http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills info@washingtonwatch.com http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1 http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#46957 1866 Mineral Estate Trust Act...Understanding its immense power and importance to all America(ns). Take a listen to this mp3 link: http://beyondthegrassyknoll.com/audio/anthony2.mp3 (Please be patient, it may take a few moments to load) This property is still obtainable by all citizens of the United States . It is a property so exclusively held by the qualifier, that the Grantor, the United States , can not even come against. And without your consent, it is Not taxable, Not regulable and No zoning ordinance can be applied to it. This property is private in the truest meaning. The interviewed, Mister Anthony, may be reached by email: ooglah@budget.net place in the subject line as shown here '?Attention Hal' or at this #: 541 471 7081. If he is not there to answer, please leave a message with time and number to return your call. J.J.... 46957@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 26 Nov 2008 23:22:35 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#44195 im a small scale miner and i object the thought of anyone changing or modifying the 1872 mining laws! you legislators raped our social security funds and NEVER pay it back, now you want to RAPE or constitutional right to mine! what are you thinking????... 44195@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 29 Sep 2008 07:43:42 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#38941 Im a recreational miner/rockhounder, and It sure is funny how much garbage I have picked up that has been left behind by other campers, Hunters and even Hikers. They all looooove the environment but cant pick up their ciggarette butts, beer cans, or shotgun shells. Funny isnt ? We dig a little hole sift through some dirt and pick up your garbage and we are the bad guys...I find that funny..... 38941@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 12 Jul 2008 05:27:09 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#36562 Wasn't this introduced by a Democrat to a Democrat congress? What do you expect!!... 36562@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 08 Jun 2008 09:52:49 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#33937 Mike, you are typical of the ignorant people who supports bills that damage the US economy. There are no subsidies to mining corps. The exploration costs come directly from their profits and it takes millions of dollars to find, explore and develope even a small mining operation. You love to hunt but tell me. Just where the hell do you think the metals such as iron in the barrel and action, the brass in the cartridges and the chemicals in the gun powder cam from... MINING!!!!! Maybe the US government should finance the exploration for minerals and take a 25% net profit royalty after metals sales. Then the Amecicans like you would understand what mining production costs truely are and how you gain from the current laws.... 33937@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 05 May 2008 20:17:12 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#33375 This is a great bill. Hard rock mining on public lands is so consistently and permanently damaging to the landscape that the claim that there is no impact from mining is a mendacious joke. As a hunter and NRA member, I'd throw my support wholly behind this bill, in the interest of preserving good recreational use habitat for outdoorsmen. As a taxpayer, I am pleased at the prospect that finally the US Taxpayer-Landowner will stop having to subsidize those Communists who currently take public assets without compensating the public.... 33375@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:04:04 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#31049 For those against this bill, please be sure to sign the "Support The 1872 Minig Law" petition here. http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/miningpolitics/signatures.html... 31049@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:34:38 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30824 Congressman Rahall and this bills supporters have shown their willingness to destroy one of the last basic industries in the United States. This while placing our society's mineral availability into the hands of multi-national corporations as happened with the oil industry. We can not stand for this. I urge all in the industry to contact your U.S. Senators and urge them to oppose further movement of this bill in the senate this year. I then ask all to contact Senator John McCain's presidential campaign office to let him know that to garner the support of the mining industry he must not support changes to the current mining laws. Sincerely, Glynn A Burkhardt President Arizona Small Mine Operators Association... 30824@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:28:28 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30823 The Arizona Small Mine Operators Association strongly opposes H.R. 2262 and views it as a direct attack on the mining industry in America by those who would sell the American people out to remain in power and influence. Ths proposed legislation would make America dependent on foreign sources for our industrial and precious metals supplies. next... 30823@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:28:02 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30290 From a letter OCR recently submitted to Oregon Senator Smith, and for wider distribution. Senator Gordon Smith Security Plaza 1175 E. Main St. Suite 2D Medford, Oregon 97504 Ron Gibson P.O. Box 226 Selma, Oregon 97538 January 18, 2008 Dear Senator Smith,... 30290@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:09:33 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30289 As representative and Vice President of the members of the Southern Oregon Mining Association and by our members we have become aware of House Resolution 2262, the "Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2007", H.R. 2262, which recently passed the House of the Congress of the United States. We find this Resolution of great concern, potentially very harmful, and constituting a takings if passing into law. We understand the only remaining obstacle to its passage into law merely awaits Senate action. We feel the threat H.R, 2262 poses is of compelling interest and of dire consequence to us all. Our concern began in asking the question, Can a grantor lawfully executing and memorializing a free grant of property return at some future time to condition, control, regulate or retake the property subject of the grant, dispossessing the grantee? Our findings are that a grantor may not come at some future time to steal back the property subject of a grant.... 30289@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:09:07 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30288 In researching an answer we found the courts long recognizing the Act of July 26, 1866, and May 10, 1872 as amended, "present grant" "revolutionizing the whole land policy of the government, abdicating in the name of the nation its authority and jurisdiction over the richest mineral possession on the face of God's earth,”A1 conveyed the mineral estate of the United States completely, an absolute gift of all the mineral wealth without condition and without limitation to all citizens.A2 It has long-since been settled that the federal system treats the mineral estate as a proprietor holding paramount title B1 to its public domain and not as an attribute of sovereignty. B2,C1 Standing in no different relation to the sovereignty of the state than that of any other property which is subject to barter and sale,B2... 30288@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:08:39 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30287 [t]he minerals do not differ from the great mass of property, the ownership of which may be in the United States or in individuals, without affecting in any respect the political jurisdiction of the stated it has as well been settled with that fixed and definite legislative policy granting its mineral lands the Proprietor, Congress, in the name of the United States, forever abandoned the idea of exacting royalties, instead giving free license to all citizens," the notion of royalty in the product of the mines was forever relinquished.B3 Moreover, the only reservation with the granting of the mineral estate was the mode, the regulation by which a claimant would formalize his intention and to perfect purchase by patent. Being this reservation expressed in the praesentio grantD1 of July 26, 1866, and May 10, 1872 as amended was regulation only for the purpose of administration the formal location and purchase of the public domain,... 30287@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:08:19 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30286 that the Act did not purport to be a mining code and its object was not to regulate mining as such,A1 in that, [t]he system does not seek to regulate or control mines or mining within the lands held in private ownership, except such only as are acquired directly from the government under the mining laws, and then only forming a muniment of the locator's or purchaser's title, that the grant gave the locator the right to get a patent for his "mine," we believe this otherwise unconditional grant foreclosed the grantor's continuing disposition of the property itself, either in exploitation or right of acquisition of the grantee's mineral property. We can find no authority providing a grantor may come at some future time to steal back the property subject of a grant whether or not in tangible possession of a grantee. We fully appreciate the immense implication of such a finding long-since lost to memory, today requiring resurrection and enforcement.... 30286@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:07:55 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30285 that the Act did not purport to be a mining code and its object was not to regulate mining as such,A1 in that, [t]he system does not seek to regulate or control mines or mining within the lands held in private ownership, except such only as are acquired directly from the government under the mining laws, and then only forming a muniment of the locator's or purchaser's title, that the grant gave the locator the right to get a patent for his "mine," we believe this otherwise unconditional grant foreclosed the grantor's continuing disposition of the property itself, either in exploitation or right of acquisition of the grantee's mineral property. We can find no authority providing a grantor may come at some future time to steal back the property subject of a grant whether or not in tangible possession of a grantee. We fully appreciate the immense implication of such a finding long-since lost to memory, today requiring resurrection and enforcement.... 30285@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:07:04 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30283 We believe, as a matter of law, the Resolution approved by the House is without lawful authority in the first instance. We believe, with good cause, these facts divest the Congress of the United States, the grantor of the proprietary mineral holding, of any authority to "amend", condition, control, regulate or retake the mineral estate, long-since, residing in the intention of a grantee. Despite the question upon the lawfulness of the Resolution, we nonetheless vigorously oppose H.R. 2262 as passed by the House, now heading to the Senate and otherwise or by any means, primarily, though not singularly, for the reason thus far stated. So that we might act in accord, we are writing this day to inquire if you are aware of the threat H.R. 2262 poses? And if you are, we ask what your position is concerning H.R. 2262 and the response, if any, you plan to make to it?... 30283@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:06:43 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#30282 Sincerely, ~signature~ Ron Gibson Vice President of the Southern Oregon Mining Association. Phone-541-592.3893 Email-dritecrg@hotmail.com A1) The Encyclopedia Americana, 1919, Volume M Mining Laws of the United States, Page 184. A2) Page 185. B 1) Handbook of America Mining Law, Geo. P Costigan, Jr„ 1908. Pg. 11. B2) Page 10, Moore v. Smaw 17 Cal. 199 79 Am. Dec. 123 B3) Page 15, Ivanhoe Mining Co. v. Consolidated Min. Co., 102 U.S. 167. 173, 26 L.Ed. 126, B4) Page 19, Section 3 C I ) American Law Relating To Mines And Mineral Land within the Public Land States and Territories and Governing The Acquisition and Enjoyment of Mining Rights in Lands of the Public Domain, Curtis H. Lindley, of the San Fransisco Bar Volume I, l897, Section 80. C2) Section 5S, Page 62. C3) Section 8l, Page 84. D1) Missouri, K. & T.R. Co. v. Kansas Pac. R. Co. 97 U.S. 491 (1878). CC: Congressman Greg Waldon... 30282@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:06:15 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#29574 It seems that pro-mining individuals are very knowledgeable about current mining laws and environmental controls, but refuse to acknowledge or choose to ignore the REALITY that MINING DOES DAMAGE our ENVIRONMENT. At the same time, while environmentalists are extremely aware of the impact mining operations have around the world, they similarly refuse to acknowledge the impact that drastic legeslation will have on the price of mined goods. Perhaps a middle ground should be supported by both sides before one or the other so quickly (and probably without factual support) rejects the opposing argument. Anyone who denies that mining operations have significant environmental impact should visit a few abandon mines around the country, which by the way do exist. Environmentalists should exercise their right to free speach and debate, but perhaps you should leave your car at home and make this one a walking tour...stringent mining laws WILL AFFECT the price of goods greatly.... 29574@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:30:41 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#28962 I strongly oppose this Bill. We need to get the word out for everyone we know to help us in this fight.Spread the word.... 28962@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:01:23 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#27348 I am a senior Canadian mineral exploration consulting geologist and also a junior mining company executive and have had over 35 years experience in the business mostly in Canada. I have been following comments on this bill by the National Mining Association of the USA and agrfee with them. No professional in the mining business wishes to rape and pillage the land...either in their own countries or in third world countries. Exploration and mining can be done using enviromentally-sound methods and be profitable to citizens through normal business taxation without resorting to super royalties. Americans, please listen to your mining associations with an unbiased ear and try not to think of them as being like the Hearst character on the tv series "Deadwood".. Fiction is fiction and reality is reality. You really need self-efficency in metal production and you do not have to sacrifice normal taxation or the enviroment.... 27348@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:41:37 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#26188 I hope this bill dies quickly in the senate in 2008. As a small time pick and shovel prospector and recreational miner as my father was before me, I sure can't afford anymore fees and goverment interference than I now already have on my mining claims. I am a good steward of the land and I don't see where I cause any harm. Too bad the old timers didn't patent when they had the chance as my claims go back to 1889 but they just didn't want to be put on the tax rolls. The minerals are there and I'm well aware that it has always been the little guy that has located them. I want to continue this recreational pastime into my GOLDen years. Please don't kill me off prematurely. Put this bill down a deep shaft and blast it closed. It is a very bad idea.... 26188@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 03 Jan 2008 13:08:16 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#25865 Once again environmental rules to take away our freedoms from us. I strongly vote no on this bill... 25865@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 30 Dec 2007 13:01:29 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#24407 The USA has some of the most stringent hard rock mining environmental rules in the world. If this bill goes into effect, it will destroy the hard rock mining industry in this country. All you tree huggers can say "hooray we saved the earth!" Here's what you don't want to believe: This bill, if passed, will not decrease global demand for metals. Instead, it will force countries like China to expand their mining industry, causing extensive damage to their environment under lax regulations. Forcing them to pillage their land to provide people like you with goods is called imperialism. I am a student in mining engineering and I am proud of the stewardship mining companies in this country show to the environment.... 24407@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:11:43 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#24048 Gaja, Give up your house/apt., your auto, all mass transportation, most medical supplies and medicine as well as your pet/s. Grow all your own food using only wooden tools carved with flint. Hunt meat with a bow and butcher an animal every 3rd or 4th day as refridgeratiuon would no be available. Then speak like an ass when it comes to mining. If it's not grown it must be mined, AND the harvesting is done with what? Metal tools and machinery. What happened to you people that you are so ignorant as to where your living standard comes from. Did your mothers give you shaken infant syndrom or did an alien suck your brains out when you were a babe and replace it with wool? Elitists like you would cause the starvation of millions of people world wide just so you could have the perception that you are saving your earth goddess Gaia.... 24048@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Sat, 01 Dec 2007 19:26:13 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_2262.html#23542 Taking arms against those in goverment who need to be taken out would need major public support, really the public in the most part do not even know so it would not work. like one day between soaps 100 000 000 women learn that a rebel arms is taking over a major goverment office, those criminals they'll think.... 23542@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:13:15 EST