30 U.S.C. § 22

Lands open to purchase by citizens

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 30 CasesGoogle Scholar

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.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 233 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1897–2026 · leading case: California Coastal Comm'n v. Granite Rock Co., 480 U.S. 572 (1987).
California Coastal Comm'n v. Granite Rock Co., 480 U.S. 572 (1987). · cites it 6× “91 , as amended, 30 U. S. C. § 22 et seq., a private citizen may enter federal lands to explore for mineral deposits.”
United States v. Locke, 471 U.S. 84 (1985). · cites it 4× “The general mining laws, 30 U. S. C. § 22 et seq., still in effect today, allow United States citizens to go onto unappropriated, unreserved public land to prospect for and develop certain minerals.”
People v. Rinehart, 377 P.3d 818 (Cal. 2016). · cites it 8× “Because, according to Rinehart, Congress had granted prospectors the right to mine on federal land free from material interference (see 30 U.S.C. §§ 22 , 612(b)), these provisions should be preempted as an obstacle to Congress’s purposes and objectives.”
Lujan v. Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n, 497 U.S. 871 (1990). · cites it 2× “§2319, 30 U. S. C. § 22 et seq. (Mining Law of 1872); 41 Stat.”
BedRoc Ltd., LLC v. United States, 541 U.S. 176 (2004). · cites it 2× “§ 2319, 30 U. S. C. § 22 . Then, as now, the General Mining Act provided that "all valuable mineral deposits in lands belonging to the United States .”
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Usfws, 33 F.4th 1202 (9th Cir. 2022). · cites it 7× “” 30 U.S.C. § 22 . A valid unpatented claim gives the miner the right to “occupy” the claim and to mine the minerals free of charge.”
Joshua Bohmker v. State of Oregon, 903 F.3d 1029 (9th Cir. 2018). · cites it 5× “30 U.S.C. § 22 (emphasis added). Under this Act, prospectors could acquire unpatented mining claims by discovering valuable mineral resources on federal lands, marking the location of their claims and recording their claims in accordance with state law: Rights to mineral lands,…”
Watt v. W. Nuclear, Inc., 462 U.S. 36 (1983). · cites it 4× “" 30 U. S. C. § 22 . After a claim has been located, the entryman obtains from the United States the right to exclusive possession of "all the surface included within the lines of [his] locatio[n]" and the right to extract minerals lying beneath the surface.”
Andrus v. Shell Oil Co., 446 U.S. 657 (1980). · cites it 4× “The general mining law of 1872, 30 U. S. C. § 22 et seq., provides that citizens may enter and explore the public domain, and search for minerals; if they discover "valuable mineral deposits," they may obtain title to the land on which such deposits are located.”
Salazar v. Buono, 559 U.S. 700 (2010). · cites it 2× “2319, 30 U. S. C. §22 ; Andrus v. Shell Oil Co.”
Alyeska Pipeline Serv. Co. v. Anderson, 629 P.2d 512 (Alaska 1981). · cites it 10× “Alyeska contested the validity of Anderson's mining claim, contending that the claim did not encompass a "valuable mineral deposit" as required by 30 U.S.C.A. § 22 ; Alyeska argued that absent a valid mining claim, Anderson had no right to damages on either a tort or a *517…”
Karuk Tribe v. United States Forest Serv., 681 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “30 U.S.C. § 22 . The Organic Administration Act of 1897 extended the Mining Law to the National Forest system but authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to regulate mining activities in the National Forests to protect the forest lands from destruction and depredation.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.