1 2 7 1. The prayers of both parties to quiet title to the disputed areas in sections 28 and 29, T 40 N, R 35 E, M.D.B.LM are denied. is denied. 2. Injunctive relief in support of such asserted title 3. It is declared that as of May 1986 when this case was tried there had been no valid locations of placer and lode 8 mining claims in the area under dispute and said lands remain 9 10 11 in the public domain open to peaceable exploration by anyone until a discovery of valuable mineral is made on a specific claim. No party is entitled to damages. 4. 5. Each party shall bear his or its costs of suit. DATED February 26, 1987.* Sire, I am writing today to submit my comments relevant to your oversight hearing on the 1872 Mining Law. I feel this law and the voluminous body of court decisions handed down subsequent to ite passage, continues to be as effective tool in stimulating exploration, investmort, and recovery of the various minerals so escential to our culture and its future. The laws, as they stand offer incentive to amall and large mining interests, and through the claiming process embody certain elements of free enterprise, ambition, and opportunity for all Americans that in fast disappearing in our bureaucracy based economy:1.0. aaz V. 5. citizen can aquire the ainersle in a 20 acre deposit, merely by claiming then, and perfecting a discovery. The size of a clain might at first appear antiquaited, yet consider the se commente: 1) this size was what was felt single san could mine effectively, and I feel the law is still accessible to the individual prospector in a practical way by at:mulating grass roote exploration. 2) though ore bodies are more and more disseminated, amorphous rather than veins a clais could atraddle, typically located with several hundred contiguous claims, the clain block car be trimmed and modified to pore precisely define the actual ore body in 20 sere increpente, thereby freeing up large arose stakde mostly for position, which brings me to point 3) a suggested change in policy concerning these sometimes huge areas staked for position' and held by Federal aqui conce through the doctrine of pedis possessio. I would prefer a mot time limit on the claimant perfecting a discovery of mineral in place of 3 years from location date. As it is, you can hold ground indefinately if its contiguous to a working nine or other activity to cover your assessment, and sever dig a hole on the clain. You an adverse claimant can overstake and attempt to establish a discovery, but as a practical matter, any multi-national with 2000 positios elaine would run you off and outlast you in court.It is in this respect that podis posuvedio has beld the small mining company out of areas that they with less overbead could possibly mine, is onsence favoring the large multi-nationale and fueling this trend towards speculative land graba, which repove large arose from serious exploration, and which I might add has led to a steady lowering of clain location standarde, murveying and monumentation, because every one is in a hurry to grab alot of ground and speculate, and knows they won't really seed to ever prove a discovery on the majority of their ground, because there is no mechanian to void them out. Podis possessio, look into it if you will. I have worked throughout the western 1.3. for 15 years, surveying mineral locations. I feel the 1872 mining law io good, but essentially mocked by the relaxation of discovery requirements. Thank you for your time, Honorable Nick J. Rahall II Chairman, Subcommittee on Mining and Natural Resources U.S. House of Representatives 819 HOB Annex 1 Washington D.C. 20515 Enclosed for the hearing record is the statement of the Public Landa Foundation (PLF) on H.R.913. STATEMENT OF THE PUBLIC LANDS FOUNDATION MINERAL EXPLORATION AND DEVELPMENT AND This statement was prepared by Mel Shilling, 5963 Norham Drive, Alexandria, Virginia 22310. I am a resource specialist mempert Public Lands Foundation (PLF). The PLF is a non-profit private of the auct ganization composed of retired federal employees of Land Management(BLM). All voting members are former career mployees our nation's natural who have been involved in the management of resources. PLF was formed out of a common concern for our country's finite natural resources; to further the professional stewardship and, to provide of these valuable properties; the public interest policy makers and citizens a balanced view of the vital issues relating to those resources. We share a belief that no nation has survived after squandering or mismanaging its natural resources. PLF in Although H.R. 918 appears to be consistent in intent with principles deems essential the the revision of the Mining Law, foundation does not favor its enactment unless it is amended to eliminate the concerns expressed below. The mining industry and its practices are not the same as in 1872. Regions subject to intensive mining have sometimes suffered longlasting adverse impacts: degradation of air, water, and soil are well documented. Public interest dictates that modern methods and be required to take into account local, social, practices must economic, and environmental responsibilities. The Mining Law of 1872 disposes of some Federal minerals through a system of claims while other Federal minerals are subject to lease or sale. Most State-owned and all privately owned minerals are subject to negotiated sale or lease. Many of PLF's most experienced members, with many years of knowledge and first hand observation of various mining laws, favor substitution of a the operation of leasing law. PLF believes that a healthy mining industry is essential to the Nation's economic well-being and quality of life. We appreciate mining's contribution to the growth and prosperity of the nation. Mining practices must be allowed to continue subject to conditions that satisfy the public interests. PLF has six general concerno a. cut H.R. 9.8. FIRST it 18 too detailed and specific. Many of the specific details in Title 11 should be left for implementation through regulations, so as to permit accommodations to local conditions. Enactment into law of detailed specific requirements can Cause significant environmental and administrative problems. Two simple examples: First - requiring revegetation to pre-mining productivity levels assumes that productivity levels can be created by reasonable application of current technology. Alpine vegetation may require decades or longer to restore when alternate protection maybe equally appropriate. Second requiring complete regrading of the affected land may create a burden that is either economically impossible or rule out alternative methods of reclamation, such as, creation of new open-pit mines that are otherwise acceptable with the waste piles restored to productive uses and locally compatible shapes. · SECOND the H.R. 918 does not recognize mining activity as one of the major uses of Federal lands as directed in FLPMA, nor that mineral production is essential to the welfare of the nation. The reference to the Mineral Policy Act is not sufficient as that Act is so vague it has never been practical. PLF believes that land use planning must consider mineral activities as one of the "principal and major use of the public lands, worthy of full consideration accorded other resource activities. THIRD It is during land-use planning as required by FLPMA that, the National policy objectives set forth in the RECLAMATION STANDARDS, and the actual local conditions and site specific resource values that mineral activities would effect, must be considered in the decision making process. It is important that no one resource value be considered superior or inferior to other values. Thus approval of a mineral activity would then be consistent with all other Federal laws (including NEPA) and the multiple use mandate of FLPMA and its land use plans. The purpose of land-use planning is to recognize all resource uses and demands, including identifying the conflicts among various uses and the means mitigate those conflicts, in making informed and balanced decisions and to prevent anyone value from overriding all other values. Public participation in this process is properly required. to |