2C- Indian Hill and Sierra City were the applicable districts for our areas in the early stages (1850's) of the gold rush. During that time period there were around 500 mining districts spread across the Motherlode.
This is an important point you have made fowledup.
Mining districts are historically and practically limited by the type and extent of mineral deposits. Miners form districts to govern themselves. Mining districts never were intended to represent all miners in a political area, instead they represent one type of mining in one type of environment. I can assure you that the Bauxite, Barite and Asbestos miners have no interest in being governed by gold miners. I can also assure you that a "district" as large as the Jefferson has never been, and never will be, supported by the majority of miners within it's boundaries.
In my view mining districts today have a primary role as establishing best practices mining within the district. The methods used for the disseminated gold deposits in the Carlin Trend have nothing in common with dredging in California, hardrock mining in Oregon or gem mining in Nevada.
A real mining district can make regulations about mining methods in their domain. A small district may have very different soil, rock and deposit conditions than another district in the next valley over. That is why mining districts are historically small and numerous. There is no such thing as "one size fits all" in mining.
IF a district is organized with the participation of the majority of miners and IF that district creates self regulation concerning proper mining methods that are unique to the mining conditions in that district and based on expert local knowledge THEN the mining district can present expert testimony that no government agency can counter. That is where the power of mining districts will be found today.
Bringing the expert knowledge of local mining methods to the table can bring you wins. The dredging ban could have easily been overcome by expert testimony from small local districts that have already established proper dredging procedures for their district. Sadly the only "mining districts" today are political organizations more interested in building membership than self governance of mining practice on a local level.
I believe mining districts can be a powerful tool for miners. I can not support any non-local effort to create mining districts. I see no use in another organization wishing to rule miners. The mineral grant is an individual grant that is earned one claim at a time. ALL the important mining cases have been won by individual miners - not organizations. Mining districts are intended to be self regulating and for the benefit of the individual miner - not the mining district.
Heavy Pans