Denied access to woods.

[watercolor]

There's been a lot of interesting opinions on this topic. . . what's right, what's wrong, why owners may not want you to hunt on their land etc. . .

I just remembered an article I read in the paper a week or two ago. . . County and local police seized 3,000 marijuana plants growing in a wooded area of a Chicago suburbs, and by the pic's and rap-sheets of the people they arrested, I personally, would not want them finding me MD'ing in their woods.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[solaryellow]

JOE IN RENO..


I read your post about the gun incident.

That is what sparked me to write this response I got from my request.

Everyone can stop complaining, I am not new to detecting, been doing it for over 20 years.
I never had to ask for permission to hunt places, because I only chose places I knew were public.
Until this one site came along.
Following the advise of some, and the basic rules of detecting and ettiquet, I chose to write a letter and ask.
I was being nice, and my post was only to illustrate how some people react to such things.
There was no way I was going to defy this ladies request of no tresspassing.
I just think people can say no without tearing a new hole if you know what I mean.

If I am going to be nice, so should they.

As far as taking chances, who is the authority on public places?
I know for a fact that if you ask to hunt some public parks, you will get as many no answers as yes answers.
Depends who you ask.
Which brings me back to, who has the authority?
If I went through the rule books in my town, I bet somewhere in there I am banned from detecting in my own yard.

The chance I take will be minimal if sticking to known public places.
I will not ask to hunt there.

Lastly, how many here have actually been thrown in jail for accidentally detecting on private property?
Or even knowingly?

 

[renegade_7]

I guess I will be in the same boat as you, since I have the same take as you. I know I too would not be judged on how I take care of the areas I search, but on others as well. I also know about a time I wanted to search an old lot. People were always walking thier dogs there, kids hanging out there, etc. When I finally did find the owner, he said no, although he was not rude. I feel that had I just hunted it, since there were no signs forbidding it, I am sure I would have been fine. Its just like many local parks, if you keep asking, eventually someone in the city beaurocracy will say no. I still ask about parks, even though none around here post signs against it. But I go streight to the the City Administrator. If he says yes, which so far all have, then who else do I need to ask? His is the only OK I need. Yet still, some parks clean-up or maintenence men will tell me I cannot detect. I tell them "Its OK, the city admin. gave me permisson." and I continiue. If they get a local Policeman after me, which so far has not happened, again, I did get the OK. So in the eyes of many on this forum, I am right in some areas and wrong in others, but in 30 plus years of MDing, I have had no real problems at all. So follow your instincts, and if the gremlins are talking to you, you probably should listen and stand down. My two cents....

I think Tom in Ca has this one right. I personally don't ask if they havn't already made their property off limits through postings or other signage. Asking can give people time to think or worse yet, to ask around. Now if they were asking around about me personally, and were asking people who know me and have seen my MDing techniques that would be great. But we all know that's not what happens, they have already either heard a horror story or someone will tell them one, about so n so who did this or that. I'd rather take the chance of being confronted, A.) it usually just ends with a not so polite request to leave, or B.) a police officer called into inform them all they can do is tell me to leave and inform them if I return at which point I'll be cited for tresspass. I know I'll catch alot of heat for this posting but the truth is treasure hunters and MDers already have a bad rap that isn't going to go away any time soon. The reasons are two fold, I dare say that most of us are law abiding respectful good people, but even the very few bad apples have ruined that for us and it doesn't need to be the current crop of bad apples. One gent told me no because as he recounted his horror story I surmised a few things, first he wasn't speaking first hand, he was recounting a story as best he could recollect it told to him by some so n so. And that it had occured some twenty something years ago. But since it was told to him by so n so it was gospel and that was that. So I just recently decided my position on this was that my life was too short to right the wrongs of others, If I see a potentially good local and it ain't posted or otherwise made un available I'll hunt it. BTW my lawyer was consulted before I made this descision, he assured me that tresspass here is no worse than a traffic ticket, criminal tresspass was if I was caught on land that was posted or I had already been invited to leave or told it was off limits. Criminal tresspass is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $5,000 dollars and 1 year in jail. But my lawyer assures me you'd have to be a seriously habitual offender to get more than a fine. And I don't believe I'll be arrested anytime in the future, once told to leave I would and I won't go back.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

solaryellow, You ask: "As far as taking chances, who is the authority on public places" I've said this before, and I'll say it again: Anyone who boasts "I got a yes" (as if this props up the "ask even for public parks/schools" proponents), that I can go to that very official who told them "yes", and get it revoked! Yup, all I gotta do is hint at ARPA stuff, or complain that you are enriching yourself at the public's expense (afterall, that diamond ring belongs to the city, or some guy who lost it, etc...) or say I saw you digging, and I think you'll leave an open hole that some kid will slip in and thus sue the city, blah blah blah. In other words, if you get a "yes", the person granting that obviously doesn't know the laws or legal consequences well enough! But on the other hand, if you think of yourself as no different than someone flying a kite or using the swing set, I bet no one cares less! (until you ask).


Then you ask: "Lastly, how many here have actually been thrown in jail for accidentally detecting on private property?" when you use the word "accidently", that conjurs up images of places unfenced, un-posted, frequented by everyone else and their brother, cut through corner lot type stuff. To answer your question, I know of no one thrown in jail for stepping on such a spot. And I bet no one else can cite such an incident either. But no doubt, the fear will continue to be thrown out there any time this question comes up

In the coming days, I think I'm going to post some pictures of the most innocent places, and pose the question: "Do you bother yourself to go to the assessors office, or do you just hunt it?" I'll post pix of spots that even the most purists of sorts would have to admit "ah c'mon, be serious! just detect it!". Let's see if we can flush out some of the folks on this thread

 

[luvsdux]

I believe in asking permission where possible. Certainly one definitely shouldn't hunt on posted ground as you can be prosecuted for illegal trespassing. As to just going ahead and hunting on other locations in the area I live in, most often a landowner would ask you to leave if they didn't want you on the property. However, you never know when that landowner may have a shotgun and a nasty temper. Legally, in this area and I suspect in most of the country you aren't in any trouble if you leave when asked. But if you've been asked to leave previously, then get caught there again anyway, you can be arrested for illegally trespassing. However, sometimes when asking permission, the owner may point out areas that may be of interest so getting to know them sometimes pays bigger dividends than just permission. I have hunted property that hasn't seen recent use and has been let run down, without incident so far, but always have the concern about the grumpy owner with the shotgun in the back of my mind. The one thing about asking is keeping in mind that it is the right thing to do and the worst that usually would happen is being turned down. And No Trespassing/keep out signs sometimes refer to game hunters or others. Just maybe a detectorist would be granted permission if they ask. Worth a try.
HH
Bill

 

[MD Dog]

In my area alot of land is owned by utility companies like national fuel or psng. I defy any one here to identify who in their companies has authority to say definitively yes or no. Like one vice pres. told me he could say yes but that might take years to filter down to a gaurd, and at the same time some other v.p. could be telling some one else no. He was trying to say these corporations are large and ill equiped to deal with such things because it's not something anyone anticipates or something noone wants to take the time to geal with cause frankly they'll get one request like this every ten years or so.

 

[deepskyal]

Years back, I attempted to get permission to access a natural gas right-of-way. There were a couple of old foundations there but nothing else but woods and a big hill.
The gas company owned it and they said no way! It's not like I was going to dig down 30+ inches to the frost line and rupture their lines.
Nothing was posted, it was isolated, and nobody would cared.
I wouldn't even known it was the gas companies, save a gas line marker stating there was an underground line...and further up the slope, a second marker. None said no trespassing. It did say call the One Call before digging.
Just some person taking authority in their own hands and denying access for no good reason. I mean, it was woods and a hill and obviously at one time had been private property...just not anymore.

Then there was the house and property I owned that abutted a County park on 3 sides. Part was wooded,(the back 40 I liked to call it) and then the manicured acerage.
People always walked through the yard, along the woods edge, as a shortcut to the park swimming pool. Did I care...Not until the borough condemned part of my property for a right-of-way for a sewer project. Would they come now that they "owned" a right-of-way through my yard and maintain it as I had? No way...according to them...it was MY responsibility to maintain it even though they owned it, because it ran through my property. I could not stop anyone from walking the right of way because I didn't own it anymore.

Before the right-of-way, even the park would dump their tree trimmings in my woods, that I was attempting to clear and landscape. I spoke to the park manager and he told me that because the property wasn't defined, the workers would use it as public property. He did agree to have them stop but offered no remedy for all the brush that was piled up there from their past maintenance.
I ended up fencing and posting the property. No more questions on wether it was private or not.

I did learn through the court process how small governments can change laws to suit their own needs. And I also learned how they can break laws for the same purpose.
I wont get into all the federal and state laws that were broke during the construction of a line through a leach field or the constitutional laws that were violated.....

My point...it gave me a whole new view of private property rights when property is unmarked.

In my situation, my woods looked just like it was part of the parks. Who would think any different when I have a mowed area, with a weed break, before dense woods? That's the reason I never attempted to stop anyone from walking in or close to the woods. They had been doing it before I bought the house, and it was far enough from the house that I never felt threatened.

Would I flip out if someone asked me permission to do some activity on my property...of course not. Little kids losing their kites on my roof, frisbees in my yard, even trash blown in from picnics, golf balls galore.
And speaking of golfballs....the park attempted to stop golfers from practicing their strokes in the park, but couldn't. Seems one of them had a little influence and he simply said...it's not posted that you can't. They had park rules and regs posted....so...if they wanted to specifically deny an activity...it had to be posted. No open fires, no pets off leashes, etc.
And let me tell you...divits from golfers would do more damage than I could possibly do in a day of detecting.


I do believe in the MD'ers code of ethics....but I'm also not going to go through all the trouble to attempt to locate an owner of an unkempt, unposted, unfenced lot or area of woods.
If it's obvious it's private and I want to detect it bad enough, and that just hasn't happened for me because of the vast areas that can be freely detected, THEN I would ask.

But you also have to keep in mind....paranoia will get you the same negative results, sometimes bitter results, from some people, as has been experienced by some here.

What do you think of a total stranger walking up to your door? Salesman? Jahova's Witness? Some scam artist? Or someone that wants to metal detect?

I'd be suspicious if someone came to my door, even if they had a metal detector in hand, about their motives. Well, I wouldn't but...seriously, do you think everyone out there knows about this hobby? What gets more PR...the detectorist, or the home invasion criminals?

Quite possibly that woman had been burned somehow by someone that had absolutely nothing to do with detecting. So we pay the price for all societies ills.

That's why I prefer to eliminate ANY confrontation with John Q. Public.

If I'm on your property and it's not marked...well...I'm sorry...I just didn't know...I'll leave....period!

 

[teverly]

You state i ended up fencing and posting the property..
WHY?? bECAUSE YOU WERE TIRED OF PEOPLE WALKING THROUGH IT AND USING IT WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION....
But,is that not exactly what you do even if it is a wooded area out in the middle of nowhere It is not yours and a code of ethics is not supposed to be something you follow when you feel like it.
Again i say that just because someone else does it or your are afraid you will be turned down is no excuse..i assume you are not 10 yrs old and you know that if it doesnt belong to you you ask b4 you use it...
You have given a perfect example of what im talking about...you even said that if people came and asked that you did not have a problem with letting them retrieve stuff off your property.but when you got tired of it you posted it and fenced it.But not everyone feels that way and not everyone will be nice about telling you so even if you are nice in asking.That is a fact we all just have to accept.
basically what i get from all this is well i ask if i might get caught otherwise i just detect.So if that is the case then you do not follow the code of ethics and when you are caught and even if you are asked to just leave you make it worse for the rest of us in the hobby.Even if you dont believe things can be changed for the better by asking they will certainly get worse if people keep trespassing.
And i agree with you about the government abusing/bending the laws for there benefit,just because someone else does it dont make it right.
And i would be to worried about getting caught to detect worth a darn.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Teverly, I watched a TV documentary on this subject: Some people are genetically wired to be more cautious, careful, worrisome, fearful of authority, etc.... Those are normally women (but some men too) That's why generally the roles in parenting: moms fret over whether their young children might get hurt ("oh! don't run so fast! you might fall down!" etc...).

And then there are those that are fearless, bold, carefree, brave, etc.... Those are usually men - the rough-play fathers, who encourage their sons to "go gettum tiger!" don't worry about a little scrape or bruise, etc.... This lack of concern about consequences is an important factor in making good fearless soldiers, but yes, the documentary also talked about how it made for person not afraid to be criminals too (not worried about consequences).

I see all these genetically wired principles coming up right here on this thread. For example, the way you look at MD Dog's post, was through a vastly different way than I read it. Like when he says he eventually fenced his property, you read into that as ultimate proof of your point of view - that this meant he didn't like people crossing his property, and thus, we should all be concerned that someone may not like us detecting on some speck of land in the middle of nowhere. That's fine. But you failed to see this line of his: "I never attempted to stop anyone from walking in or close to the woods. They had been doing it before I bought the house, and it was far enough from the house that I never felt threatened" Do you see? He wasn't bothered if someone shortcutted to the park on his fringes. The fence he was talking about was because the park was dumping materials on his land! If you read again, you'll see this. But in your eyes, you read it the other way, because of your pre-disposition that people are lurking with shotguns, and little old ladies are spying through their blinds at you, wanting to develope a bad opinion of md'ing, and jails are full of people who detected deep in the woods at places that were unfenced, unposted, no one for miles around, etc....

 

[diggummup]

jails are full of people who detected deep in the woods at places that were unfenced, unposted, no one for miles around, etc....

If there was such a place down here, maybe I would be inclined to detect it. However, short of the Everglades, which is mainly wetlands with islands and unattainable without an airboat, there is no such place for a hundred miles in any direction. That is my point concerning the area I live in, South Florida is a vast metropolis of urban sprawl, what are woods?

 

[MD Dog]

just wanna point out Tom is givin me credit for deepskyal 's post but I get his point. :P

 

[teverly]

Teverly, I watched a TV documentary on this subject: Some people are genetically wired to be more cautious, careful, worrisome, fearful of authority, etc.... Those are normally women (but some men too) That's why generally the roles in parenting: moms fret over whether their young children might get hurt ("oh! don't run so fast! you might fall down!" etc...).

And then there are those that are fearless, bold, carefree, brave, etc.... Those are usually men - the rough-play fathers, who encourage their sons to "go gettum tiger!" don't worry about a little scrape or bruise, etc.... This lack of concern about consequences is an important factor in making good fearless soldiers, but yes, the documentary also talked about how it made for person not afraid to be criminals too (not worried about consequences).

I see all these genetically wired principles coming up right here on this thread. For example, the way you look at MD Dog's post, was through a vastly different way than I read it. Like when he says he eventually fenced his property, you read into that as ultimate proof of your point of view - that this meant he didn't like people crossing his property, and thus, we should all be concerned that someone may not like us detecting on some speck of land in the middle of nowhere. That's fine. But you failed to see this line of his: "I never attempted to stop anyone from walking in or close to the woods. They had been doing it before I bought the house, and it was far enough from the house that I never felt threatened" Do you see? He wasn't bothered if someone shortcutted to the park on his fringes. The fence he was talking about was because the park was dumping materials on his land! If you read again, you'll see this. But in your eyes, you read it the other way, because of your pre-disposition that people are lurking with shotguns, and little old ladies are spying through their blinds at you, wanting to develope a bad opinion of md'ing, and jails are full of people who detected deep in the woods at places that were unfenced, unposted, no one for miles around, etc....



No my point is that why should it matter if it is the park or people?? if you dont care enough about someone else property to worry about what they think of you being on it then you should allow them to do the same.
And the way i was brought up was to treat people and there belongings with respect.So just because i do not meet your criteria of what a MAN should do/be to bad.
I always thought if you were a grown up man or women you should have the respect and fortitude to go ask for permission and not act like a kid and say well they will tell me no so i just wont ask.
my point from the beginning has been, and still is, it does not matter where the property is,if it is fenced or posted or not it is not yours....and i am not talking about someone walking across a property from point a to point b.I am talking about you being on property that is not yours and digging holes and taking things.
All bs aside and your little technically speaking phrases, when you trespass you are breaking the law....and no, i am not a saint and i speed sometimes,but that is not the problem we are discussing.
Tnet members are always saying we believe in the code of ethices and that people should follow them.Well you cant just say well i will follow 1 or 2 and the heck with the rest.
And there is no predispositon....THERE are a lot of people who have a bad opinion of detecting because OF PEOPLE WHO TRESPASS!!!!
So as long as you can be ok with doing it then you will.But i will do what i was brought up to do and respect other people and there property and if they turn me down nicely or other wise i will move on and even though i did not get to detect i will know i did the right thing.
HH AND GOOD LUCK

 

[MD Dog]

This post reminds me of a certain poster who posed as a man, and from what I hear she suddenly disappeard ! I see certain things in our discussions here that would lead me to believe that this debate might be about more than moral sensabilities. Maybe it's the difference between the way a man thinks versus a woman ! :P

 

[teverly]

Well my avatar is my pic....and as far as i know i still stand to pee.....

 

[West Jersey Detecting]

I hate to say it , but you can blame the insurance carriers. Liability is a big concern. Many schools already keep locked gates so no one can access the grounds outside of hours. Everyone is afraid of being sued.

It has gotten out of hand.

 

[MD Dog]

Well my avatar is my pic....and as far as i know i still stand to pee.....

I'm sorry teverly I never meant to insinuate that you we're anything other than a man, My comment about the sexes was more about who started the whole concept of what's right versus wrong. I guess the easiest way for me to explain it is that if it weren't for women we men would have no moral grounding at all. I'll bet that after the fall of Adam an Eve, when Eve first begat Cain, and went through that first labor pain that was part of Gods' punishment for the sin, I'll just bet she started singin a new song like "Don't Do No Wrong if You Wanna Love Me"

 

[Ray S ECenFL]

Gee, lighten up.

I am sure that in some parts of the country the laws say you can not be on someones land without their permission. In other parts of the country, if there are no posted signs or barriers, you can be asked to leave but not cited for trespass. I do not pretend to know the laws of all the states but I am sure they differ from state to state.

It was a bit suprising to see such a heated ( friendly) debate crop up from solaryellow's post about being turned down after sending nice letter asking permission. What I got from his post was that he just wanted to relate ( vent) his disappointment from (what he felt) was a rather harsh responce to his request. The debate that followed lost sight of the fact that the laws differ in different parts of the country and in very rural areas most landowners would not care if you were on their land and if they did care and called the police, you probably would be asked to leave and not be arrested ( depending on the law). Yes, I agree that the code of ethics should be followed, but I also agree that common sense should also be used. If you trespass and get arrested for trespass, you have learned the hard way that the posting law is different in your state than in some others. My suggestion is know the law before you MD anywhere.

I have asked and have been turned down many times. I feel your pain solaryellow. I also agree that in most cases if you ask permission of the county or local government, the person you will be asking will not have a clue and will be too lazy to find out the real answer, so they will just say NO. Easier to do that then tell you Yes and have some other bureaucrat come down on them for it later.

Most cited reason for saying no is liability. I have heard that reply on numerous occasions even when I said that I am willing to sign a waiver to exempt them from any liability. Sorry, but still NO. Life goes on. Find another spot to hunt.

These are my opinions and I have no intention of debating my comments. Sorry.

Have a nice day.

Ray S.

 

[Postalrevnant]

Agreed someone else could have messed it up before or anything. However, there is nothing can be done. I definately would not just pull up and hunt though on questionable areas. I know around here it will get you arrested real fast. It does suck to do your best and get a big fat no. I got a ton of them around here before my wrists stopped me from being able to detect for a while. Problem in my area is a huge amount of theft. Peps here have to always be weary and on the watch for someone scoping out their lands looking for something to take. Unfortunately for me it translated to a large amount of no's at some great sites. I just had to suck it up and move on.

 

[Noodle]

Well, I skipped the guts of this topic and went straight from the first four to the last four responses. Pardon me if I am out of sync with the rest of you, but I'll respond to the initiator (I forgot who that is ).

I am a landowner and I don't allow anyone on my property to MD. Why? I MD. But if I didn't I still wouldn't allow them on my property (small, less than 100 acres). Why? Liability. Yes, I have insurance, but only the basics. People sue at the drop of a hat and I don't want to even entertain the thought of that. Luckily for me, Louisiana has made one law that made sense: Stay off the land unless you have written permission to be there. I love it. Works for squirrel, deer, dove and bobcat hunting. And MDing.

Keep looking. You'll find someone who doesn't care if you look long enough. Just don't get your back up at those who don't want you around. The older you get, the wiser, and the older these folks are, the less you'll find permission. Just the nature of the game. Don't give up, though. If you keep checking back (with the proper legal forms), they may give in and invite you for coffee, then into the back yard. Ya never know. Don't take it personal.

 

[teverly]

That is strange..around here it is usually the older farmers and home owners that i have the best luck with......
But i understand what your saying....
HH