Legislation & Regulation
Legislative and Regulatory Update
March 2019 by Scott Harn
• Massive 660-page lands bill passed in the Senate
Senate Bill 47 (S47), the Natural Resources Management Act, introduced by Senator Murkowski (R-Alaska), was chock full of land conveyances, mineral withdrawals, park boundary adjustments, and gifts to various Senators to get their support. Our biggest concern is that it included permanent funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), which is the primary vehicle used by the federal government to place more public lands off-limits to mining.
Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced an amendment in an attempt to limit authorization of the LWCF to a period of four years.
In support of the LWCF limits, Senator Lee stated, “...the program has regrettably drifted far from its original intent and has become rife with abuse.
“Indeed, the Land and Water Conservation Fund—or LWCF, as it is often described—has instead been used as a primary tool for more Federal land acquisition rather than to actually help people access or to help the government care for the land we already manage.”
Senator Lee also noted the federal government currently administers 640 million acres and there is an $18.5 billion maintenance backlog on federal lands.
Senator Lee’s amendment was defeated by a vote of 68 to 30.
S47 received a full, recorded vote on February 12, and it passed overwhelmingly by a vote of 92-8. The eight Senators who voted against the bill were Cruz (R-TX), Inhofe (R-OK), Johnson (R-WI), Lankford (R-OK), Lee (R-UT), Paul (R-KY), Sasse (R-NE), and Toomey (R-PA).
The bill now awaits consideration in the House.
Prospectors Protest San Gabriel Mountains National Monument
More than 100 gold prospectors gathered at Azusa Canyon in the recently declared San Gabriel Mountains National Monument in southern California to voice their concerns…
Reminder: Annual Claim Filings Due
Please note that new mining claims filed on or after September 1, 2019, will be subject to the new fee schedule.
MMAC Update
One caller wondered why he should be required to join MMAC, asked why MMAC was not a non-profit, and compared it to some kind of extortion attempt. If he had questions like these, I assume there are others with similar questions and I will address them here.
Legislative and Regulatory Update
• NEDC Surrenders in Oregon
• The California saga continues
MMAC & PLP Update
We definitely got their undivided attention with our presentations. As a direct result of our presentations, the Desert Advisory Council recommended a Memorandum of Understanding be put together between the council and the Rand Mining District. This MOU was recently completed.
Mining Community Loses A Great Leader: Gerald "Jerry" Hobbs
He certainly wasn’t afraid of a fight or a court battle, and he didn’t back away from calling out those who tried to compromise the rights of miners.
Suction Dredging Battle Escalates
• State attorneys claim the Court of Appeals wrongly relied on South Dakota Mining Association v. Lawrence County regarding federal preemption...
Subscription Required:
The Bawl Mill
• Ask The Experts - Any references on gold formation?
• Ask The Experts - Finalizing an agreement with a mining company
• The Basics of Exploration Leases and Contracts—Part II
• Pumping Water With Solar Power
• My Introduction To Gold Prospecting
• Resurrecting An Old Hard Rock Mine—Safety Is No Accident
• Mining Claims: Breaking All The Commandments
• The Importance Of Mining Critical Minerals In The USA
• Gold Prospecting for Better or Worse: Gold Is Where You Find It
• Detecting for Gold: A Return to Familiar Ground
• Melman on Gold & Silver
• Mining Stock Quotes and Mineral & Metal Prices
Free:
PLP Update
