Last Post 01 Jan 2016 12:31 PM by  D M TURNEY
MMAC
 3 Replies
Sort:
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Author Messages
Joseph Loyd
Buzzard
Buzzard
Posts:553



--
17 Jun 2015 02:52 PM

    Has anyone else seen anything else on this .

    (http://www.mineralsandmin...advisorycouncil.org) -

    They are working for the rights of all outdoors activity.

    There is a rightup in Vallyprospectors news letter from Aprial on it .

    D M TURNEY
    Greenhorn
    Greenhorn
    Posts:14



    --
    31 Dec 2015 08:30 AM
    Yes I have. I am an Administrator in Alaska. Please read this and if you want more information contact me at mact@gmapa.com and I will get it to you by email. Mac



    The Power of Mining Districts

    The 1872 Mining Act was Congressional acceptance that miners can make needful federal rules and regulations governing their activities on federally managed lands. Specifically codified under 30 U.S.C. sections 22 and 28. Section 22 states:

    “Except as otherwise provided, all valuable mineral deposits in lands belonging to the United States, both surveyed and unsurveyed, shall be free and open to exploration and purchase, and the lands in which they are found to occupation and purchase, by citizens of the United States and those who have declared their intention to become such, under regulations prescribed by law, and according to the local customs or rules of miners in the several mining districts, so far as the same are applicable and not inconsistent with the laws of the United States.”

    Essentially, this is by the miners, for the miners. This grant from Congress enabled miners in their respective mining districts to regulate their own pursuits subject to the laws of the United States. Most of the previous rules and regulation by miners in their respective mining districts were reabsorbed into state law. With the miners choosing to organize the traditional mining districts, they shall have federal supremacy over conflicting state and federal law upon federal lands.

    1) The Mining Districts shall override conflicting state and federal laws that stand as obstacles to the full Congressional objective of the 1970 National Minerals, Mining, Reclamation and Policy Act (30 U.S.C. section 21a) and the 1955 Multiple Surface Use Act (30 U.S.C. 612 sections a - b).
    2) The Mining Districts shall intervene upon the miner’s written request to resolve conflicts that unreasonably interfere with the miners right to extract, as defined in U.S. v. Shoemaker. Said in another way the miners will police themselves, and the Mining Districts will have the first right to mitigate any claim disputes before going to the Interior Board of Land Appeals or any other federal or state court.
    3) The Mining Districts shall be the arbiter of reasonable environmental and safety regulation(s) (see footnote1)
    4) And most importantly, the Mining Districts can open the federal land to Multiple – Use by the Public on principles of inclusion rather than the present day exclusions carried out by the extremist environmental lobby groups that work inside and outside all the other various agencies. (See footnote )
    Jefferson on Good Government

    “A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits” Thomas Jefferson, 1801

    Miners, in their respective Mining Districts have the ability to duly elect representatives to make rules and regulations governing their mining activities (customs of miners) in contrast to executive agencies of today that answer to the whims of the President and the bureaucracy. These duly elected representatives will have a proposed term of 4 years such that they will be accountable to their constituents – the individual miner, just as it worked in the 1800’s. And quite successfully I might add.

    Once the organized Mining Districts take shape, the Minerals and Mining Advisory Council (MMAC) can and will submit to Congress for a budget for the administrative functions and clarifications of the Mining District’s relationship with the other federal and state agencies. The MMAC website will have a resource section which explains what your fundamental rights are as miners. The claim owners in those districts elect all the miners that represent the districts and upper tiers - nobody is appointed.

    Presently, MMAC has developed a draft bill called the Minerals & Mining Regulatory Reform Act – A Clear Path Respecting Mining Rights and handed it to the Congressional House Subcommittee on Natural Resources. This preliminary notice from MMAC to Congress is open for more discussion but covers and fixes many of the problems the mining industry face that has hit most miners especially hard. There are severe ambiguities in law that need to be clarified that stand as obstacles to the accomplishment of the National Minerals, Mining and Reclamation Policy Act of 1970 (codified under 30 U.S.C. 21a).

    The MMAC will need the active participation by every miner, every mining organization, every claim holder and any other group that shares the multiple – use principles of our public lands. The tasks before us are for Americans that strive for accountability, self-determination, and for laws that are for and by the people. It could be said that miners can shine the light on the proper role of government in the darkest of tunnels.

    The Mineral & Mining Advisory Council website is:
    www.mmacusa.org


    Ben Franklin once was asked to comment about our newly formed government of the United States of America and he said: “It’s a republic, madam – if you can keep it”.
    Now I ask the miners of today, we have the Mining Districts - can we keep and run them?

    Clark Pearson
    Northern Director, PLP


    D M TURNEY
    Greenhorn
    Greenhorn
    Posts:14



    --
    31 Dec 2015 09:01 AM
    Miners Making the Rules and Regulations?
    How would you like it if you could make the actual rules and regulations governing your own business? A
    dream, right? Well, the existing Federal Mining Law gives a claim holder this ability in the context of organized
    Mining Districts. Why are all the multitude of local, State and Federal agencies regulating miners? The Mining
    districts have been neglecting their duties under Federal Mining law (30 U.S.C. section 22). This is why the
    Minerals and Mining Advisory Council (MMAC) was formed as a project under Public Lands for the People
    (PLP) to organize the traditionally and legally recorded Mining Districts within the United States and encouraging
    the miners holding mining claims to step to the plate, legally, and take charge of their future. Presently MMAC
    has partnered with the Coal Miners Union, the National Mining Association, PLP, and the National Association of
    Mining Districts. MMAC is a combined effort by numerous concerned miners, mine owners, geologists, mining
    engineers, retired politicians, retired military personnel, and mining attorneys that are gravely concerned about the
    future security of our nation and its increased dependence on foreign sources of mined materials. The utter failure
    of the present Congress and all the federal and state agencies that are actively shuttering the mining industry
    through onerous and prohibitive regulation has resulted in the exact opposite of the 1970 National Minerals Policy
    Act intent.
    MMAC has been asked by the Congressional House Subcommittee on Natural Resources to put together a
    comprehensive solution to our industry’s plight. MMAC’s solution integrates within this draft Bill named the
    “Minerals & Mining Regulatory Reform Act – A Clear Path Respecting Mining Rights” true accountability
    providing:
     Regulatory certainty of 30 day approval mitigation deadline
     Regulatory certainty of exemptions to the Clean Water Acts
     Regulatory certainty of exemptions to the Mine Safety and Health Administration
     Eliminates duplicative regulation by State and local governments
     Eliminates duplicative federal agency permits and the permit system
     Provides for Equal Access to Justice Act relief
     Provides for cost effective due process appeal relief for unreasonable regulation
     Reasonable regulatory best management standards and mitigation formation procedures
     Clear environmental standing requirements to eliminate frivolous environmental lawsuits
    MMAC’s objectives are advancing methodically and are being well received by the Bureau of Land Management
    where MMAC has recognized their needed role in this process and this new path. The www.mmacusa.org
    website has been documenting our progress as well as the ICMJ in writing and publishing updates and has
    actively been participating in conferences as our new path takes shape to accommodate the industries concerns.
    Now, here is where your help is needed. MMAC will be entering into a negotiated contract with retired
    Congressman Buck McKeon (past chairman of the armed services committee) to help get this bill passed through
    Congress under and tied to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for budget cycle 2016 since mined
    materials are of National Security Interests. Congressman Buck McKeon wrote the 2012 NDAA bill and still has
    tremendous pull with existing members in Congress to get it done so that it will be veto proof. MMAC is using
    strategic political advice from a political advisor and retired military expert volunteering within MMAC. The
    timing of doing this now is critical! PLP’s efforts in this MMAC project is to enter into this contract ASAP with
    McKeon Group LLC’s specialist team with a goal to raise $150,000. This is a historic sweeping piece of
    legislation that will help all miners and those that cater to the industry. PLP is a 501(c)(3) and your donation for
    this grand endeavor will be tax deductible. Be part of the solution today and make a healthy donation! Please
    make your check payable to: PLP and add “for MMAC Bill” on the memo part of the check and send to: Public
    Lands for the People Inc, 2029 Ventura Blvd., Ste 47-466 Woodland Hills, CA 91364, or donate online to
    www.publiclandsforthepeople.org for the MMAC bill.
    D M TURNEY
    Greenhorn
    Greenhorn
    Posts:14



    --
    01 Jan 2016 12:31 PM
    Get involved - the land (and water) belongs to all of us: Mac

    FYI

    The MMAC bill covers this problem for miners in their Mining District.

    Clark



    -----Forwarded Message-----
    From: Rachel Thomas
    Sent: Dec 31, 2015 7:42 AM
    To: Rachel Thomas
    Subject: Supreme Court must give landowners right to challenge Corps



    http://www.wallowa.com/wc...t-to-challenge-corps



    Supreme Court must give landowners right to challenge Corps

    Published: December 29, 2015 3:48PM

    The Supreme Court must give landowners the right to challenge deterimination that their property is subject to the Clean Water Act.



    The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to take a case that will determine whether landowners can challenge in court a regulatory determination that their properties are subject to the Clean Water Act.

    The government contends, and is backed by the 9th and 5th U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, that a regulatory determination by the Corps of Engineers that a property is subject to Clean Water Act restrictions is merely advisory in nature, and is not a final agency decision subject to litigation.

    The 8th Circuit reached the opposite conclusion last year, setting up a clear conflict to be settled by the Supreme Court.

    For farmers, ranchers and other landowners, the stakes are high. Regulatory requirements and restrictions under the act are expensive and can severely limit the owner’s property rights. Property owners should have the right to challenge a jurisdictional determination.

    The government says landowners who disagree with a jurisdictional determination can go ahead with a planned project without a permit and then fight the determination when the government brings an enforcement action.

    Or, the landowner can apply for the necessary permits. If the permit is denied or the landowner disagrees with the government’s findings, the landowner can file suit.

    Neither of these are practical options.

    A landowner would be foolish to expend capital and proceed without a permit if the Corps of Engineers has determined jurisdiction, whether that ruling is a final determination or merely advisory.

    Having determined a landowner needs a permit, by whatever means, the Corps will certainly follow with an enforcement action if a landowner proceeds. Win or lose, the landowner will be saddled with the expense of defending his action. And should he lose, the government can pile on ruinous fines and penalties, and perhaps criminal charges.

    Should the landowner acquiesce to the Corps’ determination, he submits to a costly, time-consuming process. If the permit is denied, or there is an issue with the terms, the litigating landowner walks into court having already conceded that the Corps has jurisdiction.

    The Corps may consider its determinations advisory in nature, but the same can be said of a rattlesnake shaking its tail. Either are ignored only at great peril.

    The rattlesnake’s warning can be appreciated for its honesty, while the Corps’ is veiled by semantics. Having been warned, the landowner will certainly feel the sting of the Corps’ strike.

    The Corps’ determinations are final by any standard of common sense. As such, they should be allowed to be challenged in court without the landowner first being placed in legal or financial jeopardy.

    We are confidant the high court will agree.
    You are not authorized to post a reply.