The effort to reset the playing field continues. There have been a few more refinements to the Minerals and Mining Regulatory Reform Act—A Clear Path Respecting Mining Rights. This is the bill we’ve been working on in conjunction with Public Lands for the People and the Minerals and Mining Advisory Council to restore the rights of miners. We are up to revision 41. You can view the bill in its entirety at mmacusa.org
The main revision has to do with the elimination of the US Department of Mines and Minerals (USDMM) and their oversight. After much discussion it made more sense to have appeals go through individual Mining Districts rather than through the USDMM.
I’ve received quite a few inquiries from miners who are beginning to realize that traditional Mining Districts are powerful entities and they are looking to get their district organized if it’s in disarray.
The first step in that process is to locate the original rules, regulations and bylaws. These original documents can often be found by visiting your local historical society, museum, library or county recorder’s office.
Once the original bylaws have been located, the next step is to publish a Public Notice to gather the miners and claimholders in the district at a meeting to elect officers. We (ICMJ’s Prospecting and Mining Journal) have offered to do this free of charge. Once officers are in place, then bylaws can be amended as needed.
I was able to track down original bylaws for quite a few Mining Districts and I will continue to post these on our website as time permits. You’ll find them by clicking on “Bylaws for Traditional Mining Districts” under the “Resources” tab on our website, www.icmj.com.
I’ve included the original bylaws for the Upper Yuba Mining District in Yuba County, California, as an example. It will be immediately obvious to you that these bylaws are very outdated. Once an elected board is in place, the bylaws can be updated to better conform to existing circumstances within the district. If you need assistance, feel free to give me a call.
As part of our ongoing support of PLP, we here at ICMJ’s Prospecting and Mining Journal have been offering a discounted membership to PLP. It works like this:
A one-year PLP individual membership is normally $35. You can get a one-year subscription to our monthly publication for $27.95 and include $25 for a PLP membership and we’ll contribute the additional $10 for your one-year PLP membership. If you already have a subscription you can certainly choose to add another year to your subscription to take advantage of this offer.
Here are the subscribers who have recently taken advantage of this offer. Thank you for your support!
Like all federal judges, he swore an oath to perform his duties “impartially… under the Constitution and laws of the U.S.” Nothing in those documents gives Judge Morris authority to order the BLM to work with non-government organizations (the same ones that filed the lawsuit in question) to alter America’s use of energy.
November 2015 Met by jeers and cheers from more than 1,000 people, US Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) made another pitch to create three new national monuments in the deserts of southern California recently.
The settlement did not grant an immediate approval for the project, but it did begin to clear the way for the company to apply for federal permits—a path the Obama administration previously had thwarted.
December 2012 Many of you are aware that we have been engaged in litigation with anti-mining activists that have been attacking us through the Karuk Tribe of California since 2003. It all started with their lawsuit against the US Forest Service (USFS), challenging that District Rangers do not have the authority to allow small-scale mining activities under a Notice of Intent (NOI) when the Ranger concludes that the mining activity is not likely to create a substantial surface disturbance.