[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 4, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E26-E27]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                    REFORM OF THE MINING LAW OF 1872

                                 ______


                         HON. NICK J. RAHALL II

                            of west virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, January 4, 1995
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing into the 104th 
Congress legislation to reform the mining law of 1872. Joining me in 
sponsoring this measure are George Miller of California, Christopher 
Shays of Connecticut, Bruce Vento of Minnesota, Neil Abercrombie of 
Hawaii, Peter DeFazio of Oregon and Jerry Kleczka of Wisconsin.
  This bill, the Mineral Exploration and Development Act of 1995, is 
identical to the version of H.R. 322 which passed the House during the 
last Congress on November 18, 1993, by a bipartisan vote of 316 to 108. 
In fact, our new Speaker, the gentleman from Georgia [Newt Gingrich], 
voted for this bill at that time. Unfortunately, last year the House-
Senate conference committee on mining law reform was unable to reach an 
agreement.
  Today, with the introduction of this measure, we begin where that 
historical debate left off. In my view, the advent of a new Congress 
with a Republican majority does not change the fundamental and 
bipartisan support that continues to be displayed for reforming the 
mining law of 1872. Indeed, the fiscal austerity being advanced by the 
Republican leadership may very well enhance our prospects for gaining 
enactment of this legislation, which has enjoyed the support of the 
National Taxpayers Union, during this Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of my colleagues, many of whom may be 
new to this issue, in order to explain this measure perhaps it is best 
to briefly go back to the year 1872. At the time, Ulysses S. Grant 
resided in the White House. Union troops still occupied the South. The 
invention of the telephone and Custer's stand at the Little Bighorn 
were still 4 years away. And in 1872 Congress passed a law that allowed 
people to go onto public lands in the West, stake mining claims, and, 
if any gold or silver were found, produce it for free.
  In an effort to promote the settlement of the West, Congress said 
that these folks could also buy the land from the Federal Government 
for $2.50 an acre.
  That was 1872. This is 1995, Yet, today, the mining law of 1872 is 
still in force.
  In 1995, however, for the most part it is not the lone prospector of 
old, pick in hand, accompanied by his trusty pack mule, who is staking 
those mining claims. It is large corporations, many of them foreign 
controlled, who are mining gold
 owned by the people of the United States for free, and snapping up 
valuable Federal land at fast-food hamburger prices.
  [[Page E27]] Remaining as the last vestige of frontier-era 
legislation, the mining law of 1872 played a role in the development of 
the West. But it also left a staggering legacy of poisoned streams, 
abandoned waste dumps, and maimed landscapes.
  Obviously, at the public's expense, the western mining interests have 
had a good thing going all of these years. But the question has to be 
asked: Is it right to continue to allow this speculation with Federal 
lands, not to require that the lands be reclaimed, and to permit the 
public's mineral wealth to be mined for free?
  Today, anybody can still go onto Federal lands in States like Nevada 
and Montana and stake any number of mining claims, each averaging about 
20 acres. In order to maintain the mining claim, until very recently 
all that was required was that the claimholder spend $100 per year to 
the benefit of the claim. In the event hardrock minerals such as gold 
or silver are found on the claim, they are mined for free. There are no 
requirements that a production royalty be paid to the Federal 
Government.
  It is incredible, but true, that an estimated 1.8 billion dollars' 
worth of hardrock minerals are annually mined from Federal lands in the 
Western States in this fashion. Yet, the Federal Government does not 
collect one penny in royalty from any of this mineral production.
  Under the mining law of 1872, claimholders can also choose to 
purchase the Federal land being claimed. They can do this by first 
showing that the lands have valuable minerals, and then by paying the 
Federal Government a mere $2.50 or $5.00 an acre depending on the type 
of claim. This is called obtaining a mining claim patent. Perhaps a 
good feature in 1872, when the Nation was trying to settle the West. 
But today there is hardly a need to promote the additional settlement 
of L.A., San Francisco, or Denver.
  Recently, for example, a mining company received preliminary approval 
to obtain 25 of these patents covering about 2,000 acres of public land 
in Montana. This company will pay the Federal Government little more 
than $10,000 for land estimated to contain 32 billion dollars' worth of 
platinum and palladium.
  Moreover, once the mining claim is patented, nothing in this so-
called mining law says that it has to be actually mined. The land is 
now in private ownership. People are free to build condos or ski slopes 
on it.
  For example, a couple of years ago the Arizona Republic carried a 
story about a gentleman who paid the Federal Government $155 for 61 
acres' worth of
 mining claims. Today, these mining claims are the site of a Hilton 
hotel. This gentleman now estimates that his share of the resort is 
worth about $6 million.

  Claimholders can also mine these Federal lands with minimal 
reclamation requirements. The only Federal requirement is that when 
operating on these lands they do not cause ``unnecessary or undue 
degradation.'' What does this term mean? It means that they can do 
whatever they want as long as it's pretty much what all of the other 
miners are doing. And who will pay the bill for this abuse? Check over 
the Superfund National Priority List and you will learn the answer.
  I might add that the issue of mining law reform does not deal with 
coal, or that matter, oil and gas. These energy minerals, if located on 
Federal lands, are leased by the Government, and a royalty is charged. 
Further, mining law reform does not deal with private lands. The scope 
of the mining law of 1872 is limited to hardrock minerals such as gold, 
silver, lead, and zinc on Federal lands in the Western States. That is 
also the scope of this reform bill.
  In brief, the legislation we are introducing today would prohibit the 
continued give-away of public lands. It would require that mining 
claims be diligently developed. It would impose a royalty on the 
production of valuable minerals extracted from Federal lands. And, it 
would require industry to comply with some basic reclamation standards.
  Again, this legislation is identical to the bill which passed the 
House last year by a bipartisan 3-to-1 margin.
  Mr. Speaker, I receive many calls in my office on the issue of mining 
law reform. When people learn that today, in 1995, gold and silver is 
still mined off public lands for free, they are, naturally, 
incredulous. The question is often asked: How come Congress has not 
done anything to reform the mining law yet?
  Frankly, as the Member who commenced this current effort to reform 
the mining law back in 1987, I, too, am incredulous that this law 
continues in force in a manner basically unchanged from its 1872 
origins. Historically, the western hardrock mining industry has been 
successful in blocking any and all congressional reform initiatives. 
Lately, however, I have noticed an increasing sentiment within the more 
progressive element of the industry to settle this matter once and for 
all. Perhaps 1995 will be the year in which the voice of this element 
of the industry will become the dominating voice of the industry 
overall.
  For the benefit of my colleagues, following I offer a brief history 
on the effort to reform the mining law of 1872:
                      History of Mining Law Reform

       The genesis of mining law reform dates back to 1879, seven 
     years after the enactment of the Mining Law of 1872. At that 
     time, Congress created the first major Public Land Commission 
     to investigate land policy in the West. One of its major 
     recommendations included a thorough rewrite of the 1872 law 
     which even then was believed by many to undermine efficient 
     mineral development.
       Several decades later, in 1908, President Roosevelt created 
     the National Conservation Commission to study Federal land 
     policy in the West, and it, too, made a number of 
     recommendations for reform of the Mining Law. Again, in 1921, 
     a committee appointed by the Director of the Bureau of Mines 
     recommended a series of reforms, developed in concert with 
     mining industry representatives interested in improving the 
     mechanics of the law. These recommendations were embodied in 
     legislation introduced in both houses of Congress and 
     hearings were held in 1922, however, no action was taken at 
     that time.
       Following this effort, the next call for reform came at the 
     onset of World War II, when then Secretary of the Interior 
     Harold Ickes endorsed a leasing system for hardrock mining. 
     In 1949, the Hoover Commission on Organization of the 
     Executive Branch of the Government, like the first Public 
     Land Commission, recommended a series of changes to the 
     Mining Law. This effort was succeeded by the President's 
     Materials Policy Commission (the Paley Commission) in 1952 
     which also recommended revisions, including placing hardrock 
     minerals under a leasing system. Once again, the criticism 
     centered on inefficiencies in mineral development caused by 
     the law.
       Between 1964 and 1977 Congress went through another period 
     of debate on mining law reform. The debate became more 
     complex during that time as issues related to abuse and the 
     need for environmental protections were added to the mix. The 
     Public Land Law Review Commission, created by Congress in 
     1964, made the Mining Law a prominent issue on its agenda. 
     Following issuance of the Commission's report in 1970, 
     Congress debated the issue until 1977, when efforts to reform 
     the mining law collapsed.
       After a decade-long hiatus, on June 23, 1987, what was then 
     known as the Subcommittee on Mining and Natural Resources 
     held an oversight hearing on the Mining Law of 1872, 
     initiating the current round of Congressional debate on 
     reform. Subsequently, the Subcommittee held a number of 
     hearings on specific issue areas related to hardrock mining 
     on public lands, such as: hardrock mine reclamation and 
     bonding requirements, abandoned mine land problems, mining 
     claims on Stock
      Raising Homestead Act lands, uncommon varieties of hardrock 
     minerals, regulation of hardrock mining wastes, and oil 
     shale claims. On September 6, 1990, the Subcommittee on 
     Mining and Natural Resources conducted a hearing on the 
     first reform measure introduced into the House in over a 
     decade, H.R. 3866, sponsored by then Subcommittee Chairman 
     Rahall. This hearing was augmented by several reports 
     produced by the U.S. General Accounting Office at the 
     Subcommittee's request: An Assessment of Hardrock Mining 
     Damage (1988); The Mining Law Needs Revision (1989); 
     Unauthorized Activities Occurring on Hardrock Mining 
     Claims (1990); Patenting of Mining Claims Complies with 
     Law (Oregon Dunes) (1990); and, Increased Attention Being 
     Given to Cyanide Operations (1991).
       At the commencement of the 102nd Congress, on February 6, 
     1991, H.R. 918 was introduced by Rep. Nick Rahall. During the 
     first session of that Congress, the Subcommittee on Mining 
     and Natural Resources held four field hearings on the bill in 
     Denver, Colorado (April 12, 1991); Reno, Nevada (April 13, 
     1991); Sante Fe, New Mexico (May 3, 1991); and Fairbanks, 
     Alaska (May 25, 1991). Two additional days of hearings were 
     held on the bill in Washington, D.C. on June 18, 1991, and 
     June 20, 1991. On June 24, 1992, H.R. 918 was favorably 
     considered by what was then known as the Committee on 
     Interior and Insular Affairs which reported the bill with 
     amendments by a roll call vote of 26 to 19. The House began 
     floor consideration of the bill, but did not complete action 
     on the measure prior to the adjournment of the 102nd 
     Congress.
       At the beginning of the 103rd Congress, on January 5, 1993, 
     Rep. Rahall introduced H.R. 322, which closely mirrored the 
     version of H.R. 918 previously considered on the House Floor. 
     On March 11, 1993, the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral 
     Resources held a hearing on the bill and on October 28, 1993, 
     the Subcommittee favorably reported the bill as amended. On 
     November 3, 1993, the Committee on Natural Resources 
     favorably reported the bill as amended by a vote of 28 to 14. 
     H.R. 322 was passed by the House on November 18, 1993, by a 
     vote of 316 to 108. Unfortunately, during the 103rd Congress 
     a House-Senate conference committee on mining law reform was 
     unable to reach an agreement.


     

                          ____________________