Who Owns the Land - ERS Publication

Who Owns the Land?
Agricultural Land Ownership
by Race/Ethnicity

O

Of all private U.S. agricultural land, Whites account for 96 percent of
the owners, 97 percent of the value, and 98 percent of the acres.
Nonetheless, four minority groups (Blacks, American Indians, Asians,
and Hispanics) own over 25 million acres of agricultural land, valued
at over $44 billion, which has wide-ranging consequences for the
social, economic, cultural, and political life of minority communities in
rural America. This article presents the most recent national data
available on the racial and ethnic dimensions of agricultural land
ownership in the United States, based largely on USDA’s Agricultural
Economics and Land Ownership Survey of 1999.

Jess Gilbert
Spencer D. Wood
Gwen Sharp

wnership and control
of land strongly
affects many aspects
of rural life, especially in the poorest regions of the
country. Land ownership in minority communities is particularly
important since it is often one of
the few (and largest) forms of
wealth. Beyond economics, land
ownership contributes substantially
to civic activities and political participation. Land is also culturally
significant to minority groups like
American Indians, Hispanics, and
Blacks. Yet some argue that they are
losing ownership and control of
land at much faster rates than
Whites. In recent years, USDA has
been sued for racial discrimination
in Federal farm programs. For these
reasons among others, good

O

Jess Gilbert is professor in the Department of Rural
Sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison
and Co-Director of the Center for Minority Land and
Community Security; Spencer D. Wood and Gwen
Sharp are graduate students in sociology
at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
For assistance and suggestions, we thank Calvin
Beale, Charles Bernard, David Buland, Jim Burt,
Theresa Carmody, Anne Effland, Bob Hoppe, Lukata
Mjumbe, Jerry Pennick, Ross Racine, Gene ummers,
Frank Tolson, Raymond Winbush, and John Zippert.
The Center for Minority Land and Community
Security, based at Tuskegee University,
supported some of this work.

landownership data are essential
for better rural development practice as well as improved agricultural
policymaking.
In this article, we present the
most recent and thorough national
data on the racial/ethnic dimensions of agricultural land ownership
in the United States, based largely
on USDA’s Agricultural Economics
and Land Ownership Survey of
1999 (AELOS). Of all private U.S.
agricultural land, Whites account
for 96 percent of the owners, 97
percent of the value, and 98 percent of the acres. Nonetheless, four
minority groups (Blacks, American
Indians, Asians, and Hispanics) own
over 25 million acres of agricultural
land, with a value of over $44 billion: Blacks possess 7.8 million
acres ($14.4 billion), American
Indians 3.4 million private acres
($5.3 billion), and Hispanics nearly
13 million acres ($18 billion). The
large acreage and high value have
significant social, economic, cultural, and political consequences for
minority communities in rural
America.

Winter 2002/Volume 17, Issue 4

Blacks
For a century after the end of
slavery, Black farmers tended to be
tenants rather than owners. Since
the early 1970s, activists and scholars have warned that the rural
Black community was in danger of
losing its entire land base. Land
ownership by Black farmers peaked
in 1910 at 16-19 million acres,
according to the Census of
Agriculture. However, the 1997
census reports that Black farmers
owned only 1.5 million acres. This
drastic decline contrasts sharply
with an increase in acres owned by
White farmers. Thus, the most surprising finding in the 1999 AELOS
is that—despite many decades of
land loss—Blacks own 7.8 million
acres (table 1).
This estimate has not been
available to other researchers
because these data appeared only
last year, and previous national
studies have not counted minority
land owners as thoroughly as
AELOS. Analysts instead have used
the much smaller Census of
Agriculture figure (1.5 million

RuralAmerica

55

Table 1

All private agricultural land owners, acres owned, and value of land and buildings, by race and ethnicity, 1999
Minorities own only a small part of the U.S. agricultural land base
Land owners

Acres

Number

Percent1

(1,000)

Percent1

Average
acres1

Value
($1,000)

Percent1

United States

3,412,080

--

932,495

--

273

1,283,853,124

--

White
Black
American Indian
Asian
Other

3,218,751
68,056
23,266
8,158
27,290

96.2
2.0
0.7
0.2
0.8

856,051
7,754
3,398
964
4,640

98.1
0.9
0.4
0.1
0.5

266
114
146
118
170

1,156,977,076
14,366,319
5,271,769
6,860,824
11,753,114

96.8
1.2
0.4
0.6
1.0

47,223

1.4

12,888

1.4

273

18,209,871

1.4

Group

Hispanic2

1Racial percentages are calculated based on the racial totals for all owners and all owner acres (3,345,521 and 872,807,000). The U.S. total is greater
than the sum of the races because it includes corporate and other non-individual owners that do not have racial characteristics, plus some individuals who
did not answer or did not receive a racial identifier. This also applies to average acres per owner.
2Hispanic percentages are calculated based on the U.S. totals for all owners and all owner acres (3,412,080 and 932,495,000).
Source: Table 68, 1999 Agricultural Economics and Land Ownership Survey.

acres). In another major discrepancy, the Census shows fewer than
19,000 Black farmers while AELOS
counts 68,000 Black agricultural
land owners. These seeming contradictions, however, are due largely
to intentional differences between

the two sources: The Census of
Agriculture studies farmers whereas
the AELOS studies agricultural land
owners (see box, “Many Agricultural Land Owners Are Not
Farmers,” pp. 58-59).

According to the AELOS, only
one-third of Black-owned acres are
operated by the owner (table 2),
with most Blacks renting their land
to others (mainly Whites). In fact,
61 percent of Black owners in 1999

Table 2

Owner-operators, non-operator owners, and acres owned, by race and ethnicity, 1999
Most agricultural land owners, other than Blacks, are owner-operators
Owner-operators1
Number

Percent2

Acres
(1,000)

Percent2

Average
acres2

United States

1,966,715

58

542,890

58

276

1,445,365

White
Black
American Indian
Asian
Other

1,892,676
29,241
17,479
6,116
21,203

59
43
75
75
78

533,642
2,502
2,615
655
3,475

62
32
77
68
75

282
86
150
107
164

33,834

72

10,160

79

300

Group

Hispanic3

56

Non-operator owners1
Acres
(1,000)

Percent2

Average
acres2

42

389,605

42

270

1,326,075
38,815
5,787
2,042
6,087

41
57
25
25
22

322,410
5,252
783
309
1,165

38
68
23
32
25

243
135
135
151
191

13,389

28

2,728

21

204

Number Percent2

1Percentages for owner-operators and non-operator owners are calculated row-wise based on the total number of owners and acres in each racial/
ethnic category.
2Racial percentages are calculated based on the racial totals for all owners and all owner acres (3,345,521 and 872,807,000). The U.S. total is greater
than the sum of the races because it includes corporate and other non-individual owners that do not have racial characteristics, plus some individuals who
did not answer or did not receive a racial identifier. This also applies to average acres per owner.
3Hispanic percentages are calculated based on the U.S. totals for all owners and all owner acres (3,412,080 and 932,495,000).
Source: Table 68, 1999 Agricultural Economics and Land Ownership Survey.

RuralAmerica

Volume 17, Issue 4/Winter 2002

were landlords, leasing 4.7 million
acres for over $216 million in rent
(table 3). Of all the racial groups,
Blacks own the smallest average
acreage (114 acres per owner).
Black agricultural land owners
are highly concentrated in the
South, from east Texas through the
Black Belt up into Virginia. Their
land use patterns are similar to
those for the region as a whole:
crops and woodland, with relatively
little land in pasture (table 4).
Blacks’ representation in the
Conservation Reserve Program is
higher than that of other minorities
but lower than Whites’ (table 5).

American Indians
Historically, of course,
American Indians had access to
practically all the land in the present-day United States. White settlers and the Federal Government
subsequently dispossessed them
of most of the land. Between the
Allotment Act of 1887 and the
Indian Reorganization Act of 1934,
American Indians lost an additional
90 million acres. Before discussing

Photo courtesy USDA/ERS.

current American Indian ownership, it is important to note that
AELOS contains data only on
private Indian land, excluding
reservation land that is held by
the tribe or otherwise administered
communally. Thus, AELOS captures
only a small amount of the total
agricultural land of American
Indians. For instance, the 1997

Census of Agriculture reports that
only 2 million acres are held privately by American Indians, while
46 million additional acres are on
reservations.
AELOS reports over 3 million
acres of private agricultural land
held by 23,266 Indian owners, with
an average of 146 acres per owner
(table 1). Unlike Blacks, these

Table 3

Private agricultural landlords and acres leased to others, by race and ethnicity, 1999
Nearly half of all land owners are landlords (less for most minorities)
Landlords

Acres leased

Number

Percent1

(1,000)

Percent2

Average
acres per
landlord3

United States

1,638,033

48

394,336

42

241

17,379,889

White
Black
American Indian
Asian
Other

1,505,648
41,377
6,487
2,634
6,584

47
61
28
32
24

321,711
4,668
726
378
1,476

38
60
21
39
32

214
113
112
144
224

14,492,197
216,262
27,384
42,648
91,267

14,616

31

2,997

23

205

156,100

Group

Hispanic

Total rent
received
($1,000)

1Landlords as percent of all owners.
2Leased acres as percent of all owned acres.
3U.S. average is higher than race-specific averages because U.S. figures include corporate and other non-individual owners that do not have racial
characteristics, plus some individuals who did not answer or did not receive a racial identifier.
Source: Table 98, 1999 Agricultural Economics and Land Ownership Survey.

Winter 2002/Volume 17, Issue 4

RuralAmerica

57

Many Agricultural Land Owners Are Not Farmers
Comparing the AELOS and the Census of Agriculture

The 1999 Agricultural Economics and Land Ownership Survey (AELOS) was a follow-on survey to the 1997 Census of
Agriculture. The sample size included 37,182 farmers and 67,178 private landlords. The response rate was 71 percent
for farmers and 51 percent for landlords. Data for nonresponding landlords was taken from the reports of farmers who
rent from them. It is important to note that the AELOS focuses on agricultural (farm and ranch) land only. For more
information on research methods, see Appendix A of AELOS (USDA, 2001).
There are no ideal data sources on land ownership in the United States-other than in the 3,000-plus county
courthouses throughout the Nation. Every 5 years, the census of agriculture reports on “land in farms,” which accounts
for roughly half of all private land in the U.S. The Census offers the most comprehensive data on farms and farmers,
including the land they operate. Yet it is a poor source of information on agricultural land ownership; it covers land
owners only when they are also “farm operators” (farmers). Other landlords and nonoperator owners are intentionally
excluded from the census of agriculture.
The crucial distinction is between farmers and agricultural land owners. A farmer may rent rather than own land, and
an agricultural land owner may not operate a farm. The census of agriculture studies farmers, not land owners. Land
owners, though, are exactly the focus of the 1999 AELOS. It reveals much more than the Census about the ownership
of agricultural land. For example, the 1997 Census of Agriculture says that 16,560 Black farmers own 1.5 million acres,
whereas the 1999 AELOS shows 68,000 Black agricultural land owners with over 7.7 million acres. This discrepancy has
broad implications.
Researchers who work on these issues know that census of agriculture data are problematic. For one thing, small
farmers are more likely to be missed by the census, and minority farmers tend to be small-scale. The 1997 Census of
Agriculture (the first conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture instead of the Department of Commerce) made
special efforts to include more minority farmers, and seems to have produced results.
Another problem is the census handling of American Indians. The 1997 Census of Agriculture (tables 17, 19, and
appendix B) reports that 18,495 Indian farmers operate 52 million acres, for an average Indian farm size of 2,812
acres-almost seven times the average size for all U.S. farms. (See footnote to box table.) This measure is highly
unlikely; it results from the Census’s counting each reservation as a single farm. The 46 million acres on Indian
reservations is included (and constitutes the vast majority) in the total for Indian agricultural land. Thus, it is difficult to

58

Indian land owners tend to be farm
operators and rent their land to
others less often (table 2). Private
Indian agricultural land is worth
over $5 billion, and leased land
earned over $27 million in rent in
1999 (table 3). American Indian
land owners are generally concentrated in the West and Southwest.
They tend to specialize in pasture
(49 percent of all acres), with some
land in crops (39 percent) and less
in woodland (8 percent) (table 4).
Pastureland’s prevalence is probably due to the concentration of

RuralAmerica

Indian farmers and ranchers in arid
and semi-arid regions, which are
generally more suitable for livestock grazing than for growing
crops. Very few Indian owners,
and even fewer of their acres,
are enrolled in the Conservation
Reserve Program, which again
may reflect their concentration in
regions dominated by rangeland
(table 5).
To supplement the AELOS data
on private Indian ownership, we
used an Intertribal Agricultural
Council report based on Bureau

of Indian Affairs data from 1990
(McKean et al.). The BIA counted
over 18 million acres of agricultural
land on reservations, owned by
29,500 individual Indian farmers
or ranchers. Most of these farmers
(63 percent) raised livestock, mainly cattle. A more recent report from
USDA says that the BIA “manages
55 million acres in trust for Indian
tribes and individuals”: 2 million
acres of cropland, 36 million in
pasture and range, 11 million in forest land, and 6 million other acres
(Vesterby and Krupa, p. 24). As with

Volume 17, Issue 4/Winter 2002

compare census of agriculture data on Indians with data on other groups, for whom individually held land is the
dominant type of ownership.
Finally, the AELOS shows many more owner-operators for all racial/ethnic groups (except Asians) than does the
1997 Census of Agriculture. AELOS estimates of acres owned by owner-operators are closer to the census figures,
but still considerably higher for Blacks (see table).

Comparison of 1997 Census of Agriculture and 1999 AELOS on owner-operators, by race and ethnicity
Major data sources disagree
Census of Agriculture
Owner-operators
Group

Number

Percent

AELOS

Acres owned
(1,000)

Percent

Number

Percent

1,966,715

Acres owned
(1,000)

Percent

United States

1,720,730

White
Black
American Indian
Asian
Other

1,679,861
16,560
9,406+1
6,502
8,401

97.6
1.0
0.5
0.4
0.5

501,683
1,499
48,043
786
1,694

90.6
0.3
8.7
0.1
0.3

1,892,676
29,241
17,479
6,116
21,203

96.2
1.5
0.9
0.3
1.1

533,642
2,502
2,615
655
3,475

98.3
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.6

24,365

1.4

10,462

1.9

33,834

1.7

10,160

1.9

Hispanic

553,705

Owner-operators

542,890

1The number of American Indian owner-operators is not reported in the 1997 Census of Agriculture. It is between the 9,406 owner-operators
reported in Table 17 and the 18,495 Indian farmers reported in Appendix B, Table A. The total number of Indian owner-operators is certainly closer to
18,495. Furthermore, the Census of Agriculture count of the acres operated by Indian owner-operators includes reservation land, which is excluded
from the AELOS.
Sources: Tables 16, 17, 46, and Appendix B, 1997 Census of Agriculture—United States Data, and Table 68, 1999 Agricultural Economics and Land
Ownership Survey.

Blacks, different data sources report
different amounts of land ownership for American Indians (see box,
“Many Agricultural Land Owners
Are Not Farmers”).

Asians
Asians (and Pacific Islanders)
make up the smallest of the racial
groups in the AELOS. Some 8,158
Asians own slightly less than a million acres, with an average of 118
acres per owner (table 1). Owneroperators control over two-thirds of
this land, with the remainder held

by landlords who do not farm
(table 2). However, 39 percent of
all Asian-owned acres are rented
out, indicating that some owneroperators are also landlords (table
3). The total value of agricultural
rent collected by Asian landlords is
almost $43 million. Asian-owned
land is highly concentrated in crops
(76 percent of all acres), and 90
percent of Asian owners have some
cropland (table 4). Only a small
percentage of Asian acreage is in
pasture, woodland, or the
Conservation Reserve Program

Winter 2002/Volume 17, Issue 4

(table 5). Asian owners are concentrated in California and Hawaii,
areas that specialize in high-value
crop production such as orchards
and specialty crops.

Hispanics
The AELOS also gathers data on
Hispanic-owned agricultural land.
Individuals in this ethnic category
are included in the AELOS racial
categories, but are also reported
separately as being “of Spanish origin.” Thus, because Hispanics are
already counted in the racial cate-

RuralAmerica

59

gories, data on these owners are
not strictly comparable to the data
by race.
The AELOS reports 47,000
Hispanic owners of agricultural
land, with almost 13 million acres
(table 1). Over 70 percent of these
owners operate the land themselves
(table 2). They have larger average
holdings (273 acres per owner)
than any racial group, including
Whites. Hispanics leased out almost
3 million acres, for $156 million in
rent (table 3). Over 60 percent of
Hispanic-owned agricultural land is
in pasture, and 28 percent in crops

(table 4). As with American
Indians, this is likely due to their
concentration in the Southwest,
where livestock operations predominate. Only about 5 percent of
Hispanic owners participate in the
Conservation Reserve Program
(about half the rate for Whites), and
less than 3 percent of Hispanicowned land is in the CRP (table 5).

Racial/Ethnic Comparisons
Among agricultural land owners, the most striking finding is that
minorities are truly in the minority.
Less than 4 percent of all owners

are non-White. They hold only 2
percent of all private agricultural
land and control just 3 percent of
its value. Still, the absolute numbers for minority land owners
(25 million acres worth $44 billion)
indicate agricultural land as a
tremendous resource for these
groups, who tend to reside in
particularly poor regions of rural
America.
Individual minority groups
vary significantly—in tenure status
(operator or landlord), value of
land, rents received, and land
uses. Compared with other races

Table 4

Land use by agricultural land owners and acres, by race and ethnicity, 19991
Agricultural land use varies across groups
Cropland
Owners
Group

Pastureland

Acres

Owners

Average
1,000 Percent
acres

Number

Percent

United States

2,710,174

79

434,162

47

White
Black
American Indian
Asian
Other

2,567,497
48,916
14,437
7,367
14,921

80
72
62
90
55

394,792
3,772
1,309
733
1,689

29,619

63

3,632

Hispanic

Acres

Percent

160

1,870,355

55

379,579

41

203

46
49
39
76
36

154
77
91
99
113

1,785,108
28,421
16,980
1,221
17,390

55
42
73
15
64

351,783
2,169
1,671
76
2,400

41
28
49
8
52

197
76
98
62
138

28

123

27,992

59

8,055

63

288

1,000 Percent

Average
acres

Woodland
Owners
Group

60

Other

Acres

Owners

Average
1,000 Percent
acres

Number

Percent

United States

1,210,005

35

73,016

8

White
Black
American Indian
Asian
Other

1,149,038
28,938
7,525
1,739
4,740

36
43
32
21
17

68,396
1,244
267
105
250

8,978

19

678

Hispanic

1,000 Percent

Average
acres

Number

Acres

Number

Percent

60

2,215,992

65

45,738

5

21

8
16
8
11
5

60
43
35
60
53

2,101,328
41,923
17,366
3,726
19,650

65
62
75
46
72

41,080
569
151
50
300

5
7
4
5
6

20
14
9
13
15

5

76

29,967

63

524

4

17

1Owners usually own land in multiple land-use categories, but any given acre is devoted to only one land use. Therefore, if one sums all owners in the
land-use categories, they will be higher than the total number of owners, whereas the summed land-use acres equal the total number of acres.
Source: Table 74, 1999 Agricultural Economics and Land Ownership Survey.

RuralAmerica

Volume 17, Issue 4/Winter 2002

Table 5

Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) participation of agricultural land owners and acres by race and ethnicity, 1999
Minority land owners use CRP less than Whites
CRP land
Owners

Acres

All
owners

Acres
(1,000)

Number

Percent

(1,000)

Percent

Average
acres1

United States

3,412,080

932,495

320,323

9.4

39,759

4.3

124

White
Black
American Indian
Asian
Other

3,218,751
68,056
23,266
8,158
27,290

856,051
7,754
3,398
964
4,640

308,052
4,789
537
252
578

9.6
7.0
2.3
3.1
2.1

37,936
363
52
39
38

4.4
4.7
1.5
4.0
0.8

123
76
97
155
66

47,223

12,888

2,295

4.9

349

2.7

152

Group

Hispanic

1Average acres in CRP for those participating in the program. U.S. average is higher than race-specific averages because U.S. figures include corporate
and other non-individual owners that do not have racial characteristics, plus some individuals who did not answer or did not receive a racial identifier.
Source: Table 74, 1999 Agricultural Economics and Land Ownership Survey.

(including Whites), a large proportion of Blacks are nonoperator
owners, who own two-thirds of all
Black-held agricultural land. The
other racial minorities are above
the national averages (58 percent)
for both owner-operators and the
acres they own.
Moreover, agricultural land use
patterns differ among racial/ethnic
groups. Blacks have above-average
percentages of woodland and
below-average pastureland, with
the largest proportion of their land
in crops. American Indian and
Hispanic owners use most of their
agricultural land as pasture, whereas Asians have hardly any pastureland and a large majority of their
land in crops, especially high-value
ones. These land use patterns
reflect the regionalization of U.S.
agriculture and the concentration
of racial/ethnic populations.

covers privately held land, thus
excluding the major resource base
of American Indians: reservations.
Second, it presents only national
data; State-level information (much
less county-level) is not available
from the AELOS by racial groups.
Third, it is cross-sectional, dealing
with ownership at only one point
in time (1999).
Trend data—ownership
changes over time—are essential
for both agricultural policymakers
and practitioners of land-based
community development. Activists
and analysts need more accurate
information on land ownership. In
minority communities, this can be
an especially pressing concern
since some are not reaping the full
value of their property, and others
are in danger of losing their land
base altogether. Several improvements would strengthen our knowledge of land ownership:

Conclusion
This article only begins to document minority land ownership.
Largely due to data sources, it has
several serious limitations. First, it

Winter 2002/Volume 17, Issue 4

The AELOS could be conducted
every 5 (rather than 10) years
as a regular follow-on survey
to the Census of Agriculture.

Racial characteristics could be
reported at the State level, not
just the national level.
The Census of Agriculture
could break down the tenure
category of “part owner” by
owned and rented land by
race (cf. tables 17 and 46 in
the 1997 Census).
USDA could support a voluntary registry of minority land
owners (following recommendation 28 of USDA’s 1997 Civil
Rights Action Team Report).
American Indian farmers and
land could be better counted.
Reservations, for instance,
are not single farms, as the
Census of Agriculture now
classifies them.
Many believe, and research
has shown, that land ownership is
of tremendous economic, cultural,
and political value to rural communities (e.g., Salamon, Couto,
LaDuke, Mitchell). Major private

RuralAmerica

61

foundations, as well as the Federal
Government, are also convinced.
They have invested millions of
dollars in research and community
development activities that bolster
land ownership. The 25 million
acres that the 1999 AELOS reports
for minority owners, worth over
$44 billion, are only a small fraction of the amount and value of
all U.S. private agricultural land.
However, it is a major form of
wealth in minority rural America,
much as homeownership—a top
policy priority—is throughout
the Nation.
This currently existing asset
base, in some of the poorest areas
of the country, could be further
utilized in community development
efforts. Access to land means that
rural communities have more
options in addressing rural housing
needs. Minority land ownership is
being used to develop youth training programs in many rural areas.
Small producers and land owners
have created opportunities for
value-added agriculture (e.g., truck
crop operations and farmers’ markets). Additionally, of course, land
owners have greater financial possibilities. Land often serves as collateral for college educations and
entreprenurial ventures. These are
just some of the ways that land
ownership is crucially important to
rural minority communities. This
social asset base is too often overlooked by race/ethnic scholars,
agricultural policymakers, and
sometimes even rural development
practitioners in the communities
themselves. RA

For Further Reading . . .
David Buland and Fen C. Hunt, “Hispanics in Agriculture and Opportunities for
Resource Conservation,” paper presented at the National Organization of
Professional Hispanic NRCS Employees Conference, Washington, DC, 2000.
Richard A. Couto, Ain’t Gonna Let Nobody Turn Me Round: The Pursuit of Racial
Justice in the Rural South, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991.
Carl Flink, “Finding a Place for Low-Income Family Farmers in the Legal Services
Equation,” Clearinghouse Review, Vol. 35, Nos. 11-12, 2002, pp. 677-694.
Kathleen R. Guzman, “Give or Take an Acre: Property Norms and the Indian Land
Consolidation Act,” Iowa Law Review, Vol. 85, 2002, pp. 595-662.
Winona LaDuke, All Our Relations: Native Struggles for Land and Life, Boston:
South End Press, 1999.
J. R. McKean, W.L. Liu, and R.G. Taylor, “Inadequate Data Base for American Indian
Agriculture,” Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin TB93-2, Fort Collins,
CO: Colorado State University, 1993.
Thomas W. Mitchell, “From Reconstruction to Deconstruction: Undermining Black
Landownership, Political Independence, and Community through Partition Sales of
Tenancies in Common,” Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 95, No. 2, 2001,
pp. 505-580.
Lester M. Salamon, “The Time Dimension in Policy Evaluation: The Case of the
New Deal Land Reform Experiments,” Public Policy, Vol. 27, No. 2, 1979,
pp. 129-183.
United States Department of Agriculture, Civil Rights at the United States
Department of Agriculture: A Report by the Civil Rights Action Team, Washington,
DC, February 1997.
United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service,
1997 Census of Agriculture: United States Summary and State Data, AC97-A-51,
USDA, 1999.
United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service,
1997 Census of Agriculture: Agricultural Economics and Land Ownership Survey
(1999), AC97-SP-4, 2001. http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census97/
aelos/aelos.htm.
Marlow Vesterby and Kenneth S. Krupa, Major Uses of Land in the United States,
1997, USDA, Economic Research Service, Statistical Bulletin No. 973, 2001.
Spencer D. Wood and Jess Gilbert, “Returning African-American Farmers to the
Land: Recent Trends and a Policy Rationale,” Review of Black Political Economy,
Vol. 27, No. 4, 2000, pp. 43-64.
Gene Wunderlich, “The Land Question: Are There Answers?” Rural Sociology,
Vol. 58, No. 4, 1993, pp. 547-559.

62

RuralAmerica

Volume 17, Issue 4/Winter 2002