Effect of Ownership Laws on Exploration
The nature and the progress of exploration (and development) in different countries have been more or less related to the character of the mining laws.
Where the mineral resource has passed from government control into private ownership, exploration is a matter of commercial arrangement between the explorer and the owner. There is often some lag in exploration, especially where the lands are held in considerable blocks. The owner is often not inclined, or unable, to institute effective exploration himself; and even though he is willing to offer favorable exploration terms to others, the inducement is often less attractive than on government lands. For instance, it is stated that in England, due to the many requirements of law and custom, it takes on an average eight years, and in some cases even longer, to close a coal lease after the terms have been agreed upon. The slowness of exploration and development on the great land grants in the United States, and on the tracts of the large timber companies, also illustrates the retarding effect of private ownership. It is partly this situation that is making governments increasingly careful about parting with mineral ownership, and that is leading to the introduction of more or less coercive measures, either to regain control or to make it easier for the public to explore and develop minerals on privately owned lands. Under the great land grants to railroads in the United States it is becoming increasingly difficult to secure mineral patents from the government; and there has been litigation between government and grantees, as in the case of certain oil lands of the Southern Pacific Railway. The taxation in some states of mineral rights which have been reserved by large owners is indirectly resulting in appraisal of these rights by the owners and in efforts to utilize them. As long as mineral rights were not taxed independently of surface rights, they were often reserved in selling surface rights on the mere chance that mineral might be found in the future, and thereby general exploration and development were held back.
In the United States, minerals on the public domain have been open to exploration and acquirement with minimum restrictions, except for the considerable areas later withdrawn from entry. After long delay a part of these withdrawn lands are again open to private exploration, but not to fee ownership. Specified minerals—coal, oil, phosphates, and potash—may be explored for, and may be leased under certain restrictions as to amount and time of development. The effect of this act on exploration is yet to be proved; but since many of the lands have now been shown to be favorable for minerals which are in great demand, there is little doubt that exploration will be resumed on a large scale. On the whole, under the federal mining laws of the United States the individual prospector has maximum leeway,—and from the standpoint of development of resources this procedure probably has been justified.
In other countries where the mineral resources are owned by the government, there is in most cases considerable restriction, through licenses and other regulative measures, upon the activities of prospectors. This restriction, together with the fact that it is usually not possible to secure title to the land, but only to secure rights through rental or leasing, is to some extent a deterring influence on the penniless prospector. It does not follow that under these conditions exploration and development are absent. The charges imposed are light, and in the early stages require comparatively small contributions as evidence of good faith. It is to be remembered that exploration has become concentrated more and more into the hands of persons financially able to meet such conditions. Exploration is passing from the highly hazardous stage of individual effort into a systematic business with calculable returns.