COMMON VARIETIES ACT FRIDAY, JUNE 18, 1965 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MINERALS, MATERIALS, AND FUELS Butte, Mont. The Subcommittee on Minerals, Materials, and Fuels of the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in the Silver Bow County Courthouse at Butte, Mont., Senator Ernest Gruening presiding. Present: Senators Ernest Gruening, of Alaska, and Lee Metcalf, of Montana. Also present: Stewart French, chief counsel. Senator GRUENING. The hearing will come to order. Gentlemen, first, let me express the appreciation of the Subcommittee on Minerals, Materials, and Fuels to Judge John B. McClernan for the use of this courtroom. We hope that our hearing will live up to the high standards of justice which Judge McClernan is known to dispense. We will do our best to live up to that standard. This is an open, public hearing by the Minerals, Materials, and Fuels Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs on Public Law 167 of the 84th Congress. This law is popularly known by the various titles of "The Common Varieties Act," or "Materials Act," or "Multiple Use Act." Although this is a Minerals, Materials, and Fuels Subcommittee hearing and I am chairman of that subcommittee in the Senatewe have the good fortune to have with us the able junior Senator from Montana, Lee Metcalf, who, of course, needs no introduction to a Montana group. As a result of the vagaries of selection of subcommittee membership, Senator Metcalf does not happen to be on the Minerals, Materials, and Fuels Subcommittee, although he is a member of the full committee. Lee Metcalf is recognized throughout Congress, and, indeed, throughout the executive branch as well, as an expert on mining law, and is a Senator keenly aware of, and deeply sympathetic toward, the problems of mining men-particularly those of the small, independent miner. In fact, it was Lee Metcalf himself who was the sparkplug that brought about these hearings. On my left is Stewart French, the chief counsel of the Interior Committee, an attorney who is extremely knowledgeable, also, in mining matters. As some of you may know, last year Lee Metcalf urged me to hold these hearings and in all good faith I agreed to do so. However, the civil rights legislation required our continued presence in Washington, and then there were the national party political conventions and election campaign in which both Senator Metcalf and I took an active part. 1 Our hearing today is on the law itself, Public Law 167, 84th Congress, which is found, as amended, in title 30 of the United States Code, beginning with section 601, and with its administration and operation under the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service. I might say, parenthetically, that I am a member of the Committee on Government Operations and chairman of one of its subcommittees. This is the unit of the Senate that looks into the administration of the laws and the operations of the executive branch in general. So it might be said that I am wearing two hats here today, or that we have two strings to our bow, so to speak. Since the provisions of the law, as well as its interpretation and administration by the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture, of which the National Forest Service is a part, are before us as a subject for inquiry and exploration, I will direct that the text of Public Law 167, as amended, and the regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior for its administration, be printed in these hearings as an appendix. These administrative guidelines are found in title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 185. Also, I will direct that Senator Clinton Anderson's report on the bill, Senate bill 1713, of the 84th Congress, which is the substance of the measure that became the law, also be printed in the appendix. This is Senate Report No. 554, 84th Congress, filed on June 15, 1955. Senator Anderson's report explains the reasons for enactment of Public Law 167, and gives some of the background for the legislation. I would like to quote, briefly, from this report. Senator Anderson states that the purpose of the bill is ***to permit multiple use of the surface re ources of our public lands, to provide for their more efficient administration, and to amend the mining laws to curtail abuses of those laws by a few individuals who usually are not miners. At the same time, the measure faithfully safeguards all of the rights and interests of bona fide prospectors and mine operators. In no way would it deprive them of rights and means for development of the mineral resources of the public lands of the United States under the historic principles of free enterprise and private ownership of the present mining laws. I would like to emphasize those last two sentences by reading them over again. They are * * * *** the measure faithfully safeguards all of the rights and interests of bona fide prospectors and mine operators. In no way would it deprive them of rights and means for development of the mineral resources of the public lands of the United States under the historic principles of free enterprise and private ownership of the present mining laws. Unfortunately, from the correspondence I have seen, this clear intent of Congress in enacting Public Law 167 has at times apparently been somewhat more honored in the breach than in the observance. However, it should be pointed out that the report goes on to say that ***the committee has received an increasing number of reports of growing abuses of the mining laws by persons whose primary interest in filing claims was not mining. The most serious of these abuses is that relating to mining claims in national forests whereby claimants have been able to obtain a color of title to hundreds of thousands of acres of valuable timber belonging to the people of the United States at virtually no cost to themselves and subject to little control, in fact, by the Forest Service. Evidence was before the committee that the mining laws had been used as a pretext to obtain land for running commercial enterprises, beer halls and honky-tonks, and other activities that had nothing whatever to do with mining. It was to correct these abuses that Public Law 167 was enacted. But I cannot forbear pointing out that the so-called Common Varieties Act has given rise to an uncommon variety of problems. It is this subcommittee's hope that these hearings may lay the groundwork for the solution to some of those problems. Now, as to the mechanics of today's proceedings. I am going to ask Senator Lee Metcalf, as the prime mover of these hearings, to make any remarks he cares to make and then to present Mr. William Maloney, the secretary-manager of the Mining Association of Montana, who has arranged the proposed agenda and order of witnesses. At this point I want to express our thanks and appreciation to Mr. William Maloney and to the Mining Association. First, however, I would like to announce that at the specific request of the chairman of the full Interior Committee, Senator Jackson of Washington, the Forest Service and the Department of the Interior have sent observers to these hearings, both from Washington and from the regional headquarters. These observers will report back to their respective executive branches, and at a later date the committee will discuss the problems you present here and their possible solution with the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior. I am going to call the names of these observers and ask each of them to stand and perhaps to remain standing until their names have all been called. First is Mr. Reynolds G. Florance, Director, Division of Legislative Reporting and Liaison of the Forest Service. Then, there is Mr. Robert Manchester, Chief of the Branch of Mining of the Bureau of Land Management. Mr. Morris Hankins, who is the regional attorney of the Forest Service. Mr. William L. Shafer, Bureau of Land Management. Mr. Thomas J. Cavanaugh, Associate Solicitor for Public Lands, Department of the Interior. I would like to suggest that if these gentlemen desire, at the end of the hearing, after we have called on the other witnesses, to make any comments or have any questions to ask, we would be very happy to hear them. The whole purpose of this hearing is to elicit the maximum amount of information. We do not want to foreclose anybody, we want to make these hearings just as informal and useful as possible. So if these observers, in addition to observing, would also like to make any comments or ask any questions, we will be very happy to hear them. Now, we will have the pleasure of hearing from the very able junior Senator from Montana, Senator Lee Metcalf, who is truly the friend of domestic mining in Montana and everywhere throughout our country. Senator Metcalf. STATEMENT OF HON. LEE METCALF, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA Senator METCALF. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Whether it is on a personal visit or on Senate business, it is always good, of course, to be back home in Montana and to be in Butte. Today it is my pleas ure to be here with one of the most distinguished Senators in the U.S. Senate Senator Gruening from Alaska. Senator Mansfield and I are proud that he is here in our home State. Senator Gruening, as he has told you, is the chairman of the Interior and Insular Affairs Subcommittee on Minerals, Materials, and Fuels. Senator Gruening graduated from Harvard University and medical school but gave up the practice of medicine to enter journalism. Between 1912 and 1933, except for his service with the Field Artillery Corps in 1918, he applied himself to the newspaper profession, working his way up from reporter to editor. He worked on the New York Tribune, the Nation, and the New York Post. In 1933 he was appointed adviser to the U.S. delegation to the 70th Inter-American Conference at Montevideo. He later served as the Director of the Division of Territories and Island Possessions of the Department of the Interior and administrator of the Puerto Rico reconstruction. He was appointed Governor of Alaska in 1939. Twice reappointed, he served until 1953. He first came to the Senate in 1957 as a Senator-elect on a provisional basis under the Alaska-Tennessee plan. He was elected to the Senate in November 1958. Upon admission of Alaska as a State in January of 1959 he drew the 4-year term from that State. He was reelected in 1962, and he tells me that when he tossed with Senator Bartlett as to whom would be the senior Senator-because they came in at exactly the same time-he lost the toss, so he is junior Senator from Alaska. Senator Gruening is here to hear testimony on Public Law 167. It has been brought to the attention of the Committee of Interior and Insular Affairs that the law has been discriminatory in some of its operations and enforcement. Public Law 167 was originally written to prevent abuse and misuse of national resources as in the famous, or maybe we should say infamous, Al Sarena mining case, where, under the guise of the mining laws, a company removed $100,000 worth of timber from the public land. They never removed an ounce of minerals. Colliers magazine the late, defunct Colliers-had a series of articles on mining law abuses. There was talk all over America about cases that Senator Gruening has spoken of, where honky-tonks and bars and so forth were built on "mining claims." I was a member of the House Interior Committee at the time and we tried to write a law that would correct these abuses. It was meant to protect the public, but if, through interpretation or administration, it is hurting the small mining operator, it ought to be changed. I, too, am a member of the Government Operations Committee that Senator Gruening talked about. It is the special responsibility of that committee to maintain legislative oversight over legislation, its application and its enforcement. But it is also the responsibility of the legislative committees themselves, every time that they enact legislation, to keep track of the way that their laws are carried out. In almost the decade which has elapsed since the enactment of Public Law 167, a good deal of experience has been had with the law. It is our purpose today to hear your experience with the law, its administration and its enforcement; to hear whether or not we have safeguarded the interests of bona fide miners and prospectors as we hoped to do and said we were going to do in Senator Anderson's report. Later, in Washington, the responsible agencies will testify before this subcommittee and such changes, modifications, or improvements, either amendments or changes in regulations that need to be attempted, will be discussed and negotiated. Bill Maloney, my old friend from the Mining Council, as secretary of the Montana Mining Association, has done a superb job in organizing this hearing and getting a list of witnesses before us, so, from now on, Bill, it is your hearing, your opportunity and the opportunity of members of your association, and we want you to proceed in the way you think best and I now turn this back to the chairman. Senator GRUENING. Mr. Maloney, I echo the sentiments expressed by our able junior Senator from Montana. You have done a magnificent job in organizing this hearing, and we would like to call on you now to present the witnesses, and, incidentally, to make any remarks that you think are appropriate; you may make them at this time or later. Mr. Maloney. STATEMENT OF W. G. MALONEY, SECRETARY-MANAGER, MINING ASSOCIATION OF MONTANA Mr. MALONEY. My name is Mr. W. G. Maloney and I am secretarymanager of the Mining Association of Montana. I have been, for the past 9 years in this position. Senator GRUENING. I would like to suggest, as I have said to you before, that we want to make this as relaxed and as informal as you wish. Mr. MALONEY. Chairman Gruening, of the Senate Subcommittee on Minerals, Materials, and Fuels, and Senator Metcalf: I wish to take this opportunity to thank you and the committee on behalf of the Mining Association of Montana for holding this hearing here in Montana to consider problems of the industry under Public Law 167, referred to as the "common variety" and "Multiple-Use Act" of 1955. Under the interpretations of this law by the Bureau of Land Management confusion has been brought about by their various interpretations. The industry is operating under a tremendous burden because of the uncertainty of the status of the claims which are located with a view toward future patents. Expert witnesses to follow will go more into detail concerning the legal and the geological aspects of these areas of confusion. I might also add that these two witnesses-one, an attorney, the other, one of the outstanding geologists of the West-will also be available to answer questions and will follow me, respectively, in their talks. Widespread dissatisfaction with the definitions of the law has even extended to officials within the Department of Interior. For example in a letter written by an Assistant Secretary in the Department of |