from a grant from the king of England at some point. I've actually done that once in Sussex County. Then I had to follow the chain of title to see where it got "lost" to see who should've retained title. So I guess what I am saying is that if you look hard enough someone owns it.

Paul in PA, post: 345029, member: 236 wrote: The US government owns nothing. It does hold in trust lands of the people of the United States as a whole. Results in other nations may vary.

Paul in PA

OK, I agree in a technical sense. Something to consider however: when being ejected from such 'public' lands for trespassing, or when the lands are conveyed by a lawful authority, the U.S. Government is the only entity that can exercise rights that are strictly reserved for fee owners.

If it looks like a duck....

Hey Scott, How's going?

In my opinion there isn't any 'un-owned' land, somebody, entity, or whatever has title to every piece of land in this country.

I am not sure what Paul in PA is talking about. I have done survey's for Army Reserve Depots that hold a fee simple deed. I guess ultimately you could say it's held in trust.

Dtp

foggyidea, post: 345036, member: 155 wrote: I am not sure what Paul in PA is talking about. I have done survey's for Army Reserve Depots that hold a fee simple deed. I guess ultimately you could say it's held in trust.

A number of governmental entities have been patented lands and hold them in fee. There are millions of deeded examples of government agencies "owning" land. What the original concept was speaking of is public lands that have never been relinquished to private interests. The government considers such public lands to be "held in trust" because they are, well, public lands owned by you and I. But it is a broad brush that paints the term. There are vast areas in Oklahoma that the lands are "held in trust" by the U.S. for tribal interests; supposedly owned by the tribe, but guarded (in a title sense) by the federal gov't. These lands are occupied and utilized by the native tribes that exercise almost all the rights enjoyed by patented owners. There are even cases where the title can be transferred to private ownership or rights of ways granted to others by the tribes. There are also public lands "held in trust" where you can you can get shot on sight by merely trespassing upon them. Held in trust merely means the government can do what they want, when they want with the property. Something generally reserved to fee ownership.

That leads to a very specific thought that applies in the New York City area.

I've read how "new land" is created through the placement of various materials in open water adjacent to "land" to expand said land. If adjacent to private land, how does the new "owner" of "new land" acquire title?

http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/stagser/s1259/113/html/modpats2.html&apos ;">Modern Land Patents

Holy Cow, post: 345040, member: 50 wrote: That leads to a very specific thought that applies in the New York City area.

I've read how "new land" is created through the placement of various materials in open water adjacent to "land" to expand said land. If adjacent to private land, how does the new "owner" of "new land" acquire title?

Interesting.

To an Oklahoma surveyor riparian properties are something that are limited to overland drainage depressions being at a minimum three chains wide...

I'm sure this is a deep subject that could fill volumes. Pun intended.

The US government OWNS a lot of land. USACE for example purchases in fee land that is to be flooded by a dam. Military bases are definitely owned by the government. As Paul has said, maybe he should know what he is talking about before he speaks.

Holy Cow, post: 345040, member: 50 wrote: That leads to a very specific thought that applies in the New York City area.

I've read how "new land" is created through the placement of various materials in open water adjacent to "land" to expand said land. If adjacent to private land, how does the new "owner" of "new land" acquire title?

In some places where fill is placed in Waters of the US, the Corps of Engineers has created maps defining the extent to which the owners have the right to fill (bulkhead lines) and the extent to which they can build out into the water (pier head lines). Since these are rights that run with the land we show them, for example, on ALTA surveys

Mighty tight rights.:-D

I believe Paul's point is philosophical rather than legal; that US Government, at an existential level, is nothing more that the expressed will of the governed.

I would submit that all land in the US is owned by somebody. It is sometimes very difficult to determine who that might be. It's not unowned as much as unknown.