Dear HCN,
Before launching into my
diatribe, I want to thank you for the recent cover story on the
history of the Butte mines (HCN, 6/7/99). It ought to be required
reading in history classes in Montana public schools. Now, here’s
my response to the letter you printed from Battle Mountain Gold’s
corporate consigliere (HCN, 6/21/99).
Battle
Mountain Gold relies on a plain misstatement of the law in
attempting to defend Washington Sen. Slade Gorton’s rider allowing
the Crown Jewel Mine here in Washington state to proceed. Greg V.
Etter, Battle Mountain Gold’s corporate attorney, asserts that the
5-acre millsite limitation relied upon by the Department of
Interior when it denied the patent application for the Crown Jewel
“is not now and never has been the law of the United States.”
A quick glance at the law refutes this
assertion.-The provision of the United States code allowing mining
companies to patent millsites states “no location (for a millsite)
made on and after May 10, 1872, of such nonadjacent land shall
exceed five acres.” (U.S. Code Title 30, Section 42).-That
unambiguous language has been on the books since the law was signed
by President Grant in 1872.
When changes in
mining technology rendered the 5-acre millsite limitation obsolete,
it was simply ignored.-This says a lot more about the power of the
mining lobby and industry lackeys such as Sen. Gorton than it does
about what the law says.
The American taxpayer
and all those who care about this nation’s public lands owe
Secretary Bruce Babbitt and Interior Solicitor John Leshy a huge
debt of gratitude for insisting that the hardrock mining industry
accept the limitations of the 1872 Mining Law along with its
largesse.-We can only hope this will be the blow that finally
forces a change to this anachronistic and environmentally
destructive corporate
welfare.
Eric
Christensen
Bothell,
Washington
The writer
practices law in Everett,
Washington.
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Let’s obey the 1872 Mining Law.

