Legislation & Regulation
Legislative and Regulatory Update
July 2015 by Scott Harn
• WOTUS
The EPA has adopted a new definition of Water of the United States (WOTUS) that will add additional roadblocks to small and large-scale mining operations, farming, home developers and others. The action was opposed by most counties and members of Congress.
In fact, the House of Representatives passed HR 1732, a bill to prevent the EPA from expanding their powers under the Clean Water Act, in mid-May, but the Obama Administration went ahead with the rule change anyway.
While bills to repeal the latest EPA expansion are likely to be passed in both the Senate and House, it does not appear there are enough votes to override a veto from President Obama.
The EPA tried to expand their regulatory authority to non-navigable waters before, but a US Supreme Court win by the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) in Rapanos v. United States in 2006 thwarted that effort.
In Rapanos, the US Supreme Court ruled that isolated waters and tributaries could not be regulated under the Clean Water Act.
“But these are the very waters that the new rule purports to regulate!” said attorney M. Reed Hopper of PLF.
PLF has vowed to return to court to stop the EPA from expanding their regulating authority.
• Sheriff withdraws Forest Service law enforcement authority
In our March 2015 issue, we reported on the harassment of several small-scale miners by Forest Service law enforcement officers in Mariposa County (Tasers and Mining Don’t Mix).
To briefly recap, several miners were sluicing for gold when they were approached by Forest Service officers who demanded identification. When one of the miners questioned their probable cause to make such a demand, one of the officers allegedly pointed a Taser at the miner.
The miners were members of the American Mining Rights Association (AMRA) and mining on valid AMRA claims.
AMRA president Shannon Poe talked with numerous miners who also complained of problems with a few Forest Service officers.
Poe compiled the complaints and attempted to resolve the issue but was unable to get a face-to-face meeting with the Forest Service supervisor. Subsequent correspondence with Forest Service patrol commander Rita Wears also failed to yield results.
Poe then took the case to Mariposa County Sheriff Doug Binnewies, which included a total of 12 documented cases of harassment to miners and other public land users.
On May 8, Sheriff Binnewies withdrew the law enforcement authority of the Forest Service in Mariposa County, and Poe expects Sheriff Mele of Tuolumne County to follow suit.
Congratulations are in order for Poe and AMRA, and a big “thank you” goes to Sheriff Binnewies. You can send a short note of thanks to Sheriff Binnewies via email at: dbinnewies@mariposacounty.org

© ICMJ's Prospecting and Mining Journal, CMJ Inc.
Next Article »« Previous Article
Additional articles that might interest you...
SB 838 and the Future of Mining in Oregon
February 2014
The verbage is SB 838 is vague and ambiguous to say the least. As a result, there is quite a bit of misinformation floating around the rumor mills.
The verbage is SB 838 is vague and ambiguous to say the least. As a result, there is quite a bit of misinformation floating around the rumor mills.
Legislative and Regulatory Update
May 2019
- Bernhardt confirmed
- State of Montana to appeal Rock Creek decision
Oregon Anti-Dredging Bill
March 2011
SB 765...would tax suction gold dredgers by charging a $50 annual fee for in-state dredgers and a whopping $2,500 fee for out-of-state dredgers for each county where the miner intends to dredge.
SB 765...would tax suction gold dredgers by charging a $50 annual fee for in-state dredgers and a whopping $2,500 fee for out-of-state dredgers for each county where the miner intends to dredge.
Legislative and Regulatory Update
April 2017
• Bills introduced to stop federal management of greater sage grouse
• WOTUS under review
• Congressional Review Act
• Bills introduced to stop federal management of greater sage grouse
• WOTUS under review
• Congressional Review Act
Clarification on Oregon's SB838
August 2014
The 100-yard restriction in SB838 actually applies to all motorized mining for the purpose of extracting gold, silver or any other precious metal that results in the disturbance of vegetation.
The 100-yard restriction in SB838 actually applies to all motorized mining for the purpose of extracting gold, silver or any other precious metal that results in the disturbance of vegetation.
Legislative and Regulatory Update
December 2014
• Court says ESA does not apply in some cases
• Comments needed for proposed critical habitat in several Western states
• EPA still trying to rewrite the Clean Water Act
• Enough already!
• Now is the time to act
• Court says ESA does not apply in some cases
• Comments needed for proposed critical habitat in several Western states
• EPA still trying to rewrite the Clean Water Act
• Enough already!
• Now is the time to act
Legislative and Regulatory Update
March 2014
• Idaho challenges EPA regulations
• California suction gold dredging
• Idaho challenges EPA regulations
• California suction gold dredging
Subscription Required:
The Bawl Mill
• Ask The Experts
• Ask The Experts
• Trail to Treasure
• The Smell of Gold -- Part II
• Hard Rock University: Expensive Hobby or Real Business?
• The Reason We Fight
• My Great Nevada Adventure
• Prospecting for Pegmatites
• Melman on Gold & Silver
• Mining Stock Quotes and Mineral & Metal Prices
Free:
MMAC & PLP Update








