Detecting National Forest Lands

[franklin]

Not all federal property. There's ample federal locations where md'ing is not forbidden. BLM and NFS (unless some specific location has an exception ). And sure, .... Arpa would kick in. Just don't find stuff over 50 yrs. old. But this is different than the age old oft-repeated mistaken notion that "all federal land is off-limits".

It is never all properties but it is best to know where and what you can or can not do as this I found on the Internet:
https://screenshots.firefox.com/Gobc8YTlLtpA6RZw/www.nps.gov

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tom_in_CA]

.... the question was would it still be illegal during government shut down,....

I was going by the OP's @ original opening question. Which was for NFS in general. You might have been addressing a subsequent question of admitted off-limits spots d/t lack of enforcement during budget short-fall times. Sorry .

.... Metal detector use is allowed in developed campgrounds and picnic areas if they are not specifically closed to such activity ....

Interesting that you quote that. That's what I've been trying to say all along

 

[Tom_in_CA]

It is never all properties but it is best to know where and what you can or can not do as this I found on the Internet:
https://screenshots.firefox.com/Gobc8YTlLtpA6RZw/www.nps.gov

For starters,

1) that would be for NPS, not NFS right ? This thread is about NFS. And

2) even if it is for NFS, then this becomes an area where there's a spelled out exception. That has already been granted (that certain "forts" or obvious historic sensitive monuments are an exception)

3) How much you want to make a bet that the ONLY reason that gets onto their "FAQ's" (resulting in wonderful links like that) is because of md'rs, in decades past, went in seeking clarifications? Hence the pencil-pushers-that-be had to "address this pressing issue" . Who knows ?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I was going by the OP's @ original opening question. Which was for NFS in general. You might have been addressing a subsequent question of admitted off-limits spots d/t lack of enforcement during budget short-fall times. Sorry .



Interesting that you quote that. That's what I've been trying to say all along

I was replying to this post a couple posts above my reply.

I wonder if it would be illegal in a gov. shutdown?

I've never denied that, BUT it is not allowed in all National forests. Ocala National in Florida does not allow detecting in the camp grounds or beaches.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I was replying to this post a couple posts above my reply...

Ok, sorry. Yes: Lack of enforcement doesn't mean "have a hay-day". And yes: There are exceptions to the NFS = yes allowed situation.

 

[Thaddeus]

Just do it

 

[sawmill man]

Sorry guys that confusion was just me being a smartelec . but seeing as i got your attention how dos one go about trying to reverse the laws on detecting, i know the Danial Boone National Forest ,went in effect on July 8 2015 prohibiting metal detecting. so who dos one need to contact on something like this, i know about that time frame was when some archaeologist came into the area and started some digs. so i just figured they got there foot in the door first.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... how dos one go about trying to reverse the laws on detecting....

Next to impossible. Any stinks we make (petitions, griping, etc...) tend to make them ALL THE MORE RESOLVED . Because if the solidarity griping has to go past the desk of an archaeologist (which , in the case of fed, and state, that's where the question/matter will go), is the exact moment you can bet he will just add additional layers to the "no".

So I hate to say it, but it's often the LESS attention to us, that gets us more freedoms. Not the MORE attention. Ie.: the less that an archaeologist thinks about us, the better.

Yes I know that this doesn't help change the situation of already enacted laws.

I would also add, that sometimes when a law DID get scaled back, d/t md'r solidarity griping, that the resulting "permit" is often silly. Like "yes but you can't dig". Or "you must turn everything in to the city hall". Or "digger tool shall not exceed 3 inches", or "not within 10 ft. of any tree", blah blah

 

[Clay Diggins]

Sorry guys that confusion was just me being a smartelec . but seeing as i got your attention how dos one go about trying to reverse the laws on detecting, i know the Danial Boone National Forest ,went in effect on July 8 2015 prohibiting metal detecting. so who dos one need to contact on something like this, i know about that time frame was when some archaeologist came into the area and started some digs. so i just figured they got there foot in the door first.

Daniel Boone National Forest was originally called the Cumberland and Redbird Purchase Units. It is not an Organic National Forest subject to the CFR and laws on National Forests. It is a renamed Purchase Unit created in 1933. Daniel Boone was the first Purchase Unit that was renamed as a National Forest. The governor of Kentucky requested the name change, I seem to remember that was in 1964.

In any case there is very little federally owned rights in that Purchase Unit/Forest.

In the map below

The Cumberland Purchase Unit "Daniel Boone National Forest" is within the dashed green line.
The dark green filled areas are the lands where the United States has already purchased some surface rights
The hatched light green areas are still private land.
That red area is where the United States owns mineral rights. Only in the red area could the Forest Service allow metal detecting. In all the rest of the "forest" the subsurface rights are in private hands and are not owned by the United States.



Again...

The western Public Land Forests were created by the Organic Act of 1897. Those are the National Forests. They are public lands and are open to all forms of recreation including metal detecting.

The eastern non Public Land forests were acquired under the Weeks Act of 1911. These are not true National Forests and are not public lands but instead are legally known as "Purchase Units". There are a few exceptions like the Ocala in Florida (Florida is a Public Land State).

The US Forest Service administers those Purchase Units. Purchase Units are usually only surface rights and being acquired property they are not public lands but instead are United States Government owned property. Usually the subsurface (minerals, water, oil and gas) is still privately owned.

Often Purchase Units are designated only. When Congress designates a Purchase Unit they set aside money to purchase the land inside the unit boundaries. Land owners are under no obligation to sell to the government so many of the lands inside most Purchase Units is still privately owned.

Until the current privately owned lands inside the unit are sold to the federal government the unit exists only in the minds of the Forest Service administrators. Those administrators are allowed to make local rules and regulations for the lands already purchased but they can't make rules for the areas not yet purchased. Most Purchase Units are a swiss cheese mix of private and government owned lands. Management of these areas is a nightmare of different ownership and rights.

The National Forests created under the Organic Act all have exactly the same laws and regulations.
Purchase Units under the Weeks Act are individually controlled and laws and regulations can vary every few hundred feet.

The Western Public land Forests are controlled by laws passed by Congress. Those laws are the same in every Public Land National Forest.

The Eastern non Public Land Forests are areas scheduled for purchase by the United States. Most of those areas have never been purchased and remain private property (off limits to you and your metal detector). The areas that have already been purchased are, for the most part only surface rights, those areas are also off limits to metal detecting. The few areas the U.S. has purchased subsurface rights to are owned by the United States - they are not public lands and they are not subject to the laws governing Forests. They are subject only to the whims of the Purchase Unit administrative supervisor, who happens to work for the Forest Service.

There are no laws to change. These are not the Public Lands administered by Congress. They are purchased lands owned by the United States regulated and administered by the executive branch.

If the United States doesn't own the land they can't permit you to dig there. If the United States doesn't own the rights to the subsurface they can't permit you to dig there. If the United States does own the subsurface rights it's up to the administrator whether you can dig and where you can dig and what you can dig with.

_________________________________________________________

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....

View attachment 1541571

..._

Holy smokes. That hundreds and hundreds of square miles ! So .... seriously now .... you're walking in the middle of nowhere there, and find a cellar hole. Is anyone "out and about" to EVEN CARE in the first place ?

 

[Clay Diggins]

Holy smokes. That hundreds and hundreds of square miles ! So .... seriously now .... you're walking in the middle of nowhere there, and find a cellar hole. Is anyone "out and about" to EVEN CARE in the first place ?

843 square miles to be more precise. Pretty much all that area of Kentucky looks like the middle of nowhere to the casual visitor.

Heck if you came upon my property from the west you wouldn't see any difference than the previous 60 miles of desert. Lucky for Americans we have property rights and it really doesn't matter if your property looks like the middle of nowhere, it's still doesn't belong to anyone else but the owner.

It could be that the person that owns the cellar hole would consider you a trespasser and thief. The Sheriff and Judge would certainly back them up on that opinion.

Why not try your theory on the area of the "Daniel Boone National Forest" west of Somerset Kentucky? That area of the "National Forest" is all private land and the owners there have more than 80 years of experience with people discovering their abandoned property and attempting to take it for their own. Around those parts that's called theft of private property and the Pulaski County Sheriff and his friends have come up with some interesting ways of dealing with thieves.

If I were you I would make sure you lock your garage. Other people may have a similar opinions as yourself and would consider any unguarded private property to be fair game. You don't actually ever leave your house alone do you Tom? Many people would consider you had abandoned your property and your property would be fair game for the taking. And by your theory they would be justified in looking in your cellar if you weren't guarding it.

 

[Honest Samuel]

It should be a crime for our president and congress to shut down the federal government.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Your analogy is not fair or correct. Trespassing laws in Kentucky are defined in Kentucky Refined Statutes -KRS Chapter 511 There are 3 degrees of trespassing and they all are in regards to KNOWINGLY entering property. I think a person would be expected to know to not enter someone's garage but may not be expected to know where the boundary lines are on un-posted property.

So are you the type of person that metal detects a target and doesn't dig because it might actually belong to someone? Is your house posted with no trespassing signs? Is your garage door ever left open when you aren't in sight of the garage?

If you don't get the point of those questions how about this.

Why argue trespassing when you are caught on private property with something you just dug up. Isn't that about theft? Posted property or not - taking someone else's property is theft ...isn't it?

Here's the thing:

So you dig the cellar hole and complain that the private property you were caught on didn't have a sign saying "don't dig my cellar hole". Does there need to be a guard present to meet your standard? Should that guard be armed? Are there cameras and witnesses required before you are in the wrong? What is the line you will accept that shouldn't be crossed? Do you need to see a law that states clearly that if you enter private property to look for buried valuables to take for yourself you are in error? There is such a law if that's what you need to respect other's property.

So do there need to be three signs before you will consider not taking other peoples property (stealing) You know "No Trespassing", "No Digging", and "no Stealing"?

Is it your weasel word theory of the law that every illegal act must be sign posted before you can be prosecuted?

Have you ever been exposed to the concept of social responsibility for the common good?

Will this help you decide?

511.080 Criminal trespass in the third degree.
(1)
A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the third degree when he knowingly enters
or remains unlawfully in or upon premises.

or this?

381.230 Possession unnecessary in action for trespass.
The owner of land may maintain the appropriate action to recover damages for any trespass or injury committed thereon, or to prevent or restrain any trespass or other injury thereto or thereon, notwithstanding the owner may not have the actual possession of the land at the time of the commission of the trespass.

or this?

512.040 Criminal mischief in the third degree.
(1)
A person is guilty of criminal mischief in the third degree when:
(a)
Having no right to do so or any reasonable ground to believe that he has such right, he intentionally or wantonly defaces, destroys or damages any property;

or this?

512.030 Criminal mischief in the second degree.
(1)
A person is guilty of criminal mischief in the second degree when, having no right to do so or any reasonable ground to believe that he has such right, he intentionally
or wantonly defaces, destroys or damages any property causing pecuniary loss of $500 or more.

or this?

512.020 Criminal mischief in the first degree.
(1)
A person is guilty of criminal mischief in the first degree when, having no right to do so or any reasonable ground to believe that he has such right, he intentionally or
wantonly defaces, destroys or damages any property causing pecuniary loss of $1,000 or more.

Kinda makes you wonder just how wise it would be to take that Confederate silver stash you just found in that cellar hole. Heck it might just lead to:

514.030 Theft by unlawful taking or disposition
Penalties.
(1)
Except as otherwise provided in KRS 217.181, a person is guilty of theft by unlawful taking or disposition when he unlawfully:
(a)
Takes or exercises control over movable property of another with intent to deprive him thereof;

Of course if you found anything of value in that cellar hole you would leave it there and immediately find and contact the actual owner of the property to let them know how lucky they were that you only treasure hunted their private property and you would never take any treasure you found. Right?

Are you really relying on the theory if you enter private lands (all lands in Kentucky are private) and you didn't bother to find out who owns that land first you couldn't possibly be guilty of trespass? The old ignorance of the facts makes trespass and theft OK defense? Do you really think that's what the Kentucky trespass laws mean?
The Supreme Court of Kentucky doesn't agree with you.

A person who mistakenly believes that his or her conduct is legal may nonetheless commit conversion." 18 Am. Jur. 2d Conversion § 3

See how many questions you haven't covered by making assumptions about what a law means.

The fact of the matter is the good people and Sheriff of Pulaski County don't give a rat's hiney what your legal theory is when you are caught in someone else's cellar hole. I've shown you several ways they can and will turn the screws on you when you give them your street lawyer interpretation of the trespass laws. Wouldn't it be easier to admit you just saw a map explaining that those lands are private and require the written permission of the owner before you begin searching for treasure they may have on their property?

Getting permission isn't a crime. Not getting permission before taking things from private property is a crime. Is that simple enough?

 

[sawmill man]

Do people post their property ? What are the trespassing laws in regards to posted vs not posted property? I could see someone getting confused if the property is not posted.

It is confusing i and some of my family own lands deep in the forest service lands and were even afraid to cross it to get there, let alone be caught carrying a metal detector. I was even told i could not clean the roads out ,and it is right of ways on the deeds.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

..... "National Forest" is all private land...

Clay, then herein lies our conversation breakdown: When I see the words "national forest" (NFS), I assume public lands. But you're saying these ones you're speaking of are private land. Ok, sure, BY ALL MEANS get permission. I just always assumed they are public lands. Don't know what you're referring to in your state, where national forests can be private lands.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... Is your house posted with no trespassing signs? Is your garage door ever left open when you aren't in sight of the garage?....

Clay, can't you see a difference (just a teensy bit) between A) someone's urban front yard and their open garage, versus B) middle of the desert or forests, where you became unaware that you had walked from public to private, because there was utterly no fence or indication ?

C'mon, you KNOW that the "average person" can see the difference between the open garage (where you/he/I KNOW that's private property). Versus the middle-of-nowhere, not-fenced, etc... Where perhaps you just started walking on trails that started from the public road, with zero fence or sign and utterly no way to know that you'd left public land.

Please tell me you can see the difference in scenarios.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

deleted

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....Getting permission isn't a crime ...

Sure. If a person knows they're entering private property, then sure. By all means get permission. But if you're just wandering through the deserts or mountains. Assume for the moment that you started on obviously public property. Like a road or park or whatever. And never encountered any fence or sign or clue . Then ... don't you see a teensy bit of difference between THAT and someone's private urban front yard or open garage ? (just a *teensy* bit ?)

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... I was even told i could not clean the roads out ,and it is right of ways on the deeds.

Well , gee .... and if you'd simply gone and cleaned your roads, do you think anyone would have cared less or noticed ? This could be one of those situations where: If you ask enough people "Can I pick my own nose?", you can eventually find one to tell you "no".

 

[Clay Diggins]

Clay, then herein lies our conversation breakdown: When I see the words "national forest" (NFS), I assume public lands. But you're saying these ones you're speaking of are private land. Ok, sure, BY ALL MEANS get permission. I just always assumed they are public lands. Don't know what you're referring to in your state, where national forests can be private lands.

If you read my previous posts Tom I was pointing out the difference between the Western National Forests composed of public lands and the Eastern National Forests composed mostly of private lands. I even provided visual aids in the form of custom maps made just to explain the difference to you.