The measure would end a congressional ban that since 1994 has prevented mineral companies and individuals from submitting new applications for "patenting," or buying, public land, including national parks and national forests.

No such provision is contained in the Senate version of the budget measure, so the issue will be one of the items to be resolved when lawmakers return in December and try to merge the two bills.

The provision "would have huge serious impacts in southwestern Oregon, especially in the Siskiyou National Forest, although many areas on the Rogue River National Forest and (Bureau of Land Management) lands would be affected," said Barbara Ullian, conservation director for the Siskiyou Project, a conservation group in Cave Junction.

Democrats say they will fight to defeat the provision.

"With a wink and a nod, this budget proposal sells not just the minerals under these federal lands, but the pristine lands that just happen to be located near high-priced ZIP codes," said Rep. Nick Rahall of West Virginia, the senior Democrat on the House Resources Committee.

Advertisement

"We are literally looking at the prospect of McDonald’s, Wal-Marts, condos or any other type of commercial or private developments springing up smack dab within some of America’s most cherished units of the national park system,"Rahall said

Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., however, said the measure would help rural Western communities stay afloat economically after a mine closes. "Without making these lands private, reclamation laws require companies to remove everything as they leave, including roads, buildings, power plants and power lines, water and sewer lines, and more," he said.

The Resources Committee’s chairman, Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., also has pushed to allow more federal land to be sold to private interests through mining claims.

The patenting process has allowed mining sales at 19th century prices of $2.50 to $5 an acre if the land contains mineral deposits. But the House mining provision would raise the price the government asks for each acre to $1,000 or "fair market value," whichever is more. And buyers could turn around and potentially resell the property for far more than that.

Under existing law, companies have had to convince the Interior Department that the land has a valuable mineral deposit and it can be mined at a profit. Department officials say companies typically spend about $10,000 to $15,000 per acre trying to document that it is economically viable to mine there.

Once a patent is granted, the law does not let the government challenge a company if it drops its plan to mine at a site and resells the property as real estate.

Department officials estimate up to 20 million acres of public land could be sold under the proposed change in mining law. That includes up to 6 million acres where some 300,000 active mining claims are staked now.

It is unknown precisely how many acres could be sold in southwestern Oregon under the provision, but hundreds of thousands of acres would likely be affected.

The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest and the BLM Medford District manage nearly 2.7 million acres combined in Southwestern Oregon.

The provision excludes "patents" in wilderness areas and national wild and scenic areas, except where a mining claim was staked before the federal designations.

There are about 1,430 existing mining claims, ranging from 5 to 160 acres each, in Jackson and Josephine counties, said Chris Strebig, a spokesman for the BLM Oregon State Office.

"The Ashland watershed would be open to mining sales," Ullian said. "The ski area has been withdrawn, but the rest of Mount Ashland would be open to mining claims."