I started a blog a few weeks ago about the Bureau of Land
Management Legislative Proposals. It included Hardrock Mining Reform (re-stated
at end of blog for reference) and I promised to expand on five items of
concern. Since then, we have seen similar bills waiting for legislation, both
pro- and anti-mining. It appears that government is working hard to revoke the
rights we all take for granted in the General Mining Law of 1872.
Item #1 is “currently
covered by the General Mining Law of 1872.”
This, if taken literally should make your skin crawl, at
least it does mine! “Currently covered,”
to me insinuates that option is being replaced by the leasing process further
defined under the proposal.
This opinion is further supported by wording later on in the
proposal… “After enactment, mining for these metals on
Federal lands will be governed by the new leasing process.” A little
further on it states, “Existing
mining claims will be exempt from the change to a leasing system.”
So first
of all I am going to state that under any scenario of my experience with
government officials, they interpret things literally and leave no room for
confusion. If it doesn’t say it in black and white, it just isn’t so.
Is
this the beginning of the end? If approved, it could be.
Would
we even be able to stake claims? It doesn’t say that we can, so I’m going to
assume we can’t. I’m going to say bluntly, my opinion is they are eliminating
the claim staking process and therefore the 1872 Mining Law. That law protects a claimholder, giving him
rights that do not exist under a leasing process. Just one instance of what it
covers would be access, which brings up a related subject on another government
level and how they can circumvent a miner’s rights.
A
fellow prospector called a few weeks ago and asked if we knew anything about a
Black Hills Forest Service plan for withdrawal of public lands from mineral
entry? We had and promised to get the word out there.
A
phone call to the US Forest Service resulted in little except being added to a
mailing list to keep us informed of progress. They did not, at that time, have
anything but a general map of the Black Hills with areas proposed for
withdrawal outlined. I was told that legal descriptions are not yet available
and not much would happen until fall of this year.
I broached an opinion to a friend the other day. We never know "the real story" behind these government efforts, but looking at the big picture it appears that our failing economy needs to be bolstered... what better way than to take mineral rights away from our citizens and award them to the government which can then claim mineral reserves to back our dollar!
So
our rights sit on a platter, which is being picked over by federal government
on two levels… that we know about!
Under the heading
Legislative Proposals -- page BH11, skip to Hardrock Mining Reform:
Page
BH12: “The second legislative proposal
institutes a leasing process under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 for certain
minerals, gold, silver, lead, zinc, copper, uranium, and molybdenum, currently
covered by the General Mining Law of 1872. After enactment, mining for these
metals on Federal lands will be governed by the new leasing process and subject
to annual rental payments and a royalty of not less than five percent of gross
proceeds. Half of the receipts will be distributed to the States in which the
leases are located and the remaining half will be deposited in the Treasury.
Existing mining claims will be exempt from the change to a leasing system. The
proposal also increases the annual maintenance fees under the General Mining
Law of 1872 and eliminates the fee exemption for miners holding ten or fewer
mining claims. These changes will discourage speculators from holding claims
that they do not intend to develop. Holders of existing mining claims for these
minerals could voluntarily convert their claims to leases. The Office of
Natural Resources Revenue will collect, account for, and disburse the hardrock
royalty receipts. “
