Magazine

PLP and Mining Districts

Mining Districts: A Concept Reborn

October 2011 by Jim Foley

In the last ten years mining has come under increasing attack from extreme environmental, as well as tribal special interest groups and last, but not least, federal and state agencies. Most of the mining opposition today is centered around the small-scale miner. These miners number in the thousands and come from every walk of life. While many of these miners hold regular jobs and practice their mining as a supplement to their regular income, and some for purely recreational purposes, there are a large percentage of them who depend on mining as their sole income.

Mining benefits a very large support industry, which includes manufacturers of equipment as well as many other types of businesses that serve as the business community in the mostly rural areas of what is known as “gold country.” Many, if not most of these businesses depend heavily on miners dollars to carry them through the winter months when business slows down in their small communities. These are the businesses that keep small communities thriving. Their continued existence benefits not only miners, but also their respective communities. They are the mom and pop grocery stores, general stores, gas stations, repair shops, restaurants, motels and R.V. parks.

It is easy to see that anything that would ban or adversely affect mining can and does have a terribly devastating effect on our rural communities. In California a recent “suction dredge” mining ban in all state waters has caused extreme financial hardship on many rural businesses. Some will close because their owners say they cannot continue to stay open to serve their communities without the help of miner’s dollars; others have already closed because of this hardship.

Most of the present-day anti-mining sentiment is centered in the Northwest states of Washington, Oregon and California. The opposition to mining normally consists of well organized and well funded organizations. By contrast, miners are, for the most part, unorganized and lacking the funding needed to combat the assault on their mining rights and property.

While it is true that all natural resource users on our public lands are also being attacked by these very same special interest groups, miners are crucial to the success of the environmentalist’s agenda simply because mining is protected by an Act of Congress known by its federal designation: HR 365. This act was put in place in 1866, and last amended in 1872. It is now known as the Mining Law of 1872. If special interest groups can topple miners, who have an actual “right” to mine, then all natural resource users will be easy pickings.

Because of the very real threat to mining and miners, there has been a lot of talk among miners about the possibility of forming mining districts like the ones that were originally formed to unite miners and fight for our rights to mine, as Congress granted us. So far this has only been talk with no real direction or knowledge of how to go about forming one, or how it might be used for the good of all miners. Mining districts no longer exist, but that doesn’t mean they cannot exist once again to fulfill the unmet needs of the modern miner.

The South West Oregon Mining Association

The South West Oregon Mining Association (SWOMA) is an organization of miners and others based in South Western Oregon that are interested in defending our mining, property, water and other rights. SWOMA, with the help of very able and knowledgeable legal researchers among their members, have thoroughly researched the need and method for forming a mining district.

SWOMA began to put out feelers in the mining community to see if there was interest in forming a mining district. Fortunately there was a great deal of interest.

After widespread notice, on September 2, 2011 at their second fact-finding meeting, it was decided by those present to form a mining district. A vote was taken of those present, which was about 70 miners in attendance, coming from as far away as Indiana. The vote was unanimous in favor of forming the district.

As required by custom and law, the name of the new mining district needed to be determined. It was decided by vote to name the new district the Jefferson Mining District. The boundaries of the District will approximate the “abandoned” State of Jefferson boundaries, to include most of Southern Oregon and Northern California. Ida Reimann was named and voted the first Recorder for the Jefferson Mining District. Kerby Jackson was named and voted interim chairman pending formal structuring of District organization. Rules promulgation was tabled until organization Establishment. The initial purpose of the Jefferson Mining District will be to produce a federally authorized Coordination Plan, which miners throughout the district may use to assert and enforce the mining law.

What is Coordination?

Coordination is a federally mandated tool used by local governments to bring federal agencies to the table to discuss and align resource management plans with local needs as explained through a Coordination Plan. Coordination works well when the local government entity understands the subject and its issues. This is where our local governments fall short regarding mining and agency plans that affect mining. Local governments simply have no knowledge regarding this specialty subject matter. Therefore, they cannot write a Coordination Plan that outlines and protects miner’s special rights and property.

A mining district is a lawful governmental entity that stands on equal footing with any other governmental entity as far as demanding that federal agencies coordinate with the mining district.

Local governments that have implemented “coordination” status with federal management agencies are successfully fighting erosion of private property rights in their communities. The “coordination” status is authorized by almost every federal statute relating to management of land, resource, and environment. All the local government has to do is formally accept the congressional invitation to “coordinate,” and federal agencies have no choice but to agree.

What is this “coordination” factor, which elevates the involvement of local government in federal planning and management actions? The foundation for the concept is found in the Federal Land Policy Management Act, commonly known as FLPMA. Section 1712 of Title 43 of the United States Code requires that the Bureau of Land Management must coordinate its “land use inventory, planning, and management actions” with any local government that has engaged in land use planning for the federal lands managed by the federal agencies. This is where the Coordination Plan comes in. The Plan will enforce standard of the law for such things as ingress and egress.

No local government is better suited to write a Coordination Plan for miners than the actual miners who are affected by federal agency actions.

In this respect and for this purpose, the Jefferson Mining District was formed. The purpose of this new mining district is for the protection and advocation of miners and their rights and property under the mining law. Authoring, and then teaching miners how to enforce the district-wide Coordination Plan will be its initiating purpose. All that will remain in this regard is for miners within the District to step up, taking responsibility for protecting themselves, their property and their rights.

By the authority of the mining district, agencies must coordinate their plans with the mining district plan. Finally miners have a voice that cannot be ignored by agencies that have, up until this time, listened politely to miners concerns and then just as politely ignored both miners and the mining law. Increased mining district mobilization will bring more power to the miners, which will have a positive economic ripple effect into the larger community.

More information can be found on the Internet at: www.miningrights.org

They can also be contacted regarding membership in the Jefferson Mining District at: www.miningrights.org/contact.html

by Jim Foley

Next Article »« Previous Article

Add a Comment

Additional articles that might interest you...

PLP Update

January 2019

We are heading into 2019 with a cautiously optimistic view. We feel we are very close to obtaining regulatory relief for miners, and believe this NDAA cycle will prove fruitful.

PLP Update: Another Suction Dredge Case Heading to the US Supreme Court

December 2019

In the meantime, we will continue our multi-pronged approach to seek regulatory relief at the federal level while supporting those court cases that are built on a strong legal foundation.

PLP To Address Needs Of Small Miners With Proposed Amendment

March 2018

The Senator’s office was very receptive to the small miner’s plight and was unaware of the dire problems created by the over-regulation of small-scale mining from so many different fronts. It was pointed out that S 145 may help the large mining companies a little, but falls woefully short in addressing the needs of small operators who make up 85% of domestic mines.