A quiz @ the Genesis of off-limits sites:

[Tom_in_CA]

C'mon Kemper, let's keep our cool !

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[kayakpat]

someone just showing up and MDing, is more likely to stir up a authority that someone showing up to ask permission. First of all, the MD will be looked at as responsible, and if and damage is left behind , they know who to account for it. it is the one's that take liberties with property not theirs that don't care enough to respect anything..

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Hi kyakpat. You say:

... don't care enough to respect anything..

Notice the implication of this is: "M'ding = disrespectful". What's dis-respectful about it ? I consider md'ing to be respectful and non-harmful. In fact, don't you too often get folks coming up to you and asking "what's the best thing you've ever found" and "where can I buy one of those?", etc.... Why have the image of "everyone hates md'ing" all the time? On the contrary, most people find it interesting, etc....

I don't doubt that perhaps some other md'rs are not so neat, but .... that is THEIRS to get whipped for. Not me and those of us who are careful and leave no trace.

I know what you are trying to get at, and I sympathize with it. That is, that maybe you'll agree that if it's not dis-allowed, then presto, no technical need to get permission, any-more-so than flying frisbees requires permission. And yes: I agree that sometimes passerbys can get their panties in a wad (because they think you'll harm earthworms or whatever). And yes, on the surface, it *seems* that the solution to this possibility, is to go in ahead of time getting the blessings of a pencil-pusher right ? If it were all that simple, I'd agree with you. But alas, .... there's been cases of "no one cared TILL you asked". So as much as you'd like to think getting permission (where it wasn't disallowed to begin with) is the solution, yet .... that's got its own set of problems

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Tom there are also cases where people go in and ask and get permission... Researching the law is best, but that doesn't mean asking is wrong either.... Asking about state parks is only way you will know, especially in states that have a coast line....

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

Tom there are also cases where people go in and ask and get permission.....

Correct. And if I'm understanding you correctly, the outcome of a "yes" (ie.: permission), therefore reinforces the implication that: "therefore it was good that I asked". And because the mere fact someone tells you "yes", implies, therefore, that asking was required . Lest how else could they have said "yes", if their permission hadn't been needed? Is that the take-away that results from what you're saying here, right ?

And I'll even go further than that: If they'd said "no", then THAT TOO would have LIKEWISE been proof that it was "good that you asked". Why? Because a) otherwise you could have been arrested, right ? and b) the mere fact of a "no" answer, is proof positive that asking was necessary (lest how could they answer "no", if their say-so wasn't needed?).

Thus either way: with a "yes" or with a "no", each answer only reinforces that it's an essential question. Is this the right take-away from your statement ?

.... Researching the law is best, but that doesn't mean asking is wrong either......

Glad you see that looking up for oneself is a viable alternative And no, asking isn't "wrong" per se, it's just that it risks ending up in arbitrary whimsical "opinions", of the mood of the person you're asking (who perhaps never gave the matter a moment's thought prior to that).

.... Asking about state parks is only way you will know, especially in states that have a coast line....

I don't understand that. Why can't persons look up their state park's rules for themselves ?

 

[cudamark]

So cutting through tree roots wouldn't be damaging? Search this forum and you will find dozens of comments on what people use to hack through those troublesome roots. Sprewel Bluff is home to one of the last Montane Longleaf Pine forests, this is the main thing they are trying to protect. Regardless of that, detecting is off limits in ALL GA state parks.

No more than mowing the grass or trimming the bushes. Cutting a few small surface roots won't hurt anything.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

No more than mowing the grass or trimming the bushes. Cutting a few small surface roots won't hurt anything.

Depends on whom you ask. If you ask long enough, and hard enough, of enough arborists, gardeners, lawyers, cops, etc.... You might in fact find one that thinks your cutting roots is horrible. And therefore merits a "no".

Therefore it's your ethical duty to go seek out that person, and placate him. Hurry! Go do the right thing. Be sure to have a shovel-in-hand when you ask, lest he not get the proper mental image of your question. Afterall, you wouldn't want to "mince words" (using euphamisms) by asking to "metal detect". You must be sure to include words like "hole", "dig", "cut", "shovel", "treasure" and "indian bone". Ok, mark, go make us proud !

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Tom people travel, not everyone has a smartphone to research when away from home.

By the way Tom, I have repeatedly said a person can research the laws their selves for years.....My object is the constant attacks on people who ask or who say asking is wrong.....

What someone does personally is their own business, advocating on TreasureNet to ignore the laws and or regulations by local authorizes is mods business. We will protect the reputation and integrity of TreasureNet.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

TH'r, granted. Not only might they not have access to a computer while on-the-road, but there may also be podunk little towns and counties, where the muni codes and such are simply not "on-line", to begin with. Right?

So in those cases, if the person feels there is no other way than to talk to a live person, then how about this compromise:

Instead of asking "Hi, can I metal detect?", he can ask "Hi, where can I avail myself of the printed rules for this park [or "this city", etc...] ? Then he would be pointed in that direction, plus he will have satisfied his need to talk to a live person.

Is this a good compromise ?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Tom it isn't our right to tell people how to ask, more importantly isn't our right to tell them how NOT to ask...

These recent barrage of permission threads are becoming just like the cemetery threads.....They are causing arguments and hard feelings among members....

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I was under the impression that we were discussing issues not telling anyone what to do. If it is being labeled as telling,that is a different story. I do not argue are have hard feelings in relation to the other members. While those that go ask to detect when they can legally detect without asking are not true treasure hunters in my opinion, it does not mean I am telling them what to do. Maybe they want to go into the park during the day loaded for bear and feel better having "permission" . I don't see them very interested in discussing the legal aspect of the issues here in the Legal issues forum. They seem more interested in moral issues that can't be based on the issues because the legal issues take a back seat to the moral ones here. Maybe that's why they get their feelings hurt.

These recent barrage of permission threads are becoming just like the cemetery threads.....They are causing arguments and hard feelings among members....

And again....

 

[Sluice Willis]

These recent barrage of permission threads are becoming just like the cemetery threads.....They are causing arguments and hard feelings among members....

But that's the point of those threads, along with a few others of a similar nature. Some people purposely seek out and instigate arguments over trivial things on the internet. Cemetery threads? Anybody that advocates detecting cemeteries is purposely trying to cause an argument, and making the hobby look bad in the process.

 

[Sluice Willis]

No more than mowing the grass or trimming the bushes. Cutting a few small surface roots won't hurt anything.

Sounds like you may want to raise the mower deck just a a tad bit!

"Cutting a few small surface roots won't hurt anything" I agree but I don't make the rules, the GADNR did in this case. To an environmentalist and archaeologist you're killing a tree to destroy history, possibly even a historic tree at that! In the case of Sprewell Bluff it's not only off limits because it's a state park, but it's a protected area where they manage several species of protected plants and animals. And in all reality, it's actually private property leased to the state.

 

[kayakpat]

It is amazing that people think they can do what they want on property that is not theirs, and argue like they do, it is disrespectful to the owner and the authority responsible with caring for it. It seems some people parents neither taught them the meaning of "NO" or to respect other people, especially in places of authority. Even George Washington showed his men the meaning of authority, He had some shot other he put down with the army,, so nothings changed. Disrespect toward the use of their property is truly the main reason more and more private property owners closing their properity for anything, and you will also find that is why more and more restrictions are showing up on public lands too. You try to blame others ie" Archies or whatever, chances are nobody at you local park has never even seen or talked with one. I see the bans on drones starting to show up, the drone operators say we are doing no harm, but they are going to be restricted if not out right banned in places. The county park here had RC owners go to the parks authority for permission, damn if they not only got permission but their own designated area just for RC use. The truth is the bans in MDing came from metal detectors actions themselves and not a conversation on permission.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

It is amazing that people think they can do what they want on property that is not theirs, and argue like they do, it is disrespectful to the owner and the authority responsible with caring for it. It seems some people parents neither taught them the meaning of "NO" or to respect other people, especially in places of authority....

Kayakpat, are you referring to private property here ? Or public property ? If you mean private property, I totally agree with you. But if you mean public property (park, beach, etc..) where no rule forbids md'ing, then tell me: What's "disrespectful" about md'ing ? It's as if your premise is: "md'ing = damage, destruction, mayhem, disrespect", etc.... Why's that? If it's so horrible, why'd you get into it as a hobby ?

As for the RC control plane thing, that's interesting that you brought that up as an analogy. Watch/read the next post:

 

[Tom_in_CA]

kayakpat brought up RC (drones?) as an example of the positive outcome of asking permission. He cites a case where hobbyists in that field not only got a "yes", but also got a designated area. Ok, point duly noted But it reminded me of another RC example, that .... well ..... didn't quite turn out that way:

There was an md'r, who had chimed in on a topic/thread similar to this. It just so happened that his other hobby was RC control model planes. And there was a loose-nit group of 8 or 10 hobbyists in his town, that would meet regularly at a certain large field in their city, to fly their RC planes. This went on for a year or two without any issues, problems, etc... Apparently the vacant lot/field they were using, was some sort of city property, that was undeveloped, un-used, etc... Perfect place to fly their planes, eh ?

However, one day, at their weekly meetings, one of the members of this RC club began to lament the "rules" and "laws" he'd read of elsewhere (rumors that get on forums for their own hobbyists, much like we md'rs have our own forums, magazines, etc...). So he suggested to his fellow RC hobbyists, that they should become a member of a larger organization umbrella, which would then cover them in insurance, and so forth. Ie.: "march down to the city and make sure it's ok, show them the proof of insurance, and make sure we have permission, so that we don't get in any trouble".

This struck the other members of this RC club as strange, because up-til-then, it had never occured to any of them, that there was any problem to begin with ! Nonethless, the skittish one suggesting this, had stories of apparent hassles elsehwhere that hobbyists were facing. And ... afterall .... you "can't be too safe", or "afterall, we don't want to get in any trouble", etc...

So guess what happened? The club (or this self-appointed rep. anyhow), went to the city proud with their plaque of membership into a nation-wide affiliation of clubs, asking permission, making sure it was ok, etc... The issue went back and forth between multiple desks, the city council, a city lawyer, etc... No doubt images of risks like "planes falling someone", or "spilled gas on the grass" or ..... who knows ? Eventually the city got back to this loose-nit group with the answer: "no".

So the other members were naturally ... uh ....a little torqued at this one fellow. Yes he meant well, but .... do you see? This became a clear cut case of "no one cared TILL you asked" routine. Thus that little club lost their flying spot.

 

[kayakpat]

Yes public property also, if you haven't spoken to the authority, how do you know the rules and that it is legal. You

are making assumptions. ALOT about public property in general, I see no law or sign saying you are allowed MDing

either. Nor a law saying there has to be a sign to be illegal. and Nobody giving you the authority to determine the

uses or access for the property SO no use people getting mad, changes nothing,,, your actions will determine the

future of any activity now and in the future, Do what you do but accept the consequences.. as population increases

more and more will try to access these resources and the actions of these people will determine it's future . If you

want guarentees OWN IT. I am tired of repeating property rights, you will find it out the hard way, this is the

way it has been for hundreds of years

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

And if control of one of the RC planes is lost and it hits someone the city is liable and open for a law suit. So point is what, be quiet and wait until there is accident and while police are investigating someone ends up being charged with trespassing on city property and or a lawsuit against the city who then drags the RC people in.

 

[slink]

While those that go ask to detect when they can legally detect without asking are not true treasure hunters in my opinion

Another feeable attempt to belittle and provoke a reaction.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

Yes public property also, if you haven't spoken to the authority, how do you know the rules and that it is legal. You are making assumptions.. ...

The laws/rules can't be looked up for oneself ? No assumptions being made, is there, if/when a person has availed himself of the law, eh ?

... I see no law or sign saying you are allowed MDing either. Nor a law saying there has to be a sign to be illegal. ...

an activity need not have an express "allowance", in order to do it, right? Ie.: there need not be a sign saying "metal detecting allowed here", does there? In the same way there need not be an express allowance for you to fly kites, skip stones on the pond, etc.. On the contrary, if it's not dis-allowed, then ... it's not dis-allowed. Eh ?

... your actions will determine the future of any activity now and in the future, Do what you do but accept the consequences. ...

I do not consider there to be "consequences" for detecting places that have nothing that prohibits it. And actually, what can have "consequences" on the future places open to detecting, is ironically not those who don't ask (where it's not dis-allowed). But ironically, it's often those that are ASKING that can sometimes bring about places closed. So ironically, it can be the opposite of what you are saying.