Facebook
TwitterThis dataset was updated May, 2025.This ownership dataset was generated primarily from CPAD data, which already tracks the majority of ownership information in California. CPAD is utilized without any snapping or clipping to FRA/SRA/LRA. CPAD has some important data gaps, so additional data sources are used to supplement the CPAD data. Currently this includes the most currently available data from BIA, DOD, and FWS. Additional sources may be added in subsequent versions. Decision rules were developed to identify priority layers in areas of overlap.Starting in 2022, the ownership dataset was compiled using a new methodology. Previous versions attempted to match federal ownership boundaries to the FRA footprint, and used a manual process for checking and tracking Federal ownership changes within the FRA, with CPAD ownership information only being used for SRA and LRA lands. The manual portion of that process was proving difficult to maintain, and the new method (described below) was developed in order to decrease the manual workload, and increase accountability by using an automated process by which any final ownership designation could be traced back to a specific dataset.The current process for compiling the data sources includes:* Clipping input datasets to the California boundary* Filtering the FWS data on the Primary Interest field to exclude lands that are managed by but not owned by FWS (ex: Leases, Easements, etc)* Supplementing the BIA Pacific Region Surface Trust lands data with the Western Region portion of the LAR dataset which extends into California.* Filtering the BIA data on the Trust Status field to exclude areas that represent mineral rights only.* Filtering the CPAD data on the Ownership Level field to exclude areas that are Privately owned (ex: HOAs)* In the case of overlap, sources were prioritized as follows: FWS > BIA > CPAD > DOD* As an exception to the above, DOD lands on FRA which overlapped with CPAD lands that were incorrectly coded as non-Federal were treated as an override, such that the DOD designation could win out over CPAD.In addition to this ownership dataset, a supplemental _source dataset is available which designates the source that was used to determine the ownership in this dataset. Data Sources:* GreenInfo Network's California Protected Areas Database (CPAD2023a). https://www.calands.org/cpad/; https://www.calands.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/CPAD-2023a-Database-Manual.pdf* US Fish and Wildlife Service FWSInterest dataset (updated December, 2023). https://gis-fws.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/9c49bd03b8dc4b9188a8c84062792cff_0/explore* Department of Defense Military Bases dataset (updated September 2023) https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/military-bases* Bureau of Indian Affairs, Pacific Region, Surface Trust and Pacific Region Office (PRO) land boundaries data (2023) via John Mosley John.Mosley@bia.gov* Bureau of Indian Affairs, Land Area Representations (LAR) and BIA Regions datasets (updated Oct 2019) https://biamaps.doi.gov/bogs/datadownload.html Data Gaps & Changes:Known gaps include several BOR, ACE and Navy lands which were not included in CPAD nor the DOD MIRTA dataset. Our hope for future versions is to refine the process by pulling in additional data sources to fill in some of those data gaps. Additionally, any feedback received about missing or inaccurate data can be taken back to the appropriate source data where appropriate, so fixes can occur in the source data, instead of just in this dataset.25_1: The CPAD Input dataset was amended to merge large gaps in certain areas of the state known to be erroneous, such as Yosemite National Park, and to eliminate overlaps from the original input. The FWS input dataset was updated in February of 2025, and the DOD input dataset was updated in October of 2024. The BIA input dataset was the same as was used for the previous ownership version.24_1: Input datasets this year included numerous changes since the previous version, particularly the CPAD and DOD inputs. Of particular note was the re-addition of Camp Pendleton to the DOD input dataset, which is reflected in this version of the ownership dataset. We were unable to obtain an updated input for tribral data, so the previous inputs was used for this version.23_1: A few discrepancies were discovered between data changes that occurred in CPAD when compared with parcel data. These issues will be taken to CPAD for clarification for future updates, but for ownership23_1 it reflects the data as it was coded in CPAD at the time. In addition, there was a change in the DOD input data between last year and this year, with the removal of Camp Pendleton. An inquiry was sent for clarification on this change, but for ownership23_1 it reflects the data per the DOD input dataset.22_1 : represents an initial version of ownership with a new methodology which was developed under a short timeframe. A comparison with previous versions of ownership highlighted the some data gaps with the current version. Some of these known gaps include several BOR, ACE and Navy lands which were not included in CPAD nor the DOD MIRTA dataset. Our hope for future versions is to refine the process by pulling in additional data sources to fill in some of those data gaps. In addition, any topological errors (like overlaps or gaps) that exist in the input datasets may thus carry over to the ownership dataset. Ideally, any feedback received about missing or inaccurate data can be taken back to the relevant source data where appropriate, so fixes can occur in the source data, instead of just in this dataset.
Facebook
Twitter
Facebook
TwitterThis dataset contains boundaries of city-owned properties in Bellevue, along with information about the responsible maintenance and ownership entities. The dataset is useful for managing public land, understanding city assets, and facilitating the coordination of maintenance efforts among various city departments and agencies.
Facebook
TwitterParcels and Land Ownership dataset current as of 2005. ParcelView-The data set is a view of the parcel polygon consisting of more than 93,000 tax parcel boundaries in Davis County. This Davis County Recorder compiled the parcel layer using GeoMeida Professional and GeoMedia Parcel Manager..
Facebook
TwitterCC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
ForestOwn_v1 is a 250-meter spatial resolution raster geospatial dataset of forest ownership of the conterminous United States (CONUS). The dataset was prepared by the Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program, Northern Research Station, Forest Service, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and differentiates forest from non-forest land and water, public and private ownership, and the percent of private forest land in corporate ownership. The forest/non-forest land/water classification is derived from the USDA Forest Service's CONUS Forest/Nonforest dataset. Public and private land ownership class is derived from the Protected Areas Database of the United States, Version 1.1 (CBI Edition). Corporate ownership of private forest land is derived from the Forest Service's 2007 Resources Planning Act (RPA) dataset, summarized over the Environmental Protection Agency's Original Environmental Monitoring & Assessment Program (EMAP) grid 648 square kilometer hexagon dataset.The ForestOwn_v1 dataset is designed for conducting geospatial analyses and for producing cartographic products over regional to national geographic extents.A corresponding Research Map (RMAP) has been produced to cartographically portray this dataset.
Original metadata date was 02/09/2011. Minor metadata updates were made on 05/10/2013, 04/16/2014, 12/21/2016, and 02/06/2017. Additional minor metadata updates were made on 04/20/2023.
On 07/23/2020 a newer version of these data became available (Sass et al. 2020).
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This dataset is intended to provide a statewide depiction of land ownership in California. It includes lands owned by each federal agency, state agency, local government entities, conservation organizations, and special districts. It does not include lands that are in private ownership. Ownership is derived from CAL FIRE's State Responsibility Area (SRA) dataset and GreenInfo Network's California Protected Areas Database (CPAD). CAL FIRE tracks lands owned by federal agencies as part of our efforts to maintain fire protection responsibility boundaries, captured as part of our State Responsibility Areas (SRA) dataset. This effort draws on data provided by various federal agencies including USDA Forest Service, BLM, National Park Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Indian Affairs. Since SRA lands are matched to county parcel data where appropriate, often federal land boundaries are also adjusted to match parcels, and may not always exactly match the source federal data. Federal lands from the SRA dataset are combined with ownership data for non-federal lands from CPAD, in order to capture lands owned by various state and local agencies, special districts, and conservation organizations. Data from CPAD are imported directly and not adjusted to match parcels or other features. However, CPAD features may be trimmed if they overlap federal lands from the SRA dataset. This service represents the latest release of the dataset by FRAP, and is updated annually. As of November 2018, it represents ownership18_2.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
An area depicted as surface ownership parcels dissolved on the same ownership classification. MetadataThis record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: ISO-19139 metadata ArcGIS Hub Dataset ArcGIS GeoService CSV Shapefile GeoJSON KML For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.
Facebook
TwitterLand and Property Extents expressed as polygons as recorded through the Allerdale Land Terrier. Extents captured from OS Mastermap from legal title plans
Facebook
Twitterhttps://data.gov.uk/dataset/4f5ed3a2-1dbc-41bc-ba1b-bf840e781e08/central-and-local-government-unregistered-land#licence-infohttps://data.gov.uk/dataset/4f5ed3a2-1dbc-41bc-ba1b-bf840e781e08/central-and-local-government-unregistered-land#licence-info
A list of central and local government land in England, which may not be registered with HM Land Registry (HMLR).
HMLR has created this dataset for the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) by combining HMLR freehold polygon data with the public sector ownership data currently openly available from the Office of Government Property.
The dataset is not definitive or complete as not all central and local government data is captured, and/or available, and the two datasets are not held in the same format. The list is therefore indicative rather than definitive.
Intellectual Property Rights
The dataset includes address data processed against Ordnance Survey’s AddressBase Premium product and incorporates Royal Mail’s PAF® database (Address Data). Royal Mail and Ordnance Survey permit your use of Address Data:
If you want to use the Address Data in any other way, you must contact Royal Mail. Email
Address data
The following fields comprise the address data included in the dataset
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Ownership is a commonly used base layer used in a wide range of business functions and these data are intended to provide a depiction of the land ownership within the CLM project area. FS_BasicOwnership_2023.shp - an area depicted as surface ownership parcels dissolved on the same ownership classification administered by the USDA Forest Service (USFS). It does not include lands of private ownership.
Facebook
TwitterThis is a comprehensive point theme that incorporates parcel ownership and address information, parcel valuation information and basic information about the land and structure(s) associated with a given tax assessment account. Data for the Parcel point theme are obtained from the State Department of Assessments and Taxation with added data from Maryland Department of Planning. The date the point was most recently published in Planning's data products MdProperty View and FINDER Quantum is contained in the mdpvdate field. The date of the most recent Assessments data linkage to MdProperty View/FINDER Quantum points is contained in the sdatdate field. Accounts deleted between those two dates are no longer represented as points. For more information on the attribute definitions please see the MdProperty View User's Guide, available for download at https://planning.maryland.gov/Pages/OurProducts/DownloadFiles.aspx . Please Note: Due to the extensive size of the parcel points file, download is recommended from the REST endpoint (https://mdgeodata.md.gov/imap/rest/services/PlanningCadastre/MD_PropertyData/MapServer/exts/MDiMapDataDownload/customLayers/0)This is a MD iMAP hosted service layer. Find more information at https://imap.maryland.gov.Feature Service Layer Link:https://mdgeodata.md.gov/imap/rest/services/PlanningCadastre/MD_PropertyData/MapServer/0**Please note, due to the size of this dataset, you may receive an error message when trying to download the dataset. You can download this dataset directly from MD iMAP Services at: https://mdgeodata.md.gov/imap/rest/services/PlanningCadastre/MD_PropertyData/MapServer/exts/MDiMAPDataDownload/customLayers/0**
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
A generalized dataset of existing land use in the District of Columbia as existed during its most recent extract of the common ownership lots. This dataset is different from the Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use, which shows land use as envisioned in the latest version of DC’s Comprehensive Plan. The primary land use categories used in this dataset are similar, but not identical. The Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO) compared two datasets to create this generalized existing land use data. The data source identifying property use is the Property Use Code Lookup from the Office of Tax and Revenue (OTR). An index provided by the Office of Planning assigns each OTR property use code with a “primary land use” designation. Through an automated process, the common ownership lots were then joined with this index to create the Existing Land Use. Only properties with an assigned use code from OTR are categorized. Other properties without a use code were left as NULL. Many of these tend to be public lands such as national parks. Refer to https://opendata.dc.gov/pages/public-lands.This dataset has no legal status and is intended primarily as a resource and informational tool. The Office of the Chief Technology Officer anticipates replicating this work annually.
Facebook
TwitterOpen Government Licence - Canada 2.0https://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
License information was derived automatically
Approximate boundaries for all land parcels in New Brunswick. The boundaries are structured as Polygons. The Property Identifier number or PID is included for each parcel.
Facebook
TwitterOpen Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
These datasets are published as part of the requirements on data transparency and are refreshed on the first of the month.
This dataset provides information on the government estate, including various property related characteristics such as: location, ownership, size, tenure and type of property.
The scope of the data includes land and property information for UK central government departments and their arms length bodies including non-ministerial departments, executive agencies, non-departmental public bodies and special health authorities. Whilst these assets are primarily located in the UK,some are located overseas.
Some properties may have more than one entry in the data extract as the government has more than one ‘interest’ in that property. For example, there may be two or more government occupiers in the same property. It also provides information about the ‘holding’ government department and, if relevant, the arm’s length body of the department responsible for the property. This dataset contains non sensitive information on the government estate e.g. commercially sensitive contract data is not published. The dataset also excludes property records that are classed as sensitive e.g. for national security purposes.
All data provided via these data sets are as reported to the Cabinet Office by the holding departments.
Property and Contracts
This dataset covers properties and their associated contracts. A property may have more than one contract associated with it. This data set includes information such as Ownership, Location, Size, Usage, Asset type (Building or Land), Contract Name and Contracted Organisation.
Building
Properties can be made up of one or more buildings and are linked to the property via a property reference. Characteristics such as Building Ownership, Location, Floor Area, Usage, Size and Construction Date are recorded and this entity is linked to the property via the property reference.
Land
Whilst properties can be made up of Building(s) and Land they can also refer exclusively to Land only. Land records include information on Ownership, Location, Size and Usage and this entity is linked to the property via the property reference.
Occupation
Occupations highlight which organisations reside within a given property. The following types of information about occupying organisations is recorded: organisation, location, asset type(e.g. Land, Building), size of the occupation (floor area), type of agreement (e.g. sub-let) and the usage (e.g. Office, Court).
Surplus Property
When a property is no longer required for the purposes of the organisation that currently holds the asset, it is then designated as being Surplus. These can then be made available for disposal which involves the transfer of a freehold or leasehold by way of sale or other agreement. Data such as Ownership, Location, Size, Usage and Contact Information is recorded for surplus property.
Vacant Space
To facilitate better utilisation of the estate; where space is available in properties these can be marked as such and made available to other government departments for co-location purposes. This data set contains Ownership, Location, Size, Information about the Space, and Contact Details.
Facebook
TwitterCC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
The CDFW Owned and Operated Lands and Conservation Easements dataset is a subset of the CDFW Lands dataset. It contains lands owned (fee title), some operated (wildlife areas, ecological reserves, and public/fishing access properties that are leases/agreements with other agencies that may be publicly accessible) and conservation easements held by CDFW. CDFW Owned and Operated Lands and Conservation Easements replaces the prior dataset, DFG Owned and Operated Lands, which included only fee title lands and some operated lands (wildlife areas, ecological reserves, and public/fishing access properties that are leases/agreements with other agencies and that may be publicly accessible). This is a generalized version dataset that has a shorter attribute table than the original and also has been dissolved based on the fields included. Please note that some lands may not be accessible due to the protection of resources and habitat. It is recommended that users contact the appropriate regional office for access information and consult regulations for CDFW lands in Sections 550, 550.1, 551, 552, 630 and 702. The CDFW Lands dataset is a digitized geographical inventory of selected lands owned and/or administered by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Properties such as ecological reserves, wildlife areas, undesignated lands containing biological resource values, public and fishing access lands, and CDFW fish hatcheries are among those lands included in this inventory. Types of properties owned or administered by CDFW which may not be included in this dataset are parcels less than 1 acre in size, such as fishing piers, fish spawning grounds, fish barriers, and other minor parcels. Physical boundaries of individual parcels are determined by the descriptions contained in legal documents and assessor parcel maps relating to that parcel. The approximate parcel boundaries are drawn onto U.S. Geological Survey 7.5'-series topographic maps, then digitized and attributed before being added to the dataset. In some cases, assessor parcel or best available datasets are used to digitize the boundary. Using parcel data to adjust the boundaries is a work in progress and will be incorporated in the future. Township, range, and section lines were based on the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5' series topographic maps (1:24,000 - scale). In some areas, the boundaries will not align with the Bureau of Land Management's Public Lands Survey System (PLSS). See the "SOURCE" field for data used to digitize boundary.
Facebook
TwitterTransfer of ownership of industrial property
Facebook
TwitterThis parcels data set is a spatial representation of municipal tax lots for Hunterdon County, New Jersey that have been extracted from the NJ statewide parcels composite by the NJ Office of Information Technology, Office of GIS (NJOGIS). Parcels at county boundaries have been modified to correspond with the NJ county boundaries and the parcels in adjacent counties.Each parcel contains a field named PAMS_PIN based on a concatenation of the county/municipality code, block number, lot number and qualification code. Using the PAMS_PIN, the dataset can be joined to the MOD-IV database table that contains supplementary attribute information regarding lot ownership and characteristics. Due to irregularities in the data development process, duplicate PAMS_PIN values exist in the parcel records. Users should avoid joining MOD-IV database table records to all parcel records with duplicate PAMS_PINs because of uncertainty regarding whether the MOD-IV records will join to the correct parcel records. There are also parcel records with unique PAMS_PIN values for which there are no corresponding records in the MOD-IV database tables. This is mostly due to the way data are organized in the MOD-IV database.The polygons delineated in the dataset do not represent legal boundaries and should not be used to provide a legal determination of land ownership. Parcels are not survey data and should not be used as such.The MOD-IV (Tax Assessor's) table for the county is packaged together with the parcels as one download. The MOD-IV system provides for uniform preparation, maintenance, presentation and storage of property tax information required by the Constitution of the State of New Jersey, New Jersey Statutes and rules promulgated by the Director of the Division of Taxation. MOD-IV maintains and updates all assessment records and produces all statutorily required tax lists for property tax bills. This list accounts for all parcels of real property as delineated and identified on each municipality's official tax map, as well as taxable values and descriptive data for each parcel. Tax List records were received as raw data from the Taxation Team of NJOIT which collected source information from municipal tax assessors and created the statewide table. This table was subsequently processed for ease of use with NJ tax parcel spatial data and split into an individual table for each county.***NOTE*** For users who incorporate NJOGIS services into web maps and/or web applications, please sign up for the NJ Geospatial Forum discussion listserv for early notification of service changes. Visit https://nj.gov/njgf/about/listserv/ for more information.
Facebook
TwitterCC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
This data product contains raster data depicting the spatial distribution of forest ownership types in the conterminous United States circa 2020. The data are a modeled representation of forest land by ownership type, and include three types of public ownership: federal, state, and local, as well as three types of private: family (includes individuals and families), corporate, and other private (includes conservation and natural resource organizations, unincorporated partnerships and associations, and Native American tribal lands).
Facebook
Twitter
Facebook
TwitterThe table Historical Property 08 is part of the dataset Cotality Smart Data Platform: Historical Property, available at https://stanford.redivis.com/datasets/e9sx-cn4k3cyva. It contains 149059118 rows across 220 variables.
Facebook
TwitterThis dataset was updated May, 2025.This ownership dataset was generated primarily from CPAD data, which already tracks the majority of ownership information in California. CPAD is utilized without any snapping or clipping to FRA/SRA/LRA. CPAD has some important data gaps, so additional data sources are used to supplement the CPAD data. Currently this includes the most currently available data from BIA, DOD, and FWS. Additional sources may be added in subsequent versions. Decision rules were developed to identify priority layers in areas of overlap.Starting in 2022, the ownership dataset was compiled using a new methodology. Previous versions attempted to match federal ownership boundaries to the FRA footprint, and used a manual process for checking and tracking Federal ownership changes within the FRA, with CPAD ownership information only being used for SRA and LRA lands. The manual portion of that process was proving difficult to maintain, and the new method (described below) was developed in order to decrease the manual workload, and increase accountability by using an automated process by which any final ownership designation could be traced back to a specific dataset.The current process for compiling the data sources includes:* Clipping input datasets to the California boundary* Filtering the FWS data on the Primary Interest field to exclude lands that are managed by but not owned by FWS (ex: Leases, Easements, etc)* Supplementing the BIA Pacific Region Surface Trust lands data with the Western Region portion of the LAR dataset which extends into California.* Filtering the BIA data on the Trust Status field to exclude areas that represent mineral rights only.* Filtering the CPAD data on the Ownership Level field to exclude areas that are Privately owned (ex: HOAs)* In the case of overlap, sources were prioritized as follows: FWS > BIA > CPAD > DOD* As an exception to the above, DOD lands on FRA which overlapped with CPAD lands that were incorrectly coded as non-Federal were treated as an override, such that the DOD designation could win out over CPAD.In addition to this ownership dataset, a supplemental _source dataset is available which designates the source that was used to determine the ownership in this dataset. Data Sources:* GreenInfo Network's California Protected Areas Database (CPAD2023a). https://www.calands.org/cpad/; https://www.calands.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/CPAD-2023a-Database-Manual.pdf* US Fish and Wildlife Service FWSInterest dataset (updated December, 2023). https://gis-fws.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/9c49bd03b8dc4b9188a8c84062792cff_0/explore* Department of Defense Military Bases dataset (updated September 2023) https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/military-bases* Bureau of Indian Affairs, Pacific Region, Surface Trust and Pacific Region Office (PRO) land boundaries data (2023) via John Mosley John.Mosley@bia.gov* Bureau of Indian Affairs, Land Area Representations (LAR) and BIA Regions datasets (updated Oct 2019) https://biamaps.doi.gov/bogs/datadownload.html Data Gaps & Changes:Known gaps include several BOR, ACE and Navy lands which were not included in CPAD nor the DOD MIRTA dataset. Our hope for future versions is to refine the process by pulling in additional data sources to fill in some of those data gaps. Additionally, any feedback received about missing or inaccurate data can be taken back to the appropriate source data where appropriate, so fixes can occur in the source data, instead of just in this dataset.25_1: The CPAD Input dataset was amended to merge large gaps in certain areas of the state known to be erroneous, such as Yosemite National Park, and to eliminate overlaps from the original input. The FWS input dataset was updated in February of 2025, and the DOD input dataset was updated in October of 2024. The BIA input dataset was the same as was used for the previous ownership version.24_1: Input datasets this year included numerous changes since the previous version, particularly the CPAD and DOD inputs. Of particular note was the re-addition of Camp Pendleton to the DOD input dataset, which is reflected in this version of the ownership dataset. We were unable to obtain an updated input for tribral data, so the previous inputs was used for this version.23_1: A few discrepancies were discovered between data changes that occurred in CPAD when compared with parcel data. These issues will be taken to CPAD for clarification for future updates, but for ownership23_1 it reflects the data as it was coded in CPAD at the time. In addition, there was a change in the DOD input data between last year and this year, with the removal of Camp Pendleton. An inquiry was sent for clarification on this change, but for ownership23_1 it reflects the data per the DOD input dataset.22_1 : represents an initial version of ownership with a new methodology which was developed under a short timeframe. A comparison with previous versions of ownership highlighted the some data gaps with the current version. Some of these known gaps include several BOR, ACE and Navy lands which were not included in CPAD nor the DOD MIRTA dataset. Our hope for future versions is to refine the process by pulling in additional data sources to fill in some of those data gaps. In addition, any topological errors (like overlaps or gaps) that exist in the input datasets may thus carry over to the ownership dataset. Ideally, any feedback received about missing or inaccurate data can be taken back to the relevant source data where appropriate, so fixes can occur in the source data, instead of just in this dataset.