Who owns the west?

Craig Vermillion

Jump to: Case Listings | Ownership Maps

Craig Vermillion is one of 92,125 beneficiaries of a 132-year-old federal mining law that gives away precious metals, minerals, and even the title to the land itself for less than $10 an acre. Craig Vermillion owns the minerals under an estimated 100 acres of claimed land giving Craig Vermillion more total land holdings (claims and patents) than 59.0% of all other mining interests.

Headquarters

3306 Treehaven Dr # 3
S Lake Tahoe, CA 96150

Partners Include

Deborah Baugh, Beverly Vermillion, Shilo Lexa, Tom Baugh

Information on subsidiaries and parent companies shown here represents our best estimate of corporate structure at the time of this website release, and are drawn from various publicly available sources. Please report any noted omissions and errors to EWG with a credible source or citation. Thank you.

Overview of Ownership

 ClaimsPatentsMining Plans & Notices
Number1 0 0
Estimated Acreage100 0 0
States
11111111
11111111
11111111

Find these features on a map.

Source: EWG analysis of US BLM data.

Claims

Like all U.S. claimholders, Craig Vermillion acquired ownership of precious metals and minerals on U.S. public land for about $2 per acre, and maintains possession of the claim with a small per-acre fee, typically $5 each year. Craig Vermillion pays no royalties to the federal government for metals and minerals mined from this land.

For Craig Vermillion:

Claims by State.

StateNumber of ClaimsEstimated AcreageDate(s)
California 11001995
U.S. Total 11001995

Find these features on the map.

Source: EWG analysis of US BLM data.



Source: EWG analysis of Bureau of Land Management's Land and Mineral Records 2000 (LR2000) data system. For claims, acreages are estimated based on maximum allowable size of claims. For patents, acreages are taken directly from the LR2000 database where available, and are estimated based on maximum allowable size of claim that preceded the patent where acreages are not noted in LR2000. All notices are assumed to be five acres in size, and the size of plans are calculated directly as the size of the land represented by the legal land description in the LR2000 database. The acreages we estimate through these methods would tend to overestimate the actual amount. We welcome corrections here, and would welcome a federal data management system that included the acreages involved in these important federal land transactions.