Federal Land Management: The Mining Law of 1872 Needs Revision
RCED-89-72
Published: Mar 10, 1989. Publicly Released: Mar 10, 1989.
Skip to Highlights
Highlights
In response to a congressional request, GAO reviewed various aspects of the Mining Law of 1872, focusing on the: (1) law's patent provision; (2) law's requirement that unpatented claim holders annually perform a minimal amount of work to develop their mineral claims; and (3) amendments needed to bring the law's provisions more in line with existing national natural resource policies.
Recommendations
Matter for Congressional Consideration
| Matter | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| Congress should amend the Mining Law of 1872 to require claim holders to pay the federal government an annual holding fee in place of the existing annual work requirement. In considering such an amendment, Congress should bear in mind the relationship of the annual work requirement to the patent provision of the Mining Law of 1872. |
Closed – Not Implemented
|
The 1993 Interior appropriations bill requires a holding fee for 1993 and 1994. Further, the President's fiscal year 1994 budget extends the holding fee through 1998. |
| Congress should amend the Mining Law of 1872 to eliminate the patenting of both hardrock minerals and the land required to mine them. This change would not only permit the land to remain under federal ownership, it would also provide the government the opportunity in the future to collect revenues for the hardrock minerals extracted. |
Closed – Not Implemented
|
Bills have been introduced in the Senate (S. 257) and the House (H.R. 322) that will end patenting the land and minerals. On June 29, 1994, the conference began considering these bills. The conference did not report out a bill. |
| If Congress decides not to eliminate the patenting provision, it should either: (1) permit claim holders to patent only the minerals, thereby retaining the land in federal ownership; or (2) require that the federal government obtain fair-market value for the lands patented. Under either option, the claim holder still should be required to pay an annual holding fee. |
Closed – Not Implemented
|
Bills have been introduced in the House (H.R. 322) that propose to end patenting and in the Senate (S. 775) that would allow patenting only the mineral, after payment of fair market value. A conference began considering these bills in June 1994. The conference did not report out a bill. |
Full Report
Office of Public Affairs
Topics
Fair market valueLand managementLand use lawMineral bearing landsMineral resourcesMineral rightsMining legislationPatentsPublic landsReal property acquisition