Frankn
Gold Member
After reading all these comments, I get the impression that there are those that bravely go where few have gone before and those that fear for that shadow that followes them.
metal detecting on gov land old house places
- Thread starter reed88
- Start date
I called the local office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and asked them if it was ok to do some metal detecting on the land that they manage. They said it was ok and sent me a short list of rules in the mail. That was all there was to it. So, for me it was just a matter of being up front with them and getting it in writing.
Terrafisher
Full Member
As far as city parks, I simply shot an email to our city parks department and received a reply back from the parks department simply stating that I could detect in any park I wished, just please be kind enough to notify them if I find a "significant historical find" while doing so. The director even suggested several local parks with some historical backgrounds to detect in, and with his best wishes.
Of course, I printed the email out, which also contained his name, title, and contact info and I carry it on me.
All i'm saying is, a simple email to the department may bring you positive responses, even without you being too specific and getting into too much detail. Make a yahoo or gmail email address and send them a note - you don't even have to include your name, and ask for their advice on where you can hunt, and just see if they give you their blessings.
At the worst, you can deny knowledge later, since the email address is expendable.
At the best, you have something in writing to back up your claim in the event you do get hassled.
Of course, I printed the email out, which also contained his name, title, and contact info and I carry it on me.
All i'm saying is, a simple email to the department may bring you positive responses, even without you being too specific and getting into too much detail. Make a yahoo or gmail email address and send them a note - you don't even have to include your name, and ask for their advice on where you can hunt, and just see if they give you their blessings.
At the worst, you can deny knowledge later, since the email address is expendable.
At the best, you have something in writing to back up your claim in the event you do get hassled.
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,336
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
terrafisher and bruce-mc, there are also countless stories of people who, like yourself, got "permission" (assuming it was needed a public parks that had no prohibitions), but later they get harrassed in the park, by a cop or gardener. When the md'r proudly shows their permission paper, or drops the name of the desk clerk downtown who "gave them permission", the cop or gardener merely gets on his cellphone calls downtown, and promptly gets it revoked.
Because you see, I bet that I, or anyone, can just as quickly go downtown ........ right now, and get your permission just as quickly revoked. Your getting it merely means you did not ask the desk clerk with the right set of mental images, right buzzwords, etc.... Terra, you yourself allude to this yourself, when you admit persons can get permission: " ......without you being too specific and getting into too much detail" Well gee? Why not? Are you hiding something?
Anyone who gets "permission" .... for even the most innocuous of public land (sandboxes, beaches, etc...) just didn't float the right buzz words. I mean, did you be sure to mention holes? treasure? enriching yourself at public expense? Indian bones that you'll be careful not to disturb? lost & found verbage? ARPA?, hold-harmless clauses that you'd like them to sign? etc....
Here's a true example:
A guy goes into city hall, to ask if he can detect in the city parks. He was careful to phrase it this way: "Is there anything in city code/law that prohibits metal detecting in the parks?" (assuming this would put the burden of proof on them, to produce an actual written rule). The clerk ........ try as she may ......... could find nothing specifically addressing the man's question. So she told him "I don't see why not". With that, the gleeful man tells her: "Great, and I'll be sure to cover my holes, and leave no trace" (guess he thought he was a real winner with that line, eh?
). Hearing that, the clerk says "hold on", and excused herself from the front desk. The man could see her walking down the hall, poking her head into various other dept. person's doorways, talking to different people. After a minute, she returned to the front desk, and says to the man "We're going to have to tell you no". The man sensed this was totally arbitrary, so he objected "But why?". With that, the clerk handed the man a pamphlet, from the utility co, with the mandate printed across the front "Call before you dig". But the md'r objected and said "but lady, this is for construction workers and tractors and such! I'm only going a few inches!!" With that, he handed the pamphlet back to the lady. She leafed through it some more, and hands it back to him saying "Sir, the mandate doesn't say 'how deep' it just says "all digging", therefore we're going to have to tell you no." True story!
The man left more confused than when he'd arrived
And I suppose the knee jerk reaction is: "What does it hurt to try? The least they can say is "no"
To that I would say: the un-intended consequence of asking, where there's no prohibitions (and perhaps no one would ever have noticed or cared), is that you risk an arbitary "no". Now guess what will happen when that same desk-clerk, or kiosk personell or whatever, sees ANOTHER md'r (whom perhaps he or she would never have given a second thought to?) He'll remember the earlier inquiry, and think "aha, there's one of them!" And start booting others. I've seen this happen before! A park, school, etc... where there was never any rules, until someone took it upon themselves to go to city hall and ask. The "presto", a "no" gets handed out. The dejected md'rs passes the word to other md'rs in the community, who are left scratching their heads, saying "since when?? I've hunted there for 20 yrs!"
Here's an example of this psychology:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,249049.0.html
Because you see, I bet that I, or anyone, can just as quickly go downtown ........ right now, and get your permission just as quickly revoked. Your getting it merely means you did not ask the desk clerk with the right set of mental images, right buzzwords, etc.... Terra, you yourself allude to this yourself, when you admit persons can get permission: " ......without you being too specific and getting into too much detail" Well gee? Why not? Are you hiding something?
Anyone who gets "permission" .... for even the most innocuous of public land (sandboxes, beaches, etc...) just didn't float the right buzz words. I mean, did you be sure to mention holes? treasure? enriching yourself at public expense? Indian bones that you'll be careful not to disturb? lost & found verbage? ARPA?, hold-harmless clauses that you'd like them to sign? etc....
Here's a true example:
A guy goes into city hall, to ask if he can detect in the city parks. He was careful to phrase it this way: "Is there anything in city code/law that prohibits metal detecting in the parks?" (assuming this would put the burden of proof on them, to produce an actual written rule). The clerk ........ try as she may ......... could find nothing specifically addressing the man's question. So she told him "I don't see why not". With that, the gleeful man tells her: "Great, and I'll be sure to cover my holes, and leave no trace" (guess he thought he was a real winner with that line, eh?
). Hearing that, the clerk says "hold on", and excused herself from the front desk. The man could see her walking down the hall, poking her head into various other dept. person's doorways, talking to different people. After a minute, she returned to the front desk, and says to the man "We're going to have to tell you no". The man sensed this was totally arbitrary, so he objected "But why?". With that, the clerk handed the man a pamphlet, from the utility co, with the mandate printed across the front "Call before you dig". But the md'r objected and said "but lady, this is for construction workers and tractors and such! I'm only going a few inches!!" With that, he handed the pamphlet back to the lady. She leafed through it some more, and hands it back to him saying "Sir, the mandate doesn't say 'how deep' it just says "all digging", therefore we're going to have to tell you no." True story!The man left more confused than when he'd arrived
And I suppose the knee jerk reaction is: "What does it hurt to try? The least they can say is "no"
To that I would say: the un-intended consequence of asking, where there's no prohibitions (and perhaps no one would ever have noticed or cared), is that you risk an arbitary "no". Now guess what will happen when that same desk-clerk, or kiosk personell or whatever, sees ANOTHER md'r (whom perhaps he or she would never have given a second thought to?) He'll remember the earlier inquiry, and think "aha, there's one of them!" And start booting others. I've seen this happen before! A park, school, etc... where there was never any rules, until someone took it upon themselves to go to city hall and ask. The "presto", a "no" gets handed out. The dejected md'rs passes the word to other md'rs in the community, who are left scratching their heads, saying "since when?? I've hunted there for 20 yrs!"
Here's an example of this psychology:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,249049.0.html
Terrafisher
Full Member
Good point, Tom, and not arguing.
I was simply lucky enough to contact our city parks director himself, who is also an avid metal detectorist, so also received suggestions for places to hunt from him, along with his cell phone number if I had an issue arise.
I realize not all municipalities would respond in like, but i'm lucky enough to live in one that does. (Sometimes small town living has its benefits)
Across the river in Houston, you can hunt parks with a permit from the city, although few actually get them, but however, hunting in Harris County parks is strictly prohibited.
Reminds me of "plausable deniability"... when all else fails, play stupid. Doesn't mean you won't get a citation, or even your stuff confiscated, but you might just get lucky, and the official give you a break.
I was simply lucky enough to contact our city parks director himself, who is also an avid metal detectorist, so also received suggestions for places to hunt from him, along with his cell phone number if I had an issue arise.
I realize not all municipalities would respond in like, but i'm lucky enough to live in one that does. (Sometimes small town living has its benefits)
Across the river in Houston, you can hunt parks with a permit from the city, although few actually get them, but however, hunting in Harris County parks is strictly prohibited.
Reminds me of "plausable deniability"... when all else fails, play stupid. Doesn't mean you won't get a citation, or even your stuff confiscated, but you might just get lucky, and the official give you a break.
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,336
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
And you know another funny thing that occurs to me: People float their examples of having gotten permission, as proof therefore, that permission was needed. Because, in their mind, the mere fact they "got permission", simply means that permission was ....... therefore .... needed. Right? I mean, if it had been something you didn't need permission for, perhaps they think the desk clerk would have smiled, laughed, and said "no silly, you don't need permission for that", right?
But human nature doesn't work that way with authorities. The fact that you are standing their asking their permission to do something, merely presumes that something is inherently wrong with you or your hobby, that you had to ask, to begin with. Ie.: you wouldn't have asked them, if it didn't somehow need sanction. With that inference in mind, they will endow on your their princely authority, and grant, or deny it. Never will someone say "you don't need my permission silly, why are you asking me?". People in power will simply say "yes" or "no", or whatever. The fact that you or I get an answer from someone in authority, to me doesn't mean that ..... therefore ...... the activity needed their sanction, and your success at getting permission is somehow proof of that.
But human nature doesn't work that way with authorities. The fact that you are standing their asking their permission to do something, merely presumes that something is inherently wrong with you or your hobby, that you had to ask, to begin with. Ie.: you wouldn't have asked them, if it didn't somehow need sanction. With that inference in mind, they will endow on your their princely authority, and grant, or deny it. Never will someone say "you don't need my permission silly, why are you asking me?". People in power will simply say "yes" or "no", or whatever. The fact that you or I get an answer from someone in authority, to me doesn't mean that ..... therefore ...... the activity needed their sanction, and your success at getting permission is somehow proof of that.
Tom in CA- I knew I didn't need permission to metal detect on Bureau of Land Management land (BLM), I should have been more specific in my first post. The area I wanted to MD on was on BLM but it was also in a Wildlife Study Area (WSA) within the boundaries of regular BLM land and bordering the Painted Hills National Monument. That's the only reason I wanted to see if it was ok.
Swartzie
Hero Member
- Mar 15, 2009
- 791
- 52
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Tejon
- Primary Interest:
- Relic Hunting
One of the sites I detect is on land where a dam sits. It's owned by the government. There have been a couple times when I have gotten out of my car and started walking and have run into a worker for the corps of engineers. The first time she asked me what it is that I'm looking for and I explain I'm looking for relics and such given that the area has some history back to the mid 1700's. The second time I ran into her she just asked if I have had any luck. Both times she suggested that if I find anything that maybe I should donate it to the local historical society. She knew the history of the area and it was nice talking to her. Now, if I had called one of the offices for the dam to ask permission to metal detect I'm sure that they would have said no. Granted, the lady didn't give me permission, but she never even hinted that I was not allowed to hunt on the land.
-Swartzie
-Swartzie
deepskyal
Bronze Member
- Aug 17, 2007
- 1,925
- 62
- Detector(s) used
- White's Coinmaster 6000 Di Series 3, Minelab Eq 600
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
My lone example for asking permission was on posted private property. It didn't say no trespassing, just said no unauthorized vehicles and was owned by the railroad. Had a steel gate running across the road.
This area is frequented by fishermen, hikers, hunters and partiers alike. It is also on the rails-to-trails map system.
After much research I had discovered many facts that made this a perfect place to detect.
There was a town there at one time that vanished without any hoopla and even historians want to know what happened to it.
It was a 4 way rail terminal at one time for trains going north/south, east/west. The e/w lines have been removed.
It was the site of an indian massacre and the old Pittsburgh canal had a viaduct there.
The area was horribly overgrown with giant Japnese knotweed and other brush so to detect was going to involve some serious brush removal.
I own a brush cutter and a modified mower to cut through brush but to drag all this down to the area and work was going to be time consuming and busy.
I decided with the scope of work it was going to take, I'd secure permission from the railroad, even though I had started brushcutting and detecting with railroad employees present and nothing was ever said to me.
The reply....a big fat NO...because of LIABILITY
Not only did they say no...the next week there was a brand new lock on the gate to drive down.
My moral to this story.
Don't ask permission when nobody in the area cares when countless others already freely use the area for recreational purposes. The railroad office
? Clear on the other side of the country from me!
The railroad employees that were there could care less and the engineers of the trains going by smile and wave.
Why did I bother to ask for permission this one time when in all my past years I never bothered.... Maybe this one time, after reading so many people on Tnet harping about private property I would do what they thought was the right thing.
Won't be doing that again.
And just so anyone wonders about what I might have said to deserve a no. I cited the historical facts, I mentioned staying away from the active rail line, I mentioned my involvement in local historical groups...it was a well thought out letter. They are simply worried about LIABILITY by saying yes.
Al
This area is frequented by fishermen, hikers, hunters and partiers alike. It is also on the rails-to-trails map system.
After much research I had discovered many facts that made this a perfect place to detect.
There was a town there at one time that vanished without any hoopla and even historians want to know what happened to it.
It was a 4 way rail terminal at one time for trains going north/south, east/west. The e/w lines have been removed.
It was the site of an indian massacre and the old Pittsburgh canal had a viaduct there.
The area was horribly overgrown with giant Japnese knotweed and other brush so to detect was going to involve some serious brush removal.
I own a brush cutter and a modified mower to cut through brush but to drag all this down to the area and work was going to be time consuming and busy.
I decided with the scope of work it was going to take, I'd secure permission from the railroad, even though I had started brushcutting and detecting with railroad employees present and nothing was ever said to me.
The reply....a big fat NO...because of LIABILITY
Not only did they say no...the next week there was a brand new lock on the gate to drive down.
My moral to this story.
Don't ask permission when nobody in the area cares when countless others already freely use the area for recreational purposes. The railroad office
? Clear on the other side of the country from me!The railroad employees that were there could care less and the engineers of the trains going by smile and wave.
Why did I bother to ask for permission this one time when in all my past years I never bothered.... Maybe this one time, after reading so many people on Tnet harping about private property I would do what they thought was the right thing.
Won't be doing that again.
And just so anyone wonders about what I might have said to deserve a no. I cited the historical facts, I mentioned staying away from the active rail line, I mentioned my involvement in local historical groups...it was a well thought out letter. They are simply worried about LIABILITY by saying yes.
Al
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,336
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
Al, excellent example. When it comes to RR property, I had something similar happen: Some friends and I were hunting a ghost town site near some RR tracks. About mid-day, a caretaker rep. must've seen us, because this guy comes over in an ATV. He tells us: You can't do that here. This is private property (there were no fences or signs, so we hadn't bothered to ask). But then he pointed across the street, and says "you can do it over there though, because that's the railroads right-of-way." With that, we merely crossed the street, and hunted old foundations over there. No problem. But it occured to me: I'll bet if we asked the RR, someone would be obliged to say "no". But on the contrary, it was obvious, no one cared (so long as you're not being a nuisance, blocking trains, etc....).
Another example: They rennovated an old high school campus (blt. 1919) here in my town, years ago. A part of the rennovation process involved scraping the grass out of the inner courtyard, where ...... for 70+ yrs., hundreds of kids each day had sat on the grass eating their lunch. It was certain to be a silver bonanza. Our brick & mortar club sent a letter to the city school dept. asking "permission" to metal detect, while the grass was off. You can guess their answer!! Meanwhile, another local fellow, just helped himself and got hundreds of old coins. But get this: he was hunting right in view of Main St. traffic, in full view of anyone and everyone, and no one cared less! After-school staff who could see him from other un-affected buildings, would come over, out of curiosity, and see what he was finding each night, wishing him luck, and quite intrigued. No one cared! But some desk-bound bureaucrat across town, must've checked with a school legal counsel, and was advised to tell us "no" I guess. When I confronted this lone hunter and told him that we'd been told "no", he just looked at me bewildered, and .... for the life of him, he couldn't understand why we'd felt compelled to ask, for a public school. He told me that he'd been there all week, and no one said "boo" to him so far. Then he opened up his apron and showed me all the goodies he'd found that night so far. Believe me, it was an EYE OPENER for me, of how all this psychology works.
Another example: They rennovated an old high school campus (blt. 1919) here in my town, years ago. A part of the rennovation process involved scraping the grass out of the inner courtyard, where ...... for 70+ yrs., hundreds of kids each day had sat on the grass eating their lunch. It was certain to be a silver bonanza. Our brick & mortar club sent a letter to the city school dept. asking "permission" to metal detect, while the grass was off. You can guess their answer!!
Meanwhile, another local fellow, just helped himself and got hundreds of old coins. But get this: he was hunting right in view of Main St. traffic, in full view of anyone and everyone, and no one cared less! After-school staff who could see him from other un-affected buildings, would come over, out of curiosity, and see what he was finding each night, wishing him luck, and quite intrigued. No one cared! But some desk-bound bureaucrat across town, must've checked with a school legal counsel, and was advised to tell us "no" I guess. When I confronted this lone hunter and told him that we'd been told "no", he just looked at me bewildered, and .... for the life of him, he couldn't understand why we'd felt compelled to ask, for a public school. He told me that he'd been there all week, and no one said "boo" to him so far. Then he opened up his apron and showed me all the goodies he'd found that night so far. Believe me, it was an EYE OPENER for me, of how all this psychology works.
treasurejones
Jr. Member
- Oct 4, 2007
- 27
- 0
- Detector(s) used
- Excalibur 2 and a Bounty Hunter Time Ranger
Try this site. If your area is highlighted on the map, you can look at 1940 aerials with an option to view with major roads as an overlay.
http://www.historicaerials.com/
Good luck!
TreasureJones
http://www.historicaerials.com/
Good luck!
TreasureJones
NHBandit
Silver Member
The Army Corps of Engineers sites have their own set of rules and are subject to interpretation depending on who you ask from my experience. Here is an example of the rules for a specific area. The location I used to go to in New Hampshre has similar rules posted but does not restrict detecting to any particular area. It says it IS allowed and is posted on their sign at the entrance. However.. The last time I was there I was told by a park ranger that it is not allowed. When I pointed it out on their own sign he showed me at the very bottom of the sign where it said something to the effect that the rules "are subject to the interpretation of the park ranger" and that since he was the ranger and he said no then I needed to leave. In the past several trips to the same location I've had different rangers ask if I had any luck & one of them pointed out to me where the old dump used to be...Swartzie said:
Here are the rules for a different Corps of Engineers site and from what I'm seeing every site has slightly different rules. Almost all dams & large flood control areas are managed by this agency. "The following guidance governs the use of metal detectors on Navarro Mills Lake, a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers water resource project: The use of metal detectors will be allowed at Navarro Mills Lake only in the developed park areas that are mowed and maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and will be further restricted to those areas, such as swim beaches, where hand digging will not adversely impact any existing vegetation.
Nonidentifiable items, such as coins of nominal value (defined in paragraph C) that are found do not need to be deposited with the natural resource manager or a ranger. Identifiable items (rings, watches, etc...) or items of greater than the nominal value will be deposited with the natural resource manager or a ranger for disposition according to the Title 36 CFR Part 327.15 (Abandonment and Impoundment of Personal Property) and Part 327.16 (Lost and Found) and subsequent revisions. These revisions will include all lost and found articles, not just those found with aid of metal detectors.
Nominal value is defined as less than $25.00.
All historical, archaeological, or paleontological items found will be deposited with the natural resource manager or a ranger.
Digging shall be limited to hand tools that can be used by one hand only, e.g. a hand trowel. Hand tools shall be limited to 4 inches wide and 12 inches long.
All trash, litter or other debris uncovered must be removed and placed in an approved trash receptacle. All soil disturbed or displaced shall be returned to its original state.
In all other areas, metal detectors will not be allowed without prior written permission from the District Engineer. "
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,336
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
NH Bandit. thanx for posting that. Odd that this entity would have such detailed thought-out things to say about detecting. But the sad part is, the reason WHY it's so spelled out! No doubt, someone 30 or so years ago went asking for permission, clarification, etc..... Well then, you simply get rules to address your "pressing issue", eh? In that particular case, sounds like at least you can hunt a sandy beach, and ..... doh......... but you gotta turn in rings over $25 value 
But I bet before any such "clarification" was passed down, probably no one ever gave the matter thought (till someone asks, and gets, clarifications added, printed, etc...)
An example of this is the Utah's state-run parks. There was a memo of some sort, passed down the rank and file rangers, detailing the state's position on metal detectors in state parks. It was pretty dire sounding, citing all cultural heritage verbage which had been morphed to apply to the issue. But what was FASCINATING (and illistrates the psychology of the "squeeky wheel"), was the reason given for the memo, in the opening paragraph. It read something like this: "Due to frequent inquiries as to the permissibility of metal detectors in Utah state parks, the following will serve to clarify ......" Did you catch that? You can only infer that ..... prior to this, apparently it was a non-addressed issue. But given enough "inquiries", well then, .... "I guess we better address this pressing issue", and presto: "no" is the easy answer.
Sheesk, sometimes I think we can be our own worst enemy!
But I bet before any such "clarification" was passed down, probably no one ever gave the matter thought (till someone asks, and gets, clarifications added, printed, etc...)An example of this is the Utah's state-run parks. There was a memo of some sort, passed down the rank and file rangers, detailing the state's position on metal detectors in state parks. It was pretty dire sounding, citing all cultural heritage verbage which had been morphed to apply to the issue. But what was FASCINATING (and illistrates the psychology of the "squeeky wheel"), was the reason given for the memo, in the opening paragraph. It read something like this: "Due to frequent inquiries as to the permissibility of metal detectors in Utah state parks, the following will serve to clarify ......" Did you catch that? You can only infer that ..... prior to this, apparently it was a non-addressed issue. But given enough "inquiries", well then, .... "I guess we better address this pressing issue", and presto: "no" is the easy answer.
Sheesk, sometimes I think we can be our own worst enemy!
NHBandit
Silver Member
Tom this post has actually given me the incentive to email the head guy for the Corps of Engineers site in NH where the incident happened that I posted. I have explained the whole situation to him as to how it happened and asked for clarification. Alternatively I have asked him if getting written permission individually is an option. In this area it's no secret so for the NH members who haven't heard of it, the site I'm referring to is Old Hill Village near Franklin NH. It was founded in the 1700s and the whole town was moved in 1941 to higher ground. I'll update my info once I get a reply from the Corps of Engineers concerning the rules for detecting here. Enjoy.. http://www.ghosttowns.com/states/nh/hill.html
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,336
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
NHbandit, I don't know why this post would give you incentive to ask more. Because, on the contrary: instead of giving you more access, it could do just the opposite: net you a "no", where no one really cares. Ie.: instead of just one ranger booting you, perhaps a memo would be passed down to the entire dept., that it's no longer allowed. So ...... why not just avoid just that one busy-body ranger?
There is a true story of a fellow who got booted from a mid-west state park (I forget which state). When he asked the ranger "but why?", the ranger would only say "because it's not allowed", but would cite no actual rule. The miffed md'r, who had always hunted this park in the past, with no problem, just left. When he got home, he researched the issue, and found no actual rules in his state's park's rules, that would disallow it (barring something silly that *might* be morphed to apply, like ... not disturbing vegetation, or indian bones, or whatever). While he was researching the matter though, he found that the NEIGHBORING state had actual verbage that allowed detecting (albeit riddled with rules, like ...... only on beaches and developed areas, etc...). The md'r thought: "Wouldn't it be cool if we could get such clarifications in MY state, so that it wouldn't be left up to the whims of individual rangers??" So he set about to petition to the highest heads of his state's parks dept, to get similar rules and clarifications for their state. In his letters, he cited the neighboring state's rules, suggesting it would be a good idea, and objecting to his booting, etc....
He waited, and waited, and waited. Despite calls and letters, no one ever replied to him
Then one day, not long after this, he was detecting at a totally different state park, where he also had never been bothered. This time however, a ranger approached him, whom he had frequently seen in the past (with never a problem). This time however, the ranger booted him!! When he asked the ranger "but why? There's never been a problem here before??". The ranger pulls out a memo, that had just been passed down to the rank and file in all the individual parks in that state. It was a "B.O.L" for md'ing, as this activity was not allowed", etc... When the md'r looked down at the memo letter that was being shown to him, guess who it was signed by? The very state-capitol park's senior official whom he'd been petitioning! The md'r couldn't help but see that it must've been brought before archies, legal folk, etc... and decided this issue must be addressed. Doh! You can bet the md'r wished he had just left "well enough alone" and avoided just that one park, or just that one ranger.
So ........ not sure why you want to make a big stink. Just avoid that one person, pick more discreet times, and/or give that one park a break for awhile.
There is a true story of a fellow who got booted from a mid-west state park (I forget which state). When he asked the ranger "but why?", the ranger would only say "because it's not allowed", but would cite no actual rule. The miffed md'r, who had always hunted this park in the past, with no problem, just left. When he got home, he researched the issue, and found no actual rules in his state's park's rules, that would disallow it (barring something silly that *might* be morphed to apply, like ... not disturbing vegetation, or indian bones, or whatever). While he was researching the matter though, he found that the NEIGHBORING state had actual verbage that allowed detecting (albeit riddled with rules, like ...... only on beaches and developed areas, etc...). The md'r thought: "Wouldn't it be cool if we could get such clarifications in MY state, so that it wouldn't be left up to the whims of individual rangers??" So he set about to petition to the highest heads of his state's parks dept, to get similar rules and clarifications for their state. In his letters, he cited the neighboring state's rules, suggesting it would be a good idea, and objecting to his booting, etc....
He waited, and waited, and waited. Despite calls and letters, no one ever replied to him
Then one day, not long after this, he was detecting at a totally different state park, where he also had never been bothered. This time however, a ranger approached him, whom he had frequently seen in the past (with never a problem). This time however, the ranger booted him!! When he asked the ranger "but why? There's never been a problem here before??". The ranger pulls out a memo, that had just been passed down to the rank and file in all the individual parks in that state. It was a "B.O.L" for md'ing, as this activity was not allowed", etc... When the md'r looked down at the memo letter that was being shown to him, guess who it was signed by? The very state-capitol park's senior official whom he'd been petitioning! The md'r couldn't help but see that it must've been brought before archies, legal folk, etc... and decided this issue must be addressed. Doh! You can bet the md'r wished he had just left "well enough alone" and avoided just that one park, or just that one ranger.
So ........ not sure why you want to make a big stink. Just avoid that one person, pick more discreet times, and/or give that one park a break for awhile.
Swartzie
Hero Member
- Mar 15, 2009
- 791
- 52
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Tejon
- Primary Interest:
- Relic Hunting
Well, I have to tell you. Now when I go to the site where the dam is I no longer park at the dam. That way I don't have to worry about anybody in authority seeing me walking around the dam with a metal detector and telling me I can't be doing that. I now access the site from another spot and park where all the hunters park. I still have a half mile walk either way.
-Swartzie
-Swartzie
NHBandit
Silver Member
Ummm.. because this is New Hampshire NOT CA. The site I inquired about is a small site in a rural area where there are probably no more than 2-3 rangers total who patrol it. It is also not frequented by very many people, in fact there have been several times I spent a few hours there and never saw another soul (other than the ranger on duty). In this part of the country people tend to remember you if they see you more than once. So you're suggesting that I go back there without permission and take a chance on running into the same guy who already told me once that HE dosn't think it should be allowed ? Maybe get written up on some bogus charge, maybe lose my detector, etc ? No thanks. I'll stay on this side of the law. Maybe you missed the part where I said it IS allowed according to their own sign that lists all the rules & regulations ? I'm simply looking for clarification in writing from the head guy. If he says no I lost nothing. If he says the sign is correct we all win. Besides I didn't say I was going to the Governor about it, just asking for clarification from the guy who runs this particular site. Hell, it's not even a park.Tom_in_CA said:NHbandit, I don't know why this post would give you incentive to ask more. Because, on the contrary: instead of giving you more access, it could do just the opposite: net you a "no", where no one really cares. Ie.: instead of just one ranger booting you, perhaps a memo would be passed down to the entire dept., that it's no longer allowed. So ...... why not just avoid just that one busy-body ranger?
There is a true story of a fellow who got booted from a mid-west state park (I forget which state). When he asked the ranger "but why?", the ranger would only say "because it's not allowed", but would cite no actual rule. The miffed md'r, who had always hunted this park in the past, with no problem, just left. When he got home, he researched the issue, and found no actual rules in his state's park's rules, that would disallow it (barring something silly that *might* be morphed to apply, like ... not disturbing vegetation, or indian bones, or whatever). While he was researching the matter though, he found that the NEIGHBORING state had actual verbage that allowed detecting (albeit riddled with rules, like ...... only on beaches and developed areas, etc...). The md'r thought: "Wouldn't it be cool if we could get such clarifications in MY state, so that it wouldn't be left up to the whims of individual rangers??" So he set about to petition to the highest heads of his state's parks dept, to get similar rules and clarifications for their state. In his letters, he cited the neighboring state's rules, suggesting it would be a good idea, and objecting to his booting, etc....
He waited, and waited, and waited. Despite calls and letters, no one ever replied to him
Then one day, not long after this, he was detecting at a totally different state park, where he also had never been bothered. This time however, a ranger approached him, whom he had frequently seen in the past (with never a problem). This time however, the ranger booted him!! When he asked the ranger "but why? There's never been a problem here before??". The ranger pulls out a memo, that had just been passed down to the rank and file in all the individual parks in that state. It was a "B.O.L" for md'ing, as this activity was not allowed", etc... When the md'r looked down at the memo letter that was being shown to him, guess who it was signed by? The very state-capitol park's senior official whom he'd been petitioning! The md'r couldn't help but see that it must've been brought before archies, legal folk, etc... and decided this issue must be addressed. Doh! You can bet the md'r wished he had just left "well enough alone" and avoided just that one park, or just that one ranger.
So ........ not sure why you want to make a big stink. Just avoid that one person, pick more discreet times, and/or give that one park a break for awhile.
Daniel3839
Jr. Member
- Apr 3, 2012
- 21
- 1
- Detector(s) used
- CTX 3030
Garrett Ace 350
Etrac
AT Pro
Compass XP Pro
Whites 6000 DI Pro
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
I agree 100%
Ive hunted for years and never been run off from anywhere, just use common sense and sound judgement, dont jump fences, etc. I was at an old Masonic Temple Saturday and a Cop pulled into a parking lot across the street and watched me for 30 minutes, I dug up a silver Washington quarter and shortly after that he drove off. I don't have permission to hunt there and he didn't ask... This was in a downtown area to boot.
Ive hunted for years and never been run off from anywhere, just use common sense and sound judgement, dont jump fences, etc. I was at an old Masonic Temple Saturday and a Cop pulled into a parking lot across the street and watched me for 30 minutes, I dug up a silver Washington quarter and shortly after that he drove off. I don't have permission to hunt there and he didn't ask... This was in a downtown area to boot.
" .... outside a park ...."
Which begs the question: what kind of park? No doubt, one they should have known better I bet, and not the nameless faceless forests this post is about. The site of your friends is perhaps a posted site, or an obvious historic monument? or they were night-sneaking around and couldn't take a warning? Something tells me there's more to this story.
As for giving the hobby a bad name by not getting written permissions from mayors and desk-bound clerks wherever we go, it's actually the opposite, which is the net effect: I can give you example after example, of parks becoming off-limits, when people started asking for clarifications, permission, etc.... Bureaucrats, who perhaps never gave the matter thought before, nor would even have cared, yet field these questions. They are obliged to "address this pressing issue", and guess what happens? Now, in that case, who's the one doing a dis-service to the hobby?
Cass, I would like to hear more particulars about the seizure you mentioned, not actual names, but locale. You and Tom make great
points about the current state of metal detecting in the USA. The wise old bird investigates before bring out the hardware.
points about the current state of metal detecting in the USA. The wise old bird investigates before bring out the hardware.
Top Member Reactions
-
3336 -
1936 -
1922 -
1180 -
1093 -
884 -
799 -
795 -
794 -
784 -
766 -
530 -
492 -
459 -
443 -
425 -
424 -
E
412
-
401 -
389
