Legislation & Regulation
Mining Organizations Unite To Petition For Rule Change
July 2019 by Scott Harn
Eleven mining organizations signed on to a “Petition for Rulemaking to Stop State-Law-Based Prohibitions of Mining on Federal Lands.”
5 U.S.C. § 553(e) states, “Each agency shall give an interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule.”
Working with attorney James Buchal, a petition was drafted to Interior Secretary David Bernhardt and Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue that highlights the abuses miners have faced from overzealous state regulators.
As many of you know from reading our publication, the US Supreme Court declined to hear the People v. Rinehart case that dealt with the State of California’s requiring a permit for suction gold dredging and then refusing to issue such permit.
This was followed by the Bohmker v. Oregon case, where the State of Oregon banned motorized methods of in-stream mining. The US Supreme Court also declined to hear this case.
The six-page petition points out that the intent of Congress and federal preemption are being circumvented by states like California and Oregon.
From the petition:
“It is fundamentally both Departments’ duty to avoid ‘unnecessary or undue degradation of federal lands’ (43 U.S.C. § 1732(b); emphasis added), while managing federal land ‘in a manner that recognizes the Nation’s need for domestic sources of minerals’ (id. § 1701(a)(12)). Congress recognized that minerals (or energy resources) must be recovered where they lie, and that some level of environmental impact is necessary. In particular, Congress has forbidden both Agriculture and Interior from issuing federal regulations which would ‘materially interfere with prospecting, mining or processing operations or uses’ of land claimed under the federal mining laws. United States v. Backlund, 689 F.3d 986, 996 n.9 (9th Cir. 2012) (interpreting 30 U.S.C. § 612(b)).”
The petition seeks specific changes to existing Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management regulations to restore the intent of Congress and federal preemption.
This dovetails well with the legislative changes we’ve been seeking in Washington, DC. Although we would rather see the regulations changed via Congress to make it more difficult for another administration to reverse them, this action would definitely help provide regulatory relief in the near term.
Organizations that wish to support this effort are encouraged to do so by writing their own letter addressed to Secretary Bernhardt and Secretary Perdue. I’ve offered to collect them and forward them on to Tom Kitchar of the Waldo Mining District for so they can be presented to the agencies. Please try to get those letters to me sooner rather than later, but no later than July 25.
Support letters can be emailed to me at editor@icmj.com or sent by mail:
ICMJ—Petition for Rulemaking
PO Box 2260
Aptos, CA 95001
(The full “Petition for Rulemaking” can be viewed by clicking on the letter above.)
Legislative and Regulatory Update
• All bark but no bite
• Company looks to restart mining in Wisconsin
Legislative and Regulatory Update
• Idaho maintains control
• Enough wilderness already
• Restraining the EPA
• Republicans on the attack
• DOI requests hard rock royalty
• New Forest Service plans
• Bill supporting small miners
• New mercury emission regs
• Latest info on California suction dredging
Direct and Constructive Notice
It's a proven civil remedy to put an end to harassment by notifying a person who is either overstepping their authority, or failing to act as required, that they will be sued personally for an act or omission.
Legislative and Regulatory Update
• California suction dredging regulations
• Draft Coho recovery plan for Southern Oregon, Northern California
• Sage-grouse
MMAC & PLP Update
There are some miners who are under the impression that an organized Mining District will immediately get the regulatory agencies off their backs so they can start digging or dredging again.
MMAC & PLP Update
Each separate Mining District is a federally recognized entity. There are huge advantages—picture yourself going to an oversight meeting where 2, 3, 4, or even more Mining District representatives have obtained voting positions on the board.
Judge Tosses Lawsuit Against Tucson-Area Mine
A federal judge has tossed a lawsuit filed by opponents of a Tucson-area mine that had accused the US Forest Service of violating two federal laws in its handling of the mine issue.
Subscription Required:
The Bawl Mill
• Ask The Experts - Diamonds in the Mother Lode?
• Ask The Experts - How do I set up my shaker table?
• Ask The Experts - Does silicone rubber make a good sluice mat?
• Ask The Experts - Conflicting assays for platinum group elements
• Get Boots On The Ground For Patch Hunting
• Lessons Learned From Geologists
• Gold Prospecting for Better or Worse: Man vs Paydirt
• Mohave County, Arizona: The Oatman/San Francisco Mining District
• ICMJ Honored As Prospecting Magazine of the Year
• The Sunbaker
• A Golden Vacation
• Mining Company Pays Millions for Gold Dug From Mine Dumps
• Melman on Gold & Silver
• Mining Stock Quotes and Mineral & Metal Prices
