The Mining Industry Has Had It Easy For Far Too Long

[ThunderBlade + 231]

Exactly!

"When should modern Americans care about legislation signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant? When it causes deep environmental damage, deprives the federal treasury of billions, privileges one industry over others, practically gives away public lands, and hasn’t been significantly altered in almost 150 years. The law in question is the General Mining Act of 1872, which governs the harvesting of gold, silver, uranium, copper, zinc and other minerals from federal lands. To say it’s long overdue for reform is an understatement. The law was designed to propel westward advancement. So it did a few things that seem antiquated today. It exempted hardrock mines from paying a federal royalty on the minerals they took out of the earth, and enshrined a maximum price of $5 per acre for land purchases. It gave mining precedence over other land uses, such as grazing, forestry or conservation. And because environmental protection wasn’t a dominant concern at the time, it made no provisions for safeguarding land and water. All this made sense in 1872, before Colorado, Montana, Washington and Wyoming were states. It makes no sense today — and the costs of failing to substantially update the law are manifest.  They include billions of dollars in lost royalties from domestic and foreign mining companies. Producers generally pay a royalty of 8 to 12.5 percent to extract coal, oil and gas from federal land. Why should hardrock miners be excused? In addition, there are cleanup costs for hundreds of thousands of abandoned mines and polluted waterways, which the Environmental Protection Agency puts at a minimum of $20 billion. And there are the costs of placing mining above all other uses on public lands. As Mike Dombeck, the former head of the U.S. Forest Service, told Congress in 2008, once claims are staked, “It is nearly impossible to prohibit mining under the current framework of the 1872 law, no matter how serious the impacts....”

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-26/mining-reform-hardrock-miners-should-pay-federal-royalties

 

 

[francoba + 93]

If somebody is making huge profits, the fix is in.

[Pavel + 384]

This amounts to sheer exploitation of mine workers...

[rainman + 263]

With nearly 30% of all U.S. electricity generated from coal and uranium and nearly every manufactured good containing some mineral component, mining has become a vital industry.

[damirUSBiH + 327]

Coal is maybe vital industry, but Marijuana is the fastest-growing sector in the U.S. job market

 

 

[50 shades of black + 254]

Southern Arizona has a capacity to become the Silicon Valley of mining. Mining supports 60,000 jobs and continues to grown

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

12 hours ago, ThunderBlade said:

Exactly!

"When should modern Americans care about legislation signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant? When it causes deep environmental damage, deprives the federal treasury of billions, privileges one industry over others, practically gives away public lands, and hasn’t been significantly altered in almost 150 years. The law in question is the General Mining Act of 1872, which governs the harvesting of gold, silver, uranium, copper, zinc and other minerals from federal lands. To say it’s long overdue for reform is an understatement. The law was designed to propel westward advancement. So it did a few things that seem antiquated today. It exempted hardrock mines from paying a federal royalty on the minerals they took out of the earth, and enshrined a maximum price of $5 per acre for land purchases. It gave mining precedence over other land uses, such as grazing, forestry or conservation. And because environmental protection wasn’t a dominant concern at the time, it made no provisions for safeguarding land and water. All this made sense in 1872, before Colorado, Montana, Washington and Wyoming were states. It makes no sense today — and the costs of failing to substantially update the law are manifest.  They include billions of dollars in lost royalties from domestic and foreign mining companies. Producers generally pay a royalty of 8 to 12.5 percent to extract coal, oil and gas from federal land. Why should hardrock miners be excused? In addition, there are cleanup costs for hundreds of thousands of abandoned mines and polluted waterways, which the Environmental Protection Agency puts at a minimum of $20 billion. And there are the costs of placing mining above all other uses on public lands. As Mike Dombeck, the former head of the U.S. Forest Service, told Congress in 2008, once claims are staked, “It is nearly impossible to prohibit mining under the current framework of the 1872 law, no matter how serious the impacts....”

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-26/mining-reform-hardrock-miners-should-pay-federal-royalties

 

 

Dont blame the mining companies in operation now, if people dont like it, which the royalty situation is not a good thing, reach out to the lawmakers and have it changed. Mining is not an easy business to be in, just like oil and gas and other natural resources exploration and development. Hard rock mining is also more challenging and expensive then open pit, strip and surface mining and or even drilling for oil and gas, but it doesnt excuse the way things were structured long time ago in terms of royalties. Mining companies pay royalties on State and private lands so why not on Federal Lands?

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,256]

21 hours ago, ThunderBlade said:

Exactly!

"When should modern Americans care about legislation signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant? When it causes deep environmental damage, deprives the federal treasury of billions, privileges one industry over others, practically gives away public lands, and hasn’t been significantly altered in almost 150 years. The law in question is the General Mining Act of 1872, which governs the harvesting of gold, silver, uranium, copper, zinc and other minerals from federal lands. To say it’s long overdue for reform is an understatement. The law was designed to propel westward advancement. So it did a few things that seem antiquated today. It exempted hardrock mines from paying a federal royalty on the minerals they took out of the earth, and enshrined a maximum price of $5 per acre for land purchases. It gave mining precedence over other land uses, such as grazing, forestry or conservation. And because environmental protection wasn’t a dominant concern at the time, it made no provisions for safeguarding land and water. All this made sense in 1872, before Colorado, Montana, Washington and Wyoming were states. It makes no sense today — and the costs of failing to substantially update the law are manifest.  They include billions of dollars in lost royalties from domestic and foreign mining companies. Producers generally pay a royalty of 8 to 12.5 percent to extract coal, oil and gas from federal land. Why should hardrock miners be excused? In addition, there are cleanup costs for hundreds of thousands of abandoned mines and polluted waterways, which the Environmental Protection Agency puts at a minimum of $20 billion. And there are the costs of placing mining above all other uses on public lands. As Mike Dombeck, the former head of the U.S. Forest Service, told Congress in 2008, once claims are staked, “It is nearly impossible to prohibit mining under the current framework of the 1872 law, no matter how serious the impacts....”

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-26/mining-reform-hardrock-miners-should-pay-federal-royalties

 

 

I won't give you a downvote as I would rather just say it out...……..you sound like a whining liberal. You might go visit some of the places like Leadville, Co. where the mining was extensive and cleanup almost at 100%. A couple active mines gives tours and you can judge a little bit more whether or not a tax needs be in place. Of course, just my opinion. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,194]

In response: When a state became a state... ALL 100% of federal lands should have been given TO the state in question.  Frankly there should not be ANY federal lands outside of territories.   Now we have this thing called history so I would make an exception for the military bases and national parks, but ALL other lands should be handed over to the states. 

As for royalties..... Should be going to the state not feds.  And most BLM land should be sold off.  Most is nothing but desert anyways. 

PS: As far as I am concerned, NO foreign national or company should be able to own land greater than an acre in size or maybe 10 acres in ANY other country other then their own.  So, that law needs to be changed in the USA as well if you asked me.