Environmentalists up in arms over new mining proposal

Suzanne Struglinski

Thursday, Nov. 10, 2005 | 8:27 a.m.

WASHINGTON -- Environmental groups and mining interests are awaiting a House vote, which could come as early as today, on a budget reconciliation bill that would allow the sale of federal land for mining claims.

Environmentalists are yelling "land grab" over the plan, which would lift an 11-year-old ban on sales of federal land with mineral deposits. The House Resources Committee insists it is just a long overdue update of an 1872 mining law that will help taxpayers get a better return on land bought by mining companies.

The proposal requires mining-land buyers to pay $1,000 or fair market value, which ever is greater, for patenting and purchasing land with mining claims. The 1872 rates of $2.50 to $5 an acre are still in place, along with the 1994 ban. The proposal lifts that ban and changes the selling price.

Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., who supports the proposal, successfully added the fair market value or whichever is greater element to the proposal to ensure that sales do not cheat taxpayers out of land-sale money for acres valued above $1,000.

Gibbons spokeswoman Amy Maier said the proposal allows for land sales but does not change anything related to the long process involved with purchasing the land.

"They just don't give out patents like candy," she said.

Maier said before land could be bought at the new price, the buyer would have to make a considerable investment in environmental assessments and determining whether there are actual mineral deposits worth mining on the land. She said the proposal does nothing to change that.

But environmental groups do not support the change.

The Wilderness Society circulated an analysis of the proposal Wednesday, calling it an attempt to "sell off our national heritage." The group claims that the change could lead to "the privatization of millions of acres of public land, including National Park and Forest land."

The proposal prohibits sales of land within the National Park System, National Wildlife Refuge System, wilderness areas, national monuments and a handful of other protected areas, but the Wilderness Society said the House Resources Committee did not exempt millions of acres of other sensitive lands from sale.

Vanessa Conrad, a program assistant for the Great Basin Mine Watch, said Nevada is especially vulnerable because of the amount of public land in the state.

"It opens up all land for a fire sale," Conrad said.

Conrad said that under current law a company could not buy federal land unless it actually discovered minerals or something that could be mined. Under the proposal, she said, that is no longer the case. Even if a company finds nothing to be mined, it could still attempt to buy the land.

House Resources Committee spokesman Matt Streit said the proposal does not apply to all public lands, and some land is ineligible.

Streit said that through public hearings the committee learned that mining companies that are closing their mines want to purchase the land. This can help the surrounding community because the company would be able to keep buildings and other facilities on the land rather than having to remove everything.

The Environmental Working Group, a research organization based in Washington, estimates that about 2.5 million acres of public land with mining claims in Nevada could be up for sale through the proposed language.

"Once sold there would be virtually no restrictions on how the land could be developed, leaving some of America's most treasured lands open to strip mines, strip malls, oil wells, condos or luxury homes for corporate executives," according to the group's report, "Dirt Cheap: America's Lands in Speculators' Hands."

Luke Popovich, spokesman for the National Mining Association, said if a company owns the land, it has always had the option of doing whatever it wants with it.

"They own the land. They (environmental groups) are making this sound as if this is something new," Popovich said.

Maier said the claim that this is a giveaway "simply does not hold water."

She said this would affect about 360,000 acres nationwide. She did not have a breakdown for land specifically affected in Nevada.

The House might vote today on the Budget Reconciliation Bill, which contains the proposal. It is an attempt by lawmakers to cut as much as $50 billion from federal spending in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1.

The Senate passed its own bill last month, and negotiators will work out differences before it becomes law. The Senate version does not contain the mining language.

Suzanne Struglinski can be reached at (202) 662-7245 or at suzanne@lasvegassun.com.