You could argue that this is actually a good. By leveraging a small processing fee per claim (225), and a small annual maintenance fee (165), the system effectively doesn't discriminate against small businesses and even individuals who want to seek their fortune mining the land.
The above fees only address the provisional stake holding, and environmental permits must be acquired before any mining commences. While the requirements to obtain EPA permission could be seen as nullifying any advantages to small business from the low prospecting fees, it's also likely that once a prospector finds minerals they could also obtain partners or funding which would help share the cost of any additional permits required.
While it's true that the state does not benefit financially from mineral extraction in the form of royalties, in many cases states are able to collect taxes from the operations of businesses involved in the mining, processing and sale of minerals, as other commenters point out.
It's conceivable that an additional layer of tariffs in the form of royalties may make mining operations more difficult for small businesses and individuals, undermining (pun intended) the intended benefits of the low barriers to entry for prospecting.
It is also possible to make a connection with how large incumbent companies often lobby for more regulations. While a seeming paradox, this behavior actually helps protect their business by introducing additional barriers to entry that help keep out startups and smaller newcomers. These added costs, while affordable for the largest of companies, are often prohibitively expensive and burdensome for would-be competitors.
This shows a paradox: regulations meant to ensure fair business and collective good can sometimes just cement monopolies.
The above fees only address the provisional stake holding, and environmental permits must be acquired before any mining commences. While the requirements to obtain EPA permission could be seen as nullifying any advantages to small business from the low prospecting fees, it's also likely that once a prospector finds minerals they could also obtain partners or funding which would help share the cost of any additional permits required.
While it's true that the state does not benefit financially from mineral extraction in the form of royalties, in many cases states are able to collect taxes from the operations of businesses involved in the mining, processing and sale of minerals, as other commenters point out.
It's conceivable that an additional layer of tariffs in the form of royalties may make mining operations more difficult for small businesses and individuals, undermining (pun intended) the intended benefits of the low barriers to entry for prospecting.
It is also possible to make a connection with how large incumbent companies often lobby for more regulations. While a seeming paradox, this behavior actually helps protect their business by introducing additional barriers to entry that help keep out startups and smaller newcomers. These added costs, while affordable for the largest of companies, are often prohibitively expensive and burdensome for would-be competitors.
This shows a paradox: regulations meant to ensure fair business and collective good can sometimes just cement monopolies.