Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

sponsored by
Business


Discretion urged for agents in public land use

WASHINGTON -- Since mining is competing with recreation and other activities on federal land, government agents should be given more authority to determine how public land should be used, a former acting director of the Bureau of Land Management told a Senate panel on Thursday.

"I think what's missing is the discretion for field managers to balance the multiple uses," Michael Dombeck told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. "For some reason, under the 1872 Mining Law, the perception is that hard-rock mining is under its own rubric."


Most Popular Stories
  • Fraud with Portent
  • Expect to pay at Nugget's new tower
  • Debt-ridden casino operators told to expect pressure
  • REAL ESTATE: Las Vegas home prices stabilize as threat of foreclosure flood wanes
  • GAMING COMPANY EARNINGS: Station drops $455.4 million
  • THE STRIP: License approved for Aria
  • GLOBAL GAMING EXPO: Recession over? Don't bet on it
  • REAL ESTATE: Short sales on the rise
  • Foreclosure wave continues
  • Union wants insiders to help pull Station from bankruptcy




  • Dombeck served as BLM's acting director from 1994 to 1997. His view was not shared by the current deputy director of BLM or by mining industry officials who argued federal oversight already is sufficient.

    "The regulations provide a sound framework to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands during hard-rock mining and reclamation," said Henri Bisson, BLM's deputy director.

    In November, the House voted 244-166 for a bill that would impose an 8 percent royalty on the gross revenues of new hard-rock mines and a 4 percent royalty on mines already operating on federal land.

    Hard-rock mining trails only gambling as Nevada's leading industry. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., have declared the House bill dead.

    The Nevada senators are working with the Senate committee's chairman, Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., and ranking Republican Pete Domenici, also of New Mexico, on a Senate version of mining reform that has yet to be introduced.

    The hearing Thursday was the committee's second on mining reform since September, and the differing opinions have underscored the difficulty of crafting a bill that would be acceptable to both the House and the Senate.

    The United States depends on imports from other countries for all of 17 mineral commodities and for more than half of 45 mineral commodities, according to William Cobb, who is vice president of environmental services at Freeport McMoran Mining Co. in Phoenix.

    "We have a great resource in the United States. What we need is certainty (for) access, certainty for tenure to be able to develop these (mining) projects," said Cobb, who testified on behalf of the National Mining Association.

    Alan Bernholtz, mayor of Crested Butte, Colo., said state and local governments need broader authority to protect their water supplies from mining development.

    Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, acknowledged that the 1872 Mining Law is biased in favor of land development.

    Berhnoltz and other mining reform advocates want to change the bias, Craig said.

    "(They) want to give a federal agency the right to deny (mining permits on federal land)," Craig said.

    Contact Stephens Washington Bureau reporter Tony Batt at tbatt@stephensmedia.com or (202) 783-1760.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 1 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Copperhead wrote on January 25, 2008 10:31 AM: Mr. Cobb is correct, we can't ignore stragegic mineral deposits based on subjective envrionmental whims. People like Mr. Alan Bernholtz are not interested in "protecting his water supply". State and federal laws already do that.

    He is interested in subjectively disallowing mining based on his and a few others' "great vision" for the area surrounding Crested Butte. Sorry pal, overpriced artsy-fartsy resort towns can be located anwhere.....economic ore deposits are where they are, you can't move them. Besides, Crested Butte was founded based on mining and always will be a mining town in my eyes.

    In the future, if we allow people like Mr. Bernholtz to deside where we should allow mining, there will eventually be none; and we can suffer with mineral importing the same way we currently suffer with oil importing; only it will likely be WAY worse.