BC Government - Mines Permit Fees

1. Should government increase fees to increase staffing?
-No, additional fees to add staff acts as a disincentive to improve government efficiency and reduce paperwork. We are enabling and encouraging red tape by increasing fees to pay for more. This government should be looking for ways to decrease fees and beaurocracy, not finance expansion of it.

2. Should government consider an optional fee to expedite applications?
-Yes, if the application is outside the normal course of approval process, no if it falls within all conventional guidelines

3. Do the proposed class of fees make sense?
No, because it rolls the hobby prospector up with the commercial miner. The hobby prospectors, like fisherman, are willing to pay for a licence and fee to pursue their interest. They are limited to hand panning etc and thus have no potential for commercial returns. Like the sport fisherman they do it for the love of the pursuit, and the hope of a catch, but are realistic that their effort is unlikely to even pay back costs let alone have profit. But they contribute significantly to the local economy through tourism, travel and outdoor activities. The fees for this hand mining should be restricted to a category called artisinal or speculative and limited to $100.

4. Same as question 3, small and single claims for placer gold mining should be fixed at $100 as they have little chance at commercial extraction.

5. I dont know enough already about what oversight is provided, but I would encourage self policing and self disclosure for small operations with significant penalties for violations.

This whole fee discussion seems disproportionately punitive to the small operator who is not writing off expenses against income, is not incorporated and is not expected to generate royalties or taxable income to the crown. There should be a category for speculative or artisanal panners who, if they became remarkably lucky, could graduate to the "commercial" category and require increased permits.