Interior Dept. shutting down mining in 10 states

Posted by ewv 8 years, 6 months ago to Politics
195 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

From the Congressional House Natural Resources Committee. This action by an Obama political appointee, the Secretary of the Interior, shows the importance of which party is in the White House regardless of what you think of the president himself. Democrats since Clinton-I have appointed radical viros to run the government.

According to Mark Levin there are almost 4,000 political appointees assigned by the president and those he appoints to do the radical appointing. That is in addition to those they hire to be entrenched in the protected civil service. It is also in addition to Federal judges, about 40% of which have now been appointed by Obama. Another eight years of this means a nearly complete loss of control over how the Federal government functions for what political purposes, regardless of what Congress does or what new laws are passed making it worse.


USGS Study Reveals Extensive Impacts of Obama Administration’s War on Mineral Development

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 7, 2016
CONTACT: Parish Braden, Elise Daniel or Molly Block (202) 226-9019

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Secretary of the Interior (DOI) Sally Jewell is developing controversial plans to cordon off approximately 10 million acres of federal lands located in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming from mineral development. The withdrawals are one plank of the Obama administration's broader regulatory scheme to create a de-facto Endangered Species Act listing for the sage grouse. Earlier this week, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) released an 800-page assessment of mineral potential within each state subject to potential future withdrawals.

House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT) issued the following statement:

“This assessment shows significant negative impacts for western states if these withdrawals proceed. But let’s not miss the forest for the trees. Despite successful species conservation efforts at the state level, and a finding last year that listing the bird under the Endangered Species Act is not warranted, the Obama administration wants total regulatory control and a much more permanent trophy for litigious environmental groups. Along with oppressive land use plans covering parts of 10 states—with restrictions for all types of economic activities—these withdrawals have the potential to be even more punitive and damaging to energy producers and rural economies than an endangered finding. This is a de-facto listing and then some. USGS’s report is small snapshot of the pain to come. This issue will require continued oversight even after the Obama administration is finally gone. Blocking mineral development by another executive fiat is inexcusable, and the Committee will be sure to keep a close eye on it.

“Secretary Salazar told the states they should adopt sage grouse protection plans and they would be accepted. States have spent time and money to create good plans. The current Secretary is now reneging on that promise. The state plans work and the department’s proposal does not. The department’s proposal hurts military preparedness and military ranges in the West, a fact that has never been taken into consideration.”

Background:

At a minimum, the USGS report suggests the withdrawal of such a massive area could have significant negative impacts to nearly 1.3 million acres of moderate to high resource potential. The withdrawal could also affect over 7,000 mining claims across several Western states, including Nevada, Idaho, Utah, Oregon, Wyoming and Montana.
###


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 7.
  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    now "who continues to force their "disagreement" down your throat while demanding that you agree to shut up and not protest it?"
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    So sacrifice your principles, vote for evil, and blame someone else when it goes wrong again just as it hass for 30 years. It wasn't your fault that you didn't listen to all the warnings and did the same thing that has failed for 30 years. You can't be blamed. Great objectivist thinking.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -1
    Posted by 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Johnson is not an alternative. Trump or Clinton will be president, and the Senate and House will probably become worse. The election is for which of the two major candidates will take power and nothing will change that. Vote for what makes a difference and don't confuse that with what else should be and what it takes to make it so over time.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Gary Johnson is not going to be president. Nor will he determine the outcome between the two candidates in "20 states". The polls already take into account the fringe candidates. Claiming that a fringe candidate is "effectual" by frantically looking for some measurable effect while evading what the election is for shows the desperation of the fringers' PR stunts to get attention for themselves. It is a distant side show from publicity seekers who do not understand how politics works, what is possible, and what is required over time to change the philosophy of the culture in a way required for a civilized society.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Didn't say not to vote, just said that WS comment was not a reason to vote for either Trump or Hillary. Neither of them is worthy to serve as president. There is a better third choice, Gary Johnson.
    Your "acceptable" reason is unacceptable and irrational because it has been done repeatedly for 30 years and has failed. Electing another statist will just add to the statists power. Voting for either statist against your principles and given that doing so has failed repeatedly is irrational. The statists continue in power because people do not vote on principles and vote in fear. Then they refuse to take responsibility for the results of their irrational choices.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Voting is the mechanism for deciding who will be president. No one vote determines that; they add them up. Everyone knows that. Telling people not to vote because their one vote doesn't determine the outcome is evasive, rationalistic sophistry on behalf of wishful claimed "idealism" not part of reality.

    It is not moral idealism. Moral choices are made in reality among choices that are possible, not fantasyland with PR stunts for fringe candidates of dubious ideology and character that cannot win and who do not represent the principles needed for a free society. To call indulging in that fantasyland "idealism" is to subvert the concept and purpose of morality, divorcing it from reality.

    The moral choice is the one recognizing what the choice in an election is and acting accordingly to fight the destruction from the worst candidate when there is a difference, not to blabber about "idealism" while wandering off into fantasyland as if moral choices were divorced from reality.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Maybe next time.
    Especially if someone like Jeb Bush or Paul Ryan rises to the GOP top.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Someone is going to vote. Not voting doesn't stop that. One of them is going to be in power. The "acceptable reason" to vote is to add to those opposing the one who is worse here in reality. The voting is not a sanction, it determines which one of the two of them will in power.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Barring whose death? But leaving the country (alive) still wouldn't avoid the impact of what the US does. Under one of them that will be worse than the other.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by jabuttrick 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And he will get about 500% more votes this time than he got four years ago. How's that for a rate of change?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by jabuttrick 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    We are trying to. Will you join with us in the effort? This effort will go on beyond this election.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Flootus5 8 years, 6 months ago
    I have been at ground zero with this issue for the last two years. Myself and a partner had control of very prospective mining claims on public and private lands along the Nevada/Idaho border where there had been historic gold and silver production from 1918 - 1932.

    The mineral withdrawal with the sage grouse non-listing took our project. They issued the segregation of the public lands from the 1872 Mining Law on September 23, 2015. They had not even started the mineral inventory. The adjacent private patented mining claims are now worthless. Part of the plan.

    My little company is co-plaintiff with a couple of other private entities, nine Nevada Counties and the AG Laxalt of Nevada against the Department of the Interior, FWS, and USFS. Court testimony was provided last November (now almost a year ago), the initial request for immediate injunction was denied with an amazing display of pretzel logic. The Judge is a Harry Reid nominated, Obama appointed political hack named Miranda Du. She asked for evidence of immediate and irreparable harm. She got it from the private companies. We are dead in the water with a serious cloud on being able to raise capital for the projects. In our case we lost the ability continue the option on the mining claims. But evidence and logic is not enough to these out of control political power hungry agenda driven hacks.

    We expect the decision in December, post election of course.

    But hidden in this process is an entirely egregious re-write of the mineral examination process. Historically, when mineral examinations for what is called Valid Existing Rights are begun it is upon lands that are undergoing mineral withdrawal for a valid public purpose, i.e. Congressionally passed purposes such as military bombing ranges, dam flooded sites, and even wilderness areas.

    Congressionally passed - not just declared by the exec department bureaucrats. And for a non-listing at that.

    To survive a Mineral Examination for Valid Existing Rights, they now are saying that you must have an economically proven deposit in the ground at the time and at the balance of costs and gold prices of the day of segregation. A resource in the ground is not good. Should the gold price go up enough next year to make it economic? Should new process technology change the economics? Sorry, you are screwed and your investment of drilling, and developing the resource is lost. The mining claims are condemned and declared invalid.

    Moreover, what they are also now stipulating and turning into precedent is that the Mineral Examination for Valid Existing Rights can now be done anywhere, at anytime, and for any reason. This language is already creeping into the Plans of Operations required by the Agencies for "permission" of active mines and projects being permitted that are even outside of the ten million mineral withdrawal acres that ewv mentions in this post. Excellent post.

    The whackos have been after the 1872 Mining Law for decades. It is the last vestige of non-discretionary rights the agencies must recognize on the public lands. That irks them to no end and all the stops are being pulled out now to turn it all into a lease system. The Mining Law was passed with the objective of being able to domestically produce needed materials for national security. Imagine that. By mechanisms of privatization. The right to explore and the right to access your claims was recognized. Since 1872, they have slowly chipped away at the law, first by removing some commodities out from the Law, and then in 1992 a major castration took place. Before then, the law required that you demonstrate you expended $100 per claim in improvements. They changed that to an extortion payment straight to the government instead. So, investment and development dollars, instead of going into the ground just goes to government coffers. At the same time they put a moratorium in place on the patenting process that provided simple fee title as private land to claims that could demonstrate significant mineral value.

    Progressive socialism at its ugliest.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Me dino don't think so.
    I believe the flawed foot in mouth fathead actually loves this country.
    He promised to appoint conservative justices and that's what he will do. Trump ain't no tricky Dicky or Slick Willie.
    I'm not gonna own in any way, shape or form a facist Presidente Clintonista carrying on with the vile destructive work of a radical libtard Obamanation.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Well stated, but a unacceptable reason to vote for either of them.
    Death of both. The best thing to happen to Americans in decades.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Reality indicates that the only way to avoid both Trump and Hillary is to leave the country. Barring death, one of them will be the next President.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Reality gives better reasons to avoid both Trump and Hitlery. Ignore reality like you tried to ignore the asteroid, dino.
    Trump will give you the supreme court that lets Trump have the greatest power.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The hard reality is that your vote won't change the outcome. That being the case, would you rather cast an idealistic vote or a "lesser of two evils" one?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yeah, don't vote in fear of newly appointed Supreme Court judges who can';t wait to tear apart the Constitution.
    Me dino is also scared of rattlesnakes and drunk drivers. Fear is a survival mechanism.
    Ask any retired corrections officer (who is honest). Oh, yeah. Here I am.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Fear is a powerful motivator that the Dems and GOP masterfully use in propaganda to maintain power in spite of the obvious betrayals that the GOP and Dems have been guilty of for the past 30 years. Getting people to overcome their fears and to think rationally is a big challenge. Very few are willing to acknowledge past mistakes, take responsibility, recognize manipulative propaganda, and analyze the facts hidden behind the propaganda. Everyone is affected and few want to take any risks that might change their convenient, comfortable way of life. But the past 30 years make it clear that the same actions will result in continuing decline in liberty and destruction of the free market that makes all the comfort and convenience possible. Damned if I know how to get people to think.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    This is where I get confused in the gulch. So many comments throwing Johnson under the bus, but I don't see a better alternative. Reduce government and watch the country grow. One decent set of examples, and the party will inflate.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Sounds like the Gary Johnson platform.
    It certainly won't happen unless the Dems and the cowardly GOP congress are led by the nose to the rational policy.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo