(?) MD ing in the Pa. game lands

[deepskyal]

I think after the first of the year, when work settles back down to a normal 40 hours instead of the 70+ I've been working...which suks all the more because I just bought a new DFX and haven't had a chance to get it out for new ground, ( you know what it's like to have a brandy new detector, sitting in front of you, day after day, knowing its an awesome machine, dying to try it out...and it rains and you gotta sleep sometime when your pulling 12 hours 7 days a week, 7pm to 7am?)...anyhow, I'm going to call my state rep and ask him what we need to do to get things modified with the game commission.

I had them do me a favor with the Social Security Office last year and they are very cooperative folks. They had the main Social Security office In DC calling me and apologizing to me, which was cool I think.

But anyhow, he seems to be the kind of guy that takes that extra step when you ask him. I'm sure I could have some kind of answer from him about the best route to take to get us detecting on State Game Lands.

I hate politics but in some sick way, I still like playing their game. I believe with the right presentation, we can get some kind of proposal going in the works.

I have a couple articles about the changes and renovations they are planning to make at one of our main forts by Philly, how they let archie's dig random holes, and how they plan to take private property that was part of the fort and build a museum on the grounds.

Talk about destroying something?? And they dont want us to dig holes out in the middle of the woods somewhere?
As soon as I have time, I'll post the copies I have. I need sleep now...short-shifted on sleep...got home 7 am..headin to work 3pm. No detecting for Al... AGAIN!!!

But would love it if someone would want to contact some of the clubs and maybe Jeff can give us guidence on how we could maybe use this forum to get organized?

Good night, or day...whatever
Al

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Duke737]

Game lands were bought thru license dollars and Pittman Robertson act monies (Tax on sporting goods).
They were purchased to preserve and maintain wildlife habitat.
There are laws and regulations to the land and its usage, some if it dictated by the Pittman Robertson act as to what can be done with the lands.
They were not bought with General fund money and no general fund money goes into them. They are different from state parks.
As far as ATV trails I would tend to believe the ones you see are illegal since there are very few disabled atv trails established and they are usualy on main game lands roads.
It you were caught you could be cited and your MD taken as evidence. It would be returned when your case was over. However if you found something of exteme value and took it you could be prosecuted for theft and depending on the value of such item it could be a felony.

down wood can be cut by permit only and only in certian areas because wood on the ground protects new growth and provide food and cover for some wildlife.

SGL regulations,

135.2. Unlawful actions.
In addition to the prohibitions in the act on lands, waters or buildings under Commission ownership, lease or jurisdiction, it is unlawful, except with the permission of the person in charge of the lands, or the written permission of the Director to:

(1) Camp or use campsites.

(2) Plant, gather, cut, dig, remove or otherwise injure plants or parts thereof, including trees, shrubs, vines, flowering plants, cultivated crops, mushrooms and fruits of berry-producing plants.

(3) Travel on lands by means of vehicle or conveyance propelled by motorized power. This prohibition does not include the travel by individuals permanently confined to a wheelchair propelled by electric power obtained from batteries. Individuals desiring to hunt from an electric powered wheelchair shall have a disabled person permit under section 2923 of the act (relating to disabled person permits).

(4) Swim in a dam, pond, lake or stream.

(5) Injure, destroy or cause damage to property—real, personal or mixed.

(6) Remove or attempt to remove any manmade or natural object except wildlife and fish lawfully taken. Objects which may not be removed include animals, rocks, minerals, sand and historical or archaeological artifacts.

(7) Participate in, become a part of, contribute to or engage in disorderly conduct as defined in 18 Pa.C.S. § § 5503 and 5505 (relating to disorderly conduct; and public drunkenness).

(8) Kindle, use or maintain an open fire.

(9) Travel on roads open to vehicular travel with vehicle or conveyance propelled by motorized power which is not licensed or authorized for operation on a public highway under 75 Pa.C.S. (relating to the Vehicle Code).

(10) Violate, fail or neglect to follow instructions posted on signs authorized by the Director.

(11) Travel by mechanical or motorized conveyance or ride animals on newly constructed, seeded or planted roads, or other areas, when posted against the travel.



Authority

The provisions of this § 135.2 amended under the Game and Wildlife Code, 34 Pa.C.S. § § 322(c)(10), 721(a), 722(a), 2102(a) and 2923.



Source

The provisions of this § 135.2 adopted October 17, 1959; amended June 19, 1987, effective July 1, 1987, 17 Pa.B. 2464; amended July 12, 1991, effective immediately and apply retroactively to July 1, 1991, 21 Pa.B. 3141; amended April 4, 1997, effective April 5, 1997, 27 Pa.B. 1647; amended August 30, 2002, effective February 1, 2003, 32 Pa.B. 4235; amended July 16, 2004, effective July 17, 2004, 34 Pa.B. 3703; amended July 15, 2005, effective July 16, 2005, 35 Pa.B. 3924. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (306249) to (306250).



Cross References

This section cited in 58 Pa. Code § 135.41 (relating to State game lands); 58 Pa. Code § 135.48 (relating to State game lands roads open to vehicular traffic for disabled persons); 58 Pa. Code § 135.61 (relating to State game farms); 58 Pa. Code § 135.81 (relating to Commission administrative lands); 58 Pa. Code § 135.101 (relating to scope); 58 Pa. Code § 135.106 (relating to Pymatuning Wildlife Management Area); 58 Pa. Code § 135.107 (relating to Middle Creek Wildlife Management Area); 58 Pa. Code § 135.121 (relating to Federal-owned lands); 58 Pa. Code § 135.123 (relating to political subdivision-owned lands); 58 Pa. Code § 135.141 (relating to privately-owned lands); 58 Pa. Code § 135.161 (relating to Commission-owned or leased); 58 Pa. Code § 135.181 (relating to rifle and handgun ranges); and 58 Pa. Code § 135.182 (relating to ranges, State Game Lands No. 176).

 

[bjw]

yea, so I guess what all this really says it was purchased with our (sportsman's) money but it belongs to "them". I think we already know this. And while I support the preservation of land in its natural state what damage would we be doing by digging small holes and refilling them. With bureaucracy there is never a gray area. At least so long as it isn't being interpreted by liberals in power with an agenda of their own.
BJW

 

[Tubecity]

You got that right, and the stuffed shirt yes men in control of both the Fish & Game Commissions. They no longer are college educated outdoorsman with
degrees pertaining to their jobs, just more politicians looking at more ways to
control the lands & rake in more money.

 

[Duke737]

You got that right, and the stuffed shirt yes men in control of both the Fish & Game Commissions. They no longer are college educated outdoorsman with
degrees pertaining to their jobs, just more politicians looking at more ways to
control the lands & rake in more money.

Nobody in the PGC is in an elected office. The only money that the PGC gets is from license sales, Pittman Robertson, timbering (no more than 1% a year of forrested lands) and mineral rights. They dont make a dime off of anyone but sportsmen.

I would love for you to name one person that works for the PGC in the Excetuive Office or a division chief that isnt College educated or a Ross Leffler School of Conservation graduate. As well as avid outdoorsmen.

 

[Tubecity]

What about the recent change at the top of the Game Commission, many sportsman groups talk about the appointment of one who doesn't have the
same plans for the commission as the ones past. All we hear is the term
beaurecrats. I won't print any names here . I didn't say they weren't college educated , but what does a person with a degree in business or law know
about game management or wildlife in general. There are many with degrees that are given jobs that have no bearing on their field of education or their experience. It's called being promoted beyond your abilities & more education
doesn't mean more intelligent. People like to think that a 4 year education counts
as experience but a man with 20 or 30 years in the field doesn't rate. These college kids should spend at least 5 years outdoors before having any say in
management of the Fish or Game Commissions.

 

[JD007]

Maybe we should ask the game commission to start SELLING permits to detect game lands?

 

[raptor]

Precisely what we are trying to get done. That plus gaining trust from the PGC.We all know that there is alot of politics in every facit of our daily lives but if we don't band together as one to fight the problems of MDing on Game lands then there really isn't much reason to expect any changes or modifications of the laws that currently are posted. If we all use our heads to find ways to change laws then we may have a fighting chance to get some sort of compromise with the PGC. A license that cost $10.00 is a very small price to pay.But lets do it as a a unit and not individuals each going in differant directions all at the same time.I think Spinning our Wheels pertains to that.

 

[Tubecity]

Rumors have it there is approx. 2 years of solvency left for the PGC. I hope this is wrong, but many inside this Org. are going in different directions. With the problems one recent Pres. had for speaking out & telling the truth. Then the 'supposed' Kangaroo Court to be held in Dubois before the June meeting
that was shot down. And the behaviour of some on that board with their condescending remarks & attitude toward this experienced 'past' President speaks volumes. Especially two with the last names starting with a P & an R. I hope they get their act together before the Commission is taken over & run by the General Assembly or any other legislator. They are already deep enough in our pockets.

 

[RON (PA)]

Since game lands are used for hunting and you cannot get on the lands with a hunting license. Why not make a "detecting license" or permit. I would gladly pay a fee to dectect on state game land. Set it up the same way. Since we are on state game lands, abide by the rules of the game commission.

Here is what I am thinking:
1). Pay $20.00 a year (that is the price of the Pa adult hunting license) for a detecting
license/permit.
2). Pay an additional $6.00/per detector. The additional fee would be used to create a database of
detectors, make, model, serial numbers, etc in case you machine is ever stolen.The $6.00 is the
same as the "resident doe tag".
3). Wear a blaze orange hat and vest per the Game commission guidelines.
(http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/pgc/digestpdfs/2007/orange_requirements.pdf).

I know that we do not want to pay to detect on game lands, but this would give us the state wide permit to hunt on game lands, show that we are serious about the hobby, and the game commission makes a few bucks more.

Note: all prices are from the following website: http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/cwp/view.asp?a=511&q=159008

What do you all think Good idea or bad idea Would like to hear your opinions.

 

[Duke737]

Maybe we should ask the game commission to start SELLING permits to detect game lands?

Was tried with horse riders and bikers. No dice sportsmen were opposed to it. SGL's are for wildlife habitat first and foremost. For over a hundred years the sportsmen have been financing the PGC to aquire SGL. Now you want in on what sportsmen have been paying on for over a hunderd years. There are state parks for that.

 

[greywolf]

Duke 737: That may be but if you took a poll of every MD'er on this site I'll guess that most hunt either small game or deer. I for one hunted from the time I was 12 years old til about 8 years ago or so and I am 69 now. I have used the game lands near Williamsport for many of those years for hunting and photography . I just think with a few guide lines and perhaps a permit (?) like the hunting licence fee would be a way to go. BUT they the PGC answer to no one it seems and will not budge from there use rules. So many of us have paid in some way or another for this land and can't use it for other than legal taking of game, photography or hiking. and the last two items I say should be done in the off season or be sure you have blaze orange on.

 

[jeff of pa]

Since game lands are used for hunting and you cannot get on the lands with a hunting license. Why not make a "detecting license" or permit. I would gladly pay a fee to dectect on state game land. Set it up the same way. Since we are on state game lands, abide by the rules of the game commission.

Here is what I am thinking:
1). Pay $20.00 a year (that is the price of the Pa adult hunting license) for a detecting
license/permit.
2). Pay an additional $6.00/per detector. The additional fee would be used to create a database of
detectors, make, model, serial numbers, etc in case you machine is ever stolen.The $6.00 is the
same as the "resident doe tag".
3). Wear a blaze orange hat and vest per the Game commission guidelines.
(http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/pgc/digestpdfs/2007/orange_requirements.pdf).

I know that we do not want to pay to detect on game lands, but this would give us the state wide permit to hunt on game lands, show that we are serious about the hobby, and the game commission makes a few bucks more.

Note: all prices are from the following website: http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/cwp/view.asp?a=511&q=159008

What do you all think Good idea or bad idea Would like to hear your opinions.

I Mentioned this to them once.
But was told it would need to be Introduced
& Voted on by Them.
So unless we could get an Elected Officer to Introduce
the plan, it's a Moot Point.

 

[mtntrekr2]

I would be all for purchasing a permit to hunt on SGL. I wrote to
them before about a fee based permit for gold prospecting and never
received an answer. But please leave the extra $6.00 per detector out
of it. They do not need to know how many detectors we have. They
do not make a buck hunter pay extra for taking a second rifle with
them, but they will fine us for taking our backup detector with us if
we do not pay the doe tag fee. Even tho the same as the deer hunter
we can only use one at a time some Barney Fife warden will pull out
his ticket book. Leave that out.
Just My Two Cents
Joe

 

[RON (PA)]

I Mentioned this to them once.
But was told it would need to be Introduced
& Voted on by Them.
So unless we could get an Elected Officer to Introduce
the plan, it's a Moot Point.
[/quote]

Note: the above from Jeff of Pa should be in a blue "quote" box". I'm having trouble getting two quotes in the same message.

Thanks Jeff. That at least gives me a starting point. Thank you very much.

I would be all for purchasing a permit to hunt on SGL. I wrote to
them before about a fee based permit for gold prospecting and never
received an answer. But please leave the extra $6.00 per detector out
of it. They do not need to know how many detectors we have. They
do not make a buck hunter pay extra for taking a second rifle with
them, but they will fine us for taking our backup detector with us if
we do not pay the doe tag fee. Even tho the same as the deer hunter
we can only use one at a time some Barney Fife warden will pull out
his ticket book. Leave that out.
Just My Two Cents
Joe

Joe, Thanks for your input. If I decide to pursue this with a state legislator, I will definitely include prospecting as well as detecting. The $6 fee was just a suggestion, I was not sure if you needed to register make and model of guns when getting a hunting license, because I have never hunted. I figured the more it was like a hunting license/permit, the easier it might be to get it through the game commission.

 

[jeff of pa]

I'm sure you already thought of this,
But I would also suggest you mention it can be Limited
to the Non Hunting season so as to NOT interfear.

 

[Duke737]

I Mentioned this to them once.
But was told it would need to be Introduced
& Voted on by Them.
So unless we could get an Elected Officer to Introduce
the plan, it's a Moot Point.

Note: the above from Jeff of Pa should be in a blue "quote" box". I'm having trouble getting two quotes in the same message.

Thanks Jeff. That at least gives me a starting point. Thank you very much.

I would be all for purchasing a permit to hunt on SGL. I wrote to
them before about a fee based permit for gold prospecting and never
received an answer. But please leave the extra $6.00 per detector out
of it. They do not need to know how many detectors we have. They
do not make a buck hunter pay extra for taking a second rifle with
them, but they will fine us for taking our backup detector with us if
we do not pay the doe tag fee. Even tho the same as the deer hunter
we can only use one at a time some Barney Fife warden will pull out
his ticket book. Leave that out.
Just My Two Cents
Joe

Joe, Thanks for your input. If I decide to pursue this with a state legislator, I will definitely include prospecting as well as detecting. The $6 fee was just a suggestion, I was not sure if you needed to register make and model of guns when getting a hunting license, because I have never hunted. I figured the more it was like a hunting license/permit, the easier it might be to get it through the game commission.
[/quote]

No one is elected in the Game Commission

 

[deepskyal]

Not wanting to nit-pick, I think there is a fairly big difference between bike riding in the woods and metal detecting. Unless you are talking peddle bikes and not motorcycles, then my point is lost partially here.

I think you are are correct on the ATV trails I saw Duke737. They were well marked with signs and appeared to follow old roadbeds, not just random trails in the woods. Maybe they just abutted the gamelands and were not actually cutting through them.

But I've seen quad trails and remember from youth the dirt bike trails we ran. They were heavily rutted from spinning ties and do create a fair amont of damage to the trails. Plus you have the added factor of noise spooking wildlife. Even in local county parks they have reg's against anything that causes the wildlife to be harrassed. So I could see the scepticism the PGC would have allowing such activity.

Metal detecting can be demonstrated as a harmless activity in the wilds, leaving virtually no trace of anyone having removed a coin or token of some sort, when done properly. You cannot say the same thing for bikes or horses.
I don't think horses would do all that much damage either. Maybe one issue at a time needs to be presented, not multiple choices that would prohibit a blanket appeal.

If I was on the commission, I could have problems if a package was presented, horses and bikes. I'd be inlined to say yes to horses, but no to bikes. But come to me and just say horse...and explaine it's not a whole heard trompling through the woods, just a few people on a scenic ride....


Same would go for metal detecting AND prospecting.

Being someone uneducated about the hobbies, I'd have some mental picture of a guy with a dredge going after gold in some pristene stream or digging test holes to find a mine somewhere if I told them I wanted to prospect on their lands.
With prospecting, I think you'd get bogged down in a lot more regulations, what size sluice, equipment, etc...and the PGC would be more inclined to say no.

I'd say leave it at detecting with the fee.

If it is indeed true about the solvency of the PGC, we could be a partial answer to their problem with a new source of revenue. I do vaguely remember reading about the decline in license sales. It wasn't too long ago I believe the PGC was in a court battle with the Turnpike Commission over the proposed roads going through game lands and what the PGC considered a fair trade-off of land for land. I was pretty amused, one Pa entity suing another.

I don't want to sound like I'm trying to excude prospecting, but one step at a time. IF we can get through the system, successfully or not, at least we can discover the proper procedure for doing so and maybe modify some type of proposal and give it a second attempt at a later time.

Whatever is presented to the PGC, it has to be clear, concise and to the point. We CAN get change, if done in a professional mannor.

My experience lobbying the PUC, when we were up against a request by the major utility companies to disconnect customers in the winter, we were successful in stopping the proposal...based solely on our ability to acquire data from other states and present it as a whole body of organizations from across Pennsylvania.
And I can't emphasize enough, we need a clear consensus from a lot of people.

We need to present to the PGC our intentions, proof of our professionalism, and how this will benifit THEM.

Once we can get on their agenda for a proposed change, I think having a type of presentation, such as a video of exactly how metal detecting is performed and what our searching does to the area, ie: no damage when we walk out of the woods, would be extremely benificial.
Also, getting someone noteworthy to accompany a small delegation to the meeting. A formal acknowledgement from the clubs and their memberships in the state and how they too support the cause.

I hardly think we'd find anyone belonging to the detecting clubs in Pa objecting to some fee based permit system to detect on Pa. Gamelands.
Wear your permit just like the hunters, visably displayed in some holder so we can be monitored.
Hunt only in off season to prevent accidents, wear bright orange, no damage to wildlife or plants. Pretty simple I think.
Letting them know that a permit system allows those with a sense of respect would be using the lands and if they are willing to pay a fee, then they would be far less likely to be the type to sneek in undercover and do damage. We would strive to maintain the highest ethics in our field to maintain permission to detect public lands.
We have to point out we aren't the robbers of history, archeological resources,or creating hazzards for others. We're not digging craters for some animal to fall into.
We also could show them the benifits of us being there....returning lost valuables when possible, reporting major archeological finds, etc.

And Jeff's point is a good one. We need someone inside the commission. That, I think, is where we can use our state legislature. They could get us in the door.
The commission may be a seperate entity, making their own rules, but there must be a door somewhere we can use. I don't believe their system can be much different that the PaPUC's.
Wether elected or appointed, it is drawn from consensus from the Commission as a whole to who reigns over the system. We simply need to find someone on the board. How hard could that be?

I just want to point out something here, how a few people can make a significant change.
Anyone familiar with Cherry Springs State Park? Are you aware it has one of the only protected dark skies in the United States? It was astronomers, and not a whole lot of them, that showed how necessary it was to preserve a piece of Pennsylvania for viewing stars. They actually had the Govenor come up to look through a telescope to see the benifits and this is in part what became the birth of the "Pennsylvania Wild's" program. People from across the United States go to Cherry Springs to view the sky.
Because of contributions from astronomers, the park now has modern toilets, better roads and camping areas, electricity, etc. But it isn't owned by a group of astronomers...it's still state property. We just fund it and had support from the Pa. Conservation District. (It helped that a couple officers were also enthusiastic astronomers to help the cause)...we had an "in".

You see, a small, independent group can make change!
But again, it was an organized effort with support from larger organizations...but still a grass roots effort none the less.

We need some type of semiformal committee to delegate responsibility. Some to talk to the legislature, others to write a proposal, some to contact clubs and get support...and so we're not overlapping work and getting frustrated.

You see small organizations popping up all the time for various causes...we can too...give it some catchy name that makes it sound as though it encompasses the majority of detectorists in Pennsylvania.
Give it a purpose, to educate and disseminate information of Pennsylvaia rules and regulations and to enact change where ever possible...or something to that effect.

I know...I can be long winded...but if we want to do this...we have to do it right.
And we have to be patient...we're not going to get it done in a few days, weeks or even months...but I plan to live a few more years and as public parks and such get picked over more and more, it's nice to think a new resource could be opened to us in the near future.

Well...that's my two cents worth. I'm ready to go forward with this....
I just don't want to see us looking like a bunch of unorganized individuals, harassing our elected and appointed officials over and over from different parts of the state.
Al

Happy New Year all...back to a normal 40 hour week for me..woohoo!

 

[greywolf]

Well said deepskyal! If all of the MD clubs or groups and web sites that support MD'ing could be brought together under one"Banner" as well as support from the various manufactures and dealers who work and sell products in Pa. then a presentation could be made with a strong group support behind the proposal. At that time a proposal could be provided to our state legislators for help with making our wishes known to the PGC.

 

[cuddles17981]

Including someone elses pile of Trash.

SNAP, When the hubby and I go, whether it be to MD or just for a walk,especially when the nieces are with,we take a garbage bag to pick up trash while we enjoy the walk,ect.. Thought we were teaching the kids some great practices.. WOW.