2015 Minerals and Mining Regulatory Reform Act--A Clear Path Respecting Mining Rights

[2cmorau]

The general public is not aware of the problems the mining industry faces today. The remedy is the “2015 Minerals and Mining Regulatory Reform Act—A Clear Path Respecting Mining Rights,” written by miners, for miners, insuring regulatory certainty

We appreciate the efforts of Congressman Mark Amodei with his bill, the “National Strategic and Critical Minerals Production Act of 2015.” It is a step in the right direction, though it does not adequately address all the severe problems we face. The miners propose a more comprehensive bill, the “2015 Minerals and Mining Regulatory Reform Act—A Clear Path Respecting Mining Rights.”


http://www.icmj.com/news-detail.php?id=306&keywords=2015_Minerals_and_Mining_Regulatory_Reform_Act--A_Clear_Path_Respecting_Mining_Rights

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[Clay Diggins]

MMAC? - not even with a 10 foot pole.

Just another layer of regulation:

SECTION 105: THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF MINERALS & MINING
(USDMM) AND THE MINERALS AND MINING ADVISORY COUNCIL (MMAC)

The United States Department of Minerals & Mining (USDMM) A new section 1748d is created:*

“(a) Each federal mining claimant shall be entitled to nominate one person
from the mining districts to serve a four-year term on a Minerals & Mining Advisory
Council (MMAC). Persons shall be eligible for application if they own an interest in a
federal mining claim and should have not less than five (5) years experience in a private
sector mining business. MMAC administrators shall be voted in by the mining claimants.
The mining claimants through MMAC shall appoint from the list of all persons
nominated into the MMAC Administrative Districts no more than 15 members to
constitute the United States Department of Minerals & Mining (USDMM), who shall be
hired as full-time federal employees, and shall also provide no fewer than fifteen (15)
full-time staff to serve at the pleasure of the USDMM.” *

_________________________________________________________

PLP hasn't won a single mining case in their entire history. Now they are writing federal law?

This alone will kill every small miner:

“(q) ‘mine operator’ means any person or entity exercising rights of or
through the holder of a federal mining claim.

So every club member and prospector becomes a "mine operator" subject to the MSHA regulations? You would need two safety permits to pan. No children allowed on site, subject to inspection and fine at any time. Really - do you want that?

We can do better than this folks. Don't let these people ram more layers of bureaucracy and regulation down your throats. They don't have a clue what they are doing.

Heavy Pans

 

[fowledup]

NO, NO, NO! Sorry 2c ya know I love ya brother but no way in L. The only folks that want more regulation are those that won't respect or follow what exists now! As far as MMAC goes I don't want to be right and I don't want the opportunity to say I told ya so. But I fear that won't be the case.

 

[Bill_saf]

MMac IMOP are posers greenies trying to look like miners! No way No how, shape or form. I will not fall for it. that would be like handing the killer the stright razoer to cut your own throat

Bill

 

[M.E.G.]

http://www.jeffersonminingdistrict.com/MMAC_Offer_Rejection_Order.pdf

 

[russau]

M.E.G its been awhile since hearing from you! Good to see you up-n-about!

 

[2cmorau]

yeah yeah, I know, how do we get them to listen, i see after reading this they are giving up a lot of rights
thing is, i can't say much more without getting political

 

[2cmorau]

LMAO, see it's good to share, nobody ever died from embarrassment
so how do we put the brakes on MMAC, and why is ICMJ, PLP, WMA all support this nonsense?

i do know why wma and MMac are in bed together, but confussed about the others

 

[goldenIrishman]

The last thing we need is even more layers of governmental authority over us. Miners by their nature are an independent lot and everything I've seen on these proposals looks like yet another attempt to pull the wool over our eyes.

Like the old saying goes... If something seems to good to be true, it usually is. As Clay stated earlier "Not with a 10 foot pole" or in my case 9 foot 6 Czechoslovakian.

Another though here... If we are not allowed to bring children on any sight, how in the L do we get the future generation interested in mining?

 

[fowledup]

2015 Minerals and Mining Regulatory Reform Act--A Clear Path Respecting Minin...

No embarrassment at all, Many bit initially, we all have hopes of a miracle fix. Not to speak for them, but last I knew WMA was not endorsing them. The ICMJ is running reprints of MMAC's self written info pieces.

 

[fowledup]

2015 Minerals and Mining Regulatory Reform Act--A Clear Path Respecting Minin...

The problem is we have the answer but not the commitment to bring it to fruition. Mining districts as already directed by the existing laws are the answer. Finding enough people to commit to forming and maintaining them is a whole nuther animal. Forming a new agency/bureaucracy will compound the problem and take away more of your rights. We can't get the existing agencies to act the way they are supposed and directed by law. what would enforce a new one to be any different?

 

[Clay Diggins]

LMAO, see it's good to share, nobody ever died from embarrassment
so how do we put the brakes on MMAC, and why is ICMJ, PLP, WMA all support this nonsense?

i do know why wma and MMac are in bed together, but confussed about the others

No shame in sharing this stuff 2cmorau. It's good to get this stuff out in the open and get discussions going.

I'm a little surprised that Scott at the ICMJ is part of this project. He's a smart, honest guy who grew up in mining. I'm sure he will share his thoughts over time. He is the owner and editor of the Mining Journal so it's not like he can't get his message out if he wants to.

I don't think we have to worry too much about this bill getting any traction in Congress. They haven't found anyone to sponsor the bill in all these months and the mining lobby will be lining up against this as being a power grab that will just produce more regulation and layers of bureaucracy. Other than the writers of this nonsense I don't see any support in the industry.

I'm with fowledup. Mining districts are a potential part of the solution to the small miners problems. I've been studying that possibility for many years.

I don't think the MMAC or Jefferson or any of their spinoffs really understand what a mining district is. The whole country, 5,000 square miles or even 400 square miles is a stupid large mining district. Historically mining districts were much smaller. For good reason.

A mining district can't just declare the miners in their borders to be their members. It works the other way around. It's up to the miners to create the district by common agreement of all the miners. If you have ever tried to organize miners you know getting more than a couple of dozen miners in an area to agree on anything is just not gonna happen.

Heavy Pans

 

[2cmorau]

after reading, seems that MMAC wants to rewrtie this bill HR1937
https://www.opencongress.org/bill/hr1937-114/show
what say you?

 

[Hoser John]

 

[fowledup]

2015 Minerals and Mining Regulatory Reform Act--A Clear Path Respecting Minin...

Well I stand corrected, 2c just sent me the link showing that WMA had reprinted the MMAC info piece on their site and newsletter as well. So Not sure if that is a show of support or not but it doesn't change my mind about it. As I said There is already a constitutionally granted method in place and has been for over a hundred years that was well thought out, made sense, with a tried and proven track record. Hopefully Scott or one if the guys from WMA will come on and clarify their position. Cuz it didn't make sense in January and it still doesn't in August. Thanks 2c