Page images
[ocr errors]

snotion 103 - Regulations.

It is impossible for Secretary to promulgate all required regulations within 180 days. The bill should provide for continuing activity when the Secretary tails to act in a timely way.

section_404. Transitional Rulese


This section is subject to many uncertainties and
There is no provision for transition of valid existing

extralateral rights.
(c) Discovery is the only appropriate vehicle for a claim

against the United states.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]




56-185 0 - 92 - 6

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Neff.

Mr. NEFF. Mr. Chairman and Members of the committee, I am here on behalf of the Northwest Mining Association that has submitted a written statement and which I believe will be a part of the record.

Our primary concern with the entire legislation and its history is that it is essentially overriding 100 years of history of what the country was doing with its Western lands. For the benefit of industrial society, of course, we had national policy that has encouraged the private sector, not the Government, to develop mineral re sources. The current bill appears to be running right in the face of that particular policy and essentially is going to be prohibitive on the private sector attempting to further develop resource.

It may well be that roughly, I will use the term a third of the country, that is currently in public ownership should be sterilized and we should not be attempting to develop mineral. But if we are, it has to be upon terms that the industry and the people involved in exploration can live with. I submit that the current bill is not such a proposal. That the current bill, we loosely sometimes refer to it up in Spokane as the thousand points of light for lawyers. There is at least a thousand lawsuits in this bill the way it is drafted.

And the question is basically, in the end, is anybody going to be induced into spending the time, money, and energy, and years of effort that it takes to bring a mineral deposit to economic viability and then be told that they absolutely cannot mine it. I don't think that risk money is available for that type of venture. I think we are at the point where we have already discouraged most of our do mestic sources of capital from engaging in the activity we are in now, which delays ultimate development through a protracted series of environmental reviews and the long series that goes on with the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management regulations. But, to say then absolutely that, at some point in time, for whatever reason they would be denied the right to mine without compensation, I think makes it totally uninviting to anyone who is attempting to conduct exploration.

I think we are basically in that point. The question there is a lot of anticonservation provisions in the current proposals that are here, both here and in the Senate bills, particularly in the area of royalties which I consider anticonservation. But the bottom line is the policy has to be determined at the outset. Is it going to continue to be the policy of the Federal Government to invite the private sector to explore and develop minerals in the public lands? If it is not, I think the time has come to make that clear.

As I point out in the written statement, I think the current proposal already precipitates a problem of taking of what claims are there and what values are there. I don't know that the number is significant in Washington. Out in the West it certainly is. We are talking about millions of dollars of values that would be simply taken away.

I would suggest maybe this is the thousand points of light for lawyers and maybe I should look forward to my declining years of this constant litigation. But that is not the function of the North

west Mining Association and it doesn't want to foster that type of
(Prepared statement of Mr. Neff, with attachment, follows:]

[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

As background for the current proposal, H.R. 918, a brief
historic review is necessary. During the 1860's, after a
protracted period in which it became clear that the federal
government did not have the resources to manage the vast federal
lands that had been acquired by treaty, and otherwise, a series
of statutes were enacted providing for grants by the government,
and by citizen-initiated entries, giving the right to acquire
lands. The former statutes were in such forms as grants to the
railroads in support of construction, and as part of the
statehood enabling legislation, grants to the states as they were
formed. In addition grants were made of floating rights to
select land, such as the grant to all union soldiers of the right
to select 160 acres. The various entry statutes, on the other
hand, required some type of effort or development on behalf of
the entryman, to earn the right to acquire the land. Under this
vast acreages were sold for homestead purposes, timber culture,
and in later years, for development of desert lands, and other
purposes the Congress felt worthy of sponsoring in the
undeveloped western states. Possibly as early as 1848, but
clearly by the 1860's, as expressed in the statutes enacted in
that period, all mineral lands were reserved from grants made
the railroads and the states, and the railroads and states were
given the right to select other lands if the granted lands were
mineral lands. Mineral lands were not eligible for entry under
the homestead laws, or other entry statutes, except for the
recognition of mining claims in the 1866 Act.
In 1872, to integrate the mineral deposits into the land system,
all valuable mineral deposits were declared to be free and open
to exploration and purchase under the procedures provided by
statute. In the intervening century, by additional statutory
enactments, by extensive court decisions, and by regulation, the
meaning of this concept of all valuable mineral deposits has been
defined, redefined, and modified. The core concept that has been
maintained is that mineral deposits that require a great deal of
expenditure of time or money should belong to the discoverer,
with a right to mine the deposits to economic exhaustion without
undue interference. In a private enterprise system, no one will
exert the time and effort to discover mineral deposits for the
benefit of someone else. It was felt that this was of enough
importance to the nation that the right to enter the lands for
mineral exploration and development has been specifically dealt
with as an exclusion when the lands were diverted for other uses,
and even though the lands might be unavailable to the railroads,
the states, various federal projects, including establishment of
the national forest reserves, the concept has continued that the
private discovery and development of valuable mineral deposits is
in the national interest, and has been allowed to continue.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Northwest Mining Association

In the last three decades a number of actions have been taken by
the Congress and by the agencies, the Forest Service and the
Bureau of Land Management, that have drastically changed the
rules under which mining was conducted. In 1964 the Wilderness
Act was adopted, establishing a system covering vast areas of the
West, in which the right to explore for and acquire mineral
deposits was limited to a period of 20 years, ending December 31,
1984. This system has had the effect of restricting the mining
industry drastically in exploration and development in these
areas, and the right to explore and locate claims terminated at
the end of the 20-year period.
In 1970, the Congress, in the Mining and Minerals Policy Act of
1970, boldly stated

The Congress declares that it is the
continuing policy of the Federal Government in
the national interest to foster and encourage
private enterprise in (1) the development of
economically sound and stable mining,
minerals, metal and mineral reclamation
industries, (2) the orderly and economic
development of domestic mineral resources,
reserves, and reclamation of metals and
minerals to help assure satisfaction of
industrial, security and environmental

needs ... The Forest Service in 1974, and the Bureau of Land Management in 1980, adopted extensive regulations regulating all surface activities on mining claims, which have been construed to require prior review of any activity causing significant surface disturbance. The review is conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act and includes all of the studies and review required by preparation of Environmental Impact Statements. This is often duplicative of state requirements, and has resulted in substantial and significant cost and delay to any person attempting to explore for or develop any mineral deposit. Because of rapidly changing cost and income projections the delays have caused some projects to be cancelled during the protracted review process. In 1976 Congress adopted the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, sometimes referred to as the Organic Act. The purpose of the Act was to bring all records regarding status and usage of federal lands into one repository with the Bureau of Land Management, and to provide for review of prior withdrawal orders, the grant of rights of way across federal lands, and otherwise to centralize administration of "title" to the federal lands. Because of the improvident division that exists between the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture, the functions regarding "multiple use and sustained yield" as

« PreviousContinue »