The laws surrounding mining claims were first codified by the Mining Act of 1872 and updated in 1977. The cost of filing and maintaining claims is minimal about $100 a year in labor and improvements per claim (20 acres) for claims on federally controlled lands. Oil and gas leases on the other hand, are for a fixed period of time, usually 10 years. At the end of that time, if there is not substantial exploration activities or production, the leases revert back to the federal government. These problems all revert to the 1872 Act.
The BLM is also legally bound to encourage development. It's all outdated.
It is obviously not a rich deposit or it would have been developed much earlier. I suspect you are right that Ascot is interested in the U.S. Treasury. It should be subjected to the Environmental Impact Process with an economic analysis. They may have a legitimate claim for compensation. I am very uneasy about a federal taking. The Constitution's Fifth Amendment provides protection from this process.
Yes. The takings issue is important. I don’t know whether the terms of the lease stipulate that mining only is allowed with federal approval snd that the claim holder assumesvall risk in that regard. Tthese claims are decades old and long preceded the 20th environmental movement. Then again, I can’t believe they confer a guarantee to mine. It’s a complex question that will make the lawyers happy if it comes to that point.
The laws surrounding mining claims were first codified by the Mining Act of 1872 and updated in 1977. The cost of filing and maintaining claims is minimal about $100 a year in labor and improvements per claim (20 acres) for claims on federally controlled lands. Oil and gas leases on the other hand, are for a fixed period of time, usually 10 years. At the end of that time, if there is not substantial exploration activities or production, the leases revert back to the federal government. These problems all revert to the 1872 Act.
The BLM is also legally bound to encourage development. It's all outdated.
It is obviously not a rich deposit or it would have been developed much earlier. I suspect you are right that Ascot is interested in the U.S. Treasury. It should be subjected to the Environmental Impact Process with an economic analysis. They may have a legitimate claim for compensation. I am very uneasy about a federal taking. The Constitution's Fifth Amendment provides protection from this process.
Yes. The takings issue is important. I don’t know whether the terms of the lease stipulate that mining only is allowed with federal approval snd that the claim holder assumesvall risk in that regard. Tthese claims are decades old and long preceded the 20th environmental movement. Then again, I can’t believe they confer a guarantee to mine. It’s a complex question that will make the lawyers happy if it comes to that point.