# Fed Gov and "Federal land" **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 19, 2002, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fed-gov-and-federal-land/104439 "2002-04-19T01:47:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Barking\_Spider](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9dc877/32.png) [@Barking\_Spider](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barking_Spider)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2002, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fed-gov-and-federal-land/104439/1 "2002-04-19T01:47:44Z")
Where in the Constitution does it specify any delegated Federal powers to seize land within a sovereign State? As we know, the Senate just blocked oil drilling in the “Arctic National Preserve” in the State of Alaska. What part of the Constitution delegates to the Fed Gov the power to seize land in a State? ---
**Author:** ![WillGolfForFood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/82dd89/32.png) [@WillGolfForFood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillGolfForFood)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2002, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fed-gov-and-federal-land/104439/2 "2002-04-19T02:01:46Z")
I’m confused here - I was under the impression that the Arctic National Preserve was federal land (as is, say, Yosemite National Park), and all the Senate was doing was declaring that you can’t drill for oil there. ---
**Author:** ![evilhanz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba8739/32.png) [@evilhanz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/evilhanz)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2002, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fed-gov-and-federal-land/104439/3 "2002-04-19T02:07:43Z")
All the Senate decided today was that there would be no vote on whether or not to drill in ANWR [/nitpick] ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2002, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fed-gov-and-federal-land/104439/4 "2002-04-19T03:09:52Z")
Note that the Federal government _bought_ the entire state from the Russkies. _Some_ of that land has been sold to the state and private interests, but the parts that the Feds never sold, guess what?, they still own! (Okay, some of the usual “creative” land deals with the original owners was involved at some point.) OTOH, the Feds own very little of Texas. Those parts it does own were mainly acquired by paying for them (some donations here and there). This has nothing to do with “states rights” (shuddered typing that). ---
**Author:** ![Barking\_Spider](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9dc877/32.png) [@Barking\_Spider](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barking_Spider)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2002, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fed-gov-and-federal-land/104439/5 "2002-04-19T03:38:07Z")
\*Note that the Federal government bought the entire state from the Russkies \* Actually, the Fed Gov bought a territory. This territory became a State. With all the powers that a State has. I’m trying to figure out where in the US Constitution the Fed Gov has the delegated powers to declare land within a sovereign State as Federal property, is all. I’ve read the Constitution, and I can’t find it cited. If the States didn’t delegate this power to the Fed Gov, I don’t see why Alaska [or any other State] shouldn’t tell the Fed Gov to take a hike, and approve of oil drilling within the State. ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2002, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fed-gov-and-federal-land/104439/6 "2002-04-19T04:49:40Z")
From Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution: > [@](#): > > [Congress shall have the power] To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards and other needful Buildings; Well, that covers military bases, at least. ---
**Author:** ![dqa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dqa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dqa)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2002, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fed-gov-and-federal-land/104439/7 "2002-04-19T05:04:29Z")
> [@](#): > > _From [Bureau of Land Management](http://www.ak.blm.gov/whoarewe.html)_ > Most of Alaska’s land is under federal ownership. Four laws - the Native Allotment Act, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), the Alaska Statehood Act, and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) tremendously affect the land mass administered by the federal government. > > The Native Allotment Act of 1906 requires the adjudication of hundreds of small acreage sites throughout Alaska which must be settled prior to completing the final survey and transfer of lands under both the ANCSA and the Statehood Act. The Alaska Statehood Act of 1958 requires the transfer of 104 million acres to the State of Alaska, while ANCSA requires transfer of 44 million acres of public land to Native corporations. ANILCA set aside 80 million acres for inclusion within the national forests, national parks, wildlife refuges and wild and scenic rivers. > [@](#): > > _From [Alaska Pacific University](http://www.institutenorth.org/LegalProgram/statehood_index.htm)_ > The statehood bill that finally passed contained many important and unique elements. First, it declared that Statehood was a compact between the United States and the people of the State of Alaska, as voted on and approved by them in a special election. The people would quitclaim right and title to lands not granted to the state, and the United States would grant to Alaska selected land and property. Second, Alaska was granted entitlement to 103.5 million acres of land, the largest land grant ever given to a new state. This included the subsurface mineral estate, provided the state did not subsequently convey, transfer or grant the subsurface rights to a third party, which would result in forfeiture back to the United States. Third, Congress granted fisheries and wildlife management responsibilities and income on federal as well as state lands subject to approval of the Secretary of Interior, and seventy-five percent of the proceeds from the Pribilof Islands fur seal industry. Fourth, ninety percent of mineral receipts from development on federal lands (public lands) would be transferred to the state… ---
**Author:** ![starfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/87869e/32.png) [@starfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/starfish)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2002, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fed-gov-and-federal-land/104439/8 "2002-04-19T06:34:25Z")
Look at Nevada. Most of the state is owned by the federal government. Just because an area becomes a state does not mean the federal government gives up ownership. Also look at the Oklahoma land rush where the federal government did offer to give up ownership.