Mining Law, a Boon to Developers

Yesterday I was at Keystone Ski Resort, my favorite weekend escape with the exception of Vail with new snow. No, I'm not a rich snob, I'm a Front Range skiier with an extra few dollars a year to put into a season pass. I don't own property in Summit County nor, at the rate it's appreciating compared with my salary, will I ever.

Unless the Republicans manage to ram through their $50 billion rob from the poor deficit reduction package. Buried within it is a measure to revive privatization of public land based on the law Ulysses S. Grant (probably the second most corrupt president following our Shrub) signed in 1872. The law, designed to bring more people to the American west, granted mining claims to anyone who could prove there were valuable minerals under the public land (then property of the various Rocky Mountain Indian tribes but that didn't matter to Congress then). For reference, there are currently 120,000 acres of Colorado's public lands under such claims according to Colorado Public Radio's "Colorado Matters".

The measure not only ends the moratorium on new claims under the law, it takes away the provision requiring the claimer to prove there are minerals under the land. Under the new provision, anyone with such a claim could convert the land to private ownership, essentially taking it over from you and me for a couple of dollars per acre without ever having the intent to mine the land. What could possibly go wrong? Some of the million dollar condos around Keystone Resort were built using land claimed under the mining act of 1872 then sold to developers. While the claim could be disputed, the Department of the Interior never does. So now, on what was a mining claim, stand million-dollar homes and condos. This abuse was perpetrated with the restriction requiring proof of minerals intact. Now imagine what will happen once that restriction is lifted.

Who will build the first mansion on the Mount of the Holy Cross? National parks, national forests, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas and ecologically sensitive sites aren't protected under the Republican land grab. Even Allard the Torturer has enough political savvy to realize that Coloradans love their public land and is opposed to the measure. I haven't heard Salazar's position but I can't imagine he would be in favor of it. Those lands provide our fresh water, feed our streams and fish and wildlife. People hunt there, camp there, fish there, ski there. Mining is an important concern (although not at all connected with national security, regardless of what some supporters of the measure will tell you). It should not be the most important use of our land.

In 1872, the Republican administration granted the Indians' land to miners. Now the Republicans want to grant our land to developers. Their values haven't changed. Our only defense may eventually be to file land claims. Maybe then I can own some land in Summit County. I'd much rather see the measure go where it belongs and with it, the short-sighted Republicans who support it.