In 1987, Drs. Frank and Deborah Popper first proposed their bold new idea for a Buffalo Commons ; in which public policy would intentionally depopulate a vast portion of the United States Great Plains (Popper and Popper, 1987). They predicated their proposal on the fact that hundreds of counties in the American Great Plains are home to less than a sparse 6 persons per square mile -- the density standard Frederick Jackson Turner used to declare the American Frontier closed in 1893. The authors described a region characterized by eight or more decades of population decline, often at an accelerating rate; where deaths frequently exceed births, and where farms, businesses and entire communities choose or are forced to close their doors and move on. Concluding that the situation was clearly unsustainable, their proposal for dealing with the “inevitable disaster” was to restore large parts of the plains to their pre-white condition, making them again the “commons” found by settlers in the 19 th Century.
While shrinking populations are characteristic of much of rural America, especially in those areas that lack recreational amenities, the phenomenon has been particularly evident in the Great Plains (defined by Rowley (1998) to include all of North Dakota, most of South Dakota, Nebraska and Kansas, large portions of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and Oklahoma, along with Minnesota's Red River Valley, Eastern New Mexico and the Texas Panhandle). Nearly three-quarters (72%) of the rural counties in the Great Plains have lost population over the last thirty-years (a total of 304 counties), and more than a third of those counties saw their rate of population decline accelerate between 1990 and 2000 (Walser and Anderlik, 2005).
Declining populations and low population densities on the rural Great Plains have been themes of recurring interest for demographers, sociologists, economists, policy analysts and journalists. The causal sequence leading to the current state of decline in the region is broadly accepted. Changes in agricultural technology have led to changes in the scale and thus the number of farms and related businesses. Declining farm numbers have led to declining farm populations and out-migration of young people. Declining populations and out-migration result in reduced demand for goods and services, diminished job opportunities, and still more out-migration. Since the propensity to migrate tends to decline with age, out-migration from rural areas is highest among the young. Out-migration of young people results in declining birth rates and a residual elderly population, both of which further contribute to population decline (Johansen, 1993; Coffman and Anthan, 2005).
The seemingly inescapable outcome of depopulation is what Walser and Anderlik (2005) have termed the “Vicious cycle of decline.” In their analysis, they argue that:
“..many [rural] counties may face a self-reinforcing cycle of decline: declining populations lead to decreased economic vitality, and both lead to higher per capita costs [for public services]; the higher costs provide incentives for continued out-migration – and the downwardly spiraling quality of life and of the supporting infrastructure in these counties makes it increasingly difficult for the counties to attract new businesses to the area.”
Often vilified by rural residents, and sometimes celebrated by environmentalists, the Popper's Buffalo Commons has become a part of the common language for students of the Great Plains . While the Popper's 1987 vision of a Great Plains bled empty within a generation has not held precisely true, it is undeniable that the trends of decline that they identified nineteen years ago have continued. Despite widespread population increases throughout much of nonmetropolitan America during the 1990s, the rural Great Plains has remained an area of persistent decline (Johnson and Beale, 1998 and 2001).
Still, there are those who seek, if not to actually reverse these trends, to at least support a new equilibrium for the Great Plains . Public policy, government investment, entrepreneurship, education and leadership development have all been heralded as potential solutions to the problems facing the Great Plains . The simple fact is that cultures and communities do not die easily or willingly.
For a number of reasons, Nebraska has become something of the poster child for rural decline. Located near the center of the decline prone Great Plains (Figure 1), 71 of Nebraska 's 93 counties reached their historical population peak in 1940 or earlier, and twenty-nine of those peaked prior to 1920. Twenty-eight Nebraska counties have population densities below the symbolically important six per square mile. Between 2000 and 2004, the Census Bureau estimates that 82-percent of
Nebraska 's counties experienced net out-migration, while 49-percent experienced more deaths than births, or natural population decline (Bureau of the Census, 2005).
Nebraska 's relatively dismal demographics are accentuated as one travels westward. Where the eastern third of Nebraska is home to three metropolitan areas and approximately 200 growing communities, decline becomes increasingly apparent the further west one goes. By the time one reaches the eleven western most counties that make up Nebraska 's Panhandle Region, the Popper's vision of a
Buffalo Commons is easily understood. In fact, the Nebraska Panhandle lies essentially at the epicenter of that mythical region.
