Senator BUMPERS. Mr. Smith, you are what we would call a legitimate operator and what you are doing is certainly legal. If you can extract three percent or 20 percent, or whatever you can get out of your lessees, that is just jakey with me. Do you agree with one of the intents of this legislation, and that is to stop people from using this land for huge profits for non-mining purposes?

Mr. SMITH. Yes. In fact, in that article I told them about these what I call fly-by-nighters that come in and tie up your claims. For 40 claims they might give you $2,000 and they go off selling stock on it, and then you would have to take that $2,000 you got to get a lawyer to get your papers back and get rid of them.

My wife says you better start getting $5,000 or $10,000 so you have enough to pay the lawyers to get rid of them. So there is all kinds out there.

Senator BUMPERS. Mr. Langley, do you agree with that part of the bill?

Mr. LANGLEY. As far as to take care of the abuses that occur with people using patented claims for non-mining purposes, yes. I guess I agree with the problem. I am not sure that I agree with some of your proposed solutions.

Senator BUMPERS. How would you

Mr. LANGLEY. As I mentioned, although I do not agree with all the reversion provisions in your bill, I think that some sort of reversion might be necessary when, upon investigation, upon an examination, it is found that this person is not using the land for mining purposes. That is what we attempted to do in Montana. In Montana taxation was the way we took care of the problem.

If we can identify specific problems that are legitimate, wide spread public policy concerns, I would be more than happy to work with you on them, Senator Bumpers. But I do not agree with the wholesale revision of the very most basic mining law that has ever been passed.

Senator BUMPERS. I had a philosophy professor one time and he said when his first child was born, his son, and he said the first time his son said "Da Da" he almost fainted. But he said if that kid got to be 25 years old and he was still saying "Da Da," I'd take him to the nearest psychiatrist.

We have a 117 year old law here that is still saying "Da Da” as far as I am concerned.

Mr. LANGLEY. I guess we have an honest disagreement on that, Senator, because I do not agree with you.

Senator BUMPERS. Even the Constitution, which I consider the greatest document ever written, has been changed 26 times. This law has never been changed once.

Mr. LANGLEY. The procedures for changing the Constitution are much different than changing a statute.

Senator BUMPERS. A lot easier I think on this case.

Senator MCCLURE. Would the senator yield on that? As a matter of fact, the mining law of this land has changed a lot of times over the years. I do not want to engage in an argument with my Chairman tonight, but there is a perception that some how this 117 year old law is just as it existed in 1872, and that simply is not true. As a matter of fact, there was reference made earlier to the fact of earlier studies that bore out the results of, or came to the same

conclusions of the latest GAO study, and I use that term loosely, concluded.

As a matter of fact, a number of those studies were prior to, and reports were completed, prior to subsequent congressional action. We have enacted statutes repeatedly, the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act, the Common Varieties Minerals Act, the FLPMA statute itself, just to pick out a handful. There have been lots and lots of congressional action. With respect to the mining on public lands, Congress has periodically reviewed the application of laws and has affirmed them in part, changed them in part.

Senator BUMPERS. Gentlemen, thank you all for being with us. I know some of you have come a long distance. We appreciate you coming here. It has been a long day, but it has been an edifying day.

The committee will stand in recess until the call of the Chair. [Whereupon, at 8:55 p.m. the hearing recessed, subject to the call of the Chair.]

This is in response to your June 13, 1989, letter transmitting to us questions relating to the June 7, 1989, hearing on the Mining Law of 1872 and S. 1126, the "Mining Law of 1989."

Our answers to the questions from you and from Senator Bumpers are enclosed. If you should require additional information, please let us know.

Sincerely,

Cyfamian

Director

Enclosures

United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240

This is in response to your June 13, 1989, letter transmitting to us questions relating to the June 7, 1989, hearing on the Mining Law of 1872 and S. 1126, the "Mining Law of 1989."

Our answers to the questions from you and from Senator Bumpere arc enclosed. If you should require additional information, please let us know.