Metal Detecting Permits?

[ScharfRJ]

Hi everyone...I looked at the postings I could find on web sites on permits and I also searched City of Ottawa's web site for permits, metal detecting, prospecting, archeology and metal detector and came up with only info on the car metal detectors at street lights.
I have a new idea on this problem. I see that these days, if the city does not have regulations for an activity, then we are all blocked because the clerk behind the desk is afraid of approving activities on city properties that they don't have a black and white "standard operating procedure" to follow. I've worked for the Federal Government since 1986 and have seen the whole spectrum of public servants who can't think for themselves, let alone go out of their way to change things that are missing or have shortcomings.
I propose that we present a standard form to our cities, that they can use as a permit, which allows us to do metal detecting on public and city property, with a specific purpose to find, coins, artifacts and metals, while cleaning up garbage and finding the historic past of the city. The form would state that the detectorist can only detect metal down to 8 inches, using detector, probe and 8-10"digging/plug tool, using a tarp to collect the soil, so as to leave very little evidence that the grass was disturbed. The detectorist will collect and dispose of garbage found, create a record of items found, and where, for the day, to the city as a record. Coins and jewelry found, will be the property of the detectorist, and artifacts will be brought to the curator of the local military, anthropological or archeological museums. The curators will tell the detectorists, what artifacts they can keep and a report will be created for submission to the city.
I think this kind of arrangement will allow us to provide a public service, give us a local reputation as responsible detectorists, and provide us with possible contacts with the authorities, in case we are needed by local emergency or law enforcement to find metals in investigations.
I will put together a template for this and upload it to the site if you think this has potential. Unfortunately we no longer have a club here for a forum to promote this but I'm looking into finding the founders of the Capital Metal Detectors Club.
What do you all think?
Cheers
Rob

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Sandman]

My idea of an 8" limit is because there are usually laws against blades longer than 6", and in areas where we are not allowed to dig, especially with a shovel, such as "National Capital Commission" properties which are Federal, I figured they may allow us to metal detect and dig to 8" with garden type digging tools, in the areas we presently are not allowed to detect, if we pay a yearly permit fee, in the same idea that an archeological dig can get a permit.
I was not talking about limits in areas we presently get permission to search.
Thanks to everyone for all your ideas so far...I guess most seem to feel: search when areas are empty of spectators, search first and claim ignorance if a cop says move along, and get permission for private properties...
Rob

I. Started a permit system for our park system. In was in place because some detectorists dug holes where new grass was planted. The permit was free and just a means of informing guys and gals where new grass was planted. Detecting was allowed everywhere except in swim areas because of fabric under the sand. They were also told no Lesche diggers or trowels, shovels permitted.

Sent by SANDMAN

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[WVPapaw]

Hi everyone...I looked at the postings I could find on web sites on permits and I also searched City of Ottawa's web site for permits, metal detecting, prospecting, archeology and metal detector and came up with only info on the car metal detectors at street lights.
I have a new idea on this problem. I see that these days, if the city does not have regulations for an activity, then we are all blocked because the clerk behind the desk is afraid of approving activities on city properties that they don't have a black and white "standard operating procedure" to follow. I've worked for the Federal Government since 1986 and have seen the whole spectrum of public servants who can't think for themselves, let alone go out of their way to change things that are missing or have shortcomings.
I propose that we present a standard form to our cities, that they can use as a permit, which allows us to do metal detecting on public and city property, with a specific purpose to find, coins, artifacts and metals, while cleaning up garbage and finding the historic past of the city. The form would state that the detectorist can only detect metal down to 8 inches, using detector, probe and 8-10"digging/plug tool, using a tarp to collect the soil, so as to leave very little evidence that the grass was disturbed. The detectorist will collect and dispose of garbage found, create a record of items found, and where, for the day, to the city as a record. Coins and jewelry found, will be the property of the detectorist, and artifacts will be brought to the curator of the local military, anthropological or archeological museums. The curators will tell the detectorists, what artifacts they can keep and a report will be created for submission to the city.
I think this kind of arrangement will allow us to provide a public service, give us a local reputation as responsible detectorists, and provide us with possible contacts with the authorities, in case we are needed by local emergency or law enforcement to find metals in investigations.
I will put together a template for this and upload it to the site if you think this has potential. Unfortunately we no longer have a club here for a forum to promote this but I'm looking into finding the founders of the Capital Metal Detectors Club.
What do you all think?
Cheers
Rob

I am over 65 but a newbie to metal detecting. I consider myself conservative and like many Americans do not favor big government controlling everything. Still, there is some merit to your idea. I will probably get bashed for saying this though. The place I believe it has merit in is towns, cities and areas that have been listed as historical districts or historical sites. The current thinking in the regs is that metal detecting is not allowed in places designated as such. The intent is to protect historical relics, etc., but by not allowing them to be recovered, they are deteriorating in the soil. Your idea could be adopted to allow their recovery and all citizens could benefit by being able to view artifacts displayed at museums which would otherwise be lost. We can't just stick our heads in the sand and say don' ask for permission, we have to help change the system and be willing to share our finds before we totally lose our social license to metal detect by the most powerful regulator in the USA........the. American public who may already suspect that we are a bunch of greedy dirtbags. We can start by improving the image we project to others, which means being professional in all aspects of metal detecting activities.

 

[Muddyhandz]

Are there many parks that are off-limits in Ottawa? None that I can think of in Winnipeg.
There already is a metal detecting permit here. You voluntarily go down to Historic Resources (government archies) and apply.
You will pay $25 a year and they give you a list of where you can hunt; (which is a fraction of what we can do already) A bunch of forms where you record and graph out each find, and a pile of rules stating you can only dig so many inches, can't search anything older than 1905, and a big pile of jargon.
They've had this permit since the 1980's. I will NEVER apply to this. It's a joke!
Sure you've been working for one branch of the government but probably have no idea what you would be getting into when you involve archaeologists.
We are the enemy to them and their attitudes are fascist. If you think of bringing "historical artifacts" to them, you will likely get prosecuted for digging on a historic site.
All sites are historic to them. All artifacts belong to the crown (according to the Heritage Act) and unless you found them by surface collecting, digging them would be illegal.
Whether it's private or public land. Who is going to be responsible for all the objects coming in? Historic Resources has had almost all their funding cut.
Before I discuss more of your ideas here, I suggest you look into the Heritage Act and your own provincial archaeological regulations.
Go find a government archaeologist and talk to them about your ideas. Make sure you're wearing earplugs because you will get yelled at!
I'm all for doing things the right way but your ideas here (the intention is good) are a recipe for disaster!
Cheers,
Dave.

 

[Silver Simon]

The older I get, the more I realize that the government needs to stay the #%$@ out of our business, and stop trying to slowly strip us of our constitutional rights. I hope "we the people" can stop being lemmings, towing the company line and bending over whenever Sam tells us to. Governments should be afraid of its people, not the other way around.

Rand Paul 2016!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

I am over 65 but a newbie to metal detecting. I consider myself conservative and like many Americans do not favor big government controlling everything. Still, there is some merit to your idea. I will probably get bashed for saying this though. The place I believe it has merit in is towns, cities and areas that have been listed as historical districts or historical sites. The current thinking in the regs is that metal detecting is not allowed in places designated as such. The intent is to protect historical relics, etc., but by not allowing them to be recovered, they are deteriorating in the soil. Your idea could be adopted to allow their recovery and all citizens could benefit by being able to view artifacts displayed at museums which would otherwise be lost. We can't just stick our heads in the sand and say don' ask for permission, we have to help change the system and be willing to share our finds before we totally lose our social license to metal detect by the most powerful regulator in the USA........the. American public who may already suspect that we are a bunch of greedy dirtbags. We can start by improving the image we project to others, which means being professional in all aspects of metal detecting activities.

WV-papaw, you're amongst those whose eyes wax romantic at the thought of "permits". And as you say, you are a newbie to detecting.

I can understand how the thought of "permits" to a newbie, conjurs up images of being able to dig nillie willie in parks and historic sites. And then have their "stuff displayed at museums". And then your "image you project is wonderful". And we are no longer viewed as "greedy dirtbags". Oooohhhh I wish it were that simple. To a newbie, who has images of red-carpets rolled out for him, and images of archies who will "love him" once he has a "permit", and images of "museums running out their doors to greet md'rs who bring in their latest coins, bullet shells, and whatzits".

But no, let me alert you: although this is the romantic notion you have, it's not that simple. Oh I wish it was. A few misconceptions in your text:

"The current thinking in the regs is that metal detecting is not allowed in places designated as such."

This would only be true, if there were a specific rule saying such a thing. Because think of it papaw: go to the "finds" section of this forum. Scroll back through the weeks and months of finds. You will see NO SHORTAGE of old coins and relics found there, posted by forumites, RIGHT? Now ask yourself: After minusing out the items found on private land, so the topic is restricted to items found in parks, schools, beaches, forests, etc...: Did all those things get found in places that had "permits"? Maybe a few, but I'd venture to say that a LOT of them are found in parks and such where there is no "permits" offered. And even seateds, reales, busts, etc.... (if those aren't "historic", then what is?). Thus your premise that "historic" spots are all off-limits (simply by their virtue of being "historic") is simply false. I mean SURE, if it's an obvious historic monument (Shiloh, Ghettysburg, etc...) fine. But there's scores of city and county parks, especially on the east coast, that can date to the mid 1800s (or earlier) and have no "historic district" specialty status. I have a buddy who flies in to the east coast, gets a rental car, and drives around to all the small towns in the back-countries, checking old parks, schools, etc... And he's even gotten coins back to busts, reales, early seateds, etc.... doing this. Yup, all at innocuous curb strips, lawns around old public buildings, old parks, schools, etc..... (Sure you/he has to use a bit of "due discretion" and not be a pain-in-the-b*tt eyesore....... )

Next you say:

"We can't just stick our heads in the sand and say don' ask for permission"

This merely presumes that a person is "sticking his head in the sand" if/when he "doesn't ask for permission". In other words, in infers that permission was "needed", to begin with. Why is that the starting premise? Since when is that a "given"? Yes if it were true, then the rest of what you say would logically follow. Ie.: if the action were inherently evil and lawless, then yes, we'd "need permission" and "need permits". If you think your hobby is inherently damaging and evil, then everything else you think does logically follow. By why must that be your starting point of reference? You've lost the battle already when you do that. Am I saying that "everyone will love you" and that you'll never get questioned? No. So too can I not gaurantee you that you won't get flipped off in traffic by someone who doesn't like your lane-changes. Does that stop you from driving?


And if it were true that we could petition all the cities across the USA to enact a "permit" system that would "allow" of to waltz nilly willy everywhere and never be bothered for evermore, then your premise would also logically follow. Which of us would argue with that? We'd ALL like to have something like that to whip out and show busy-bodies, who .... in the newbie's mind, would then slink away in embarassment for having questioned you. Oh but I wish it were that simple and romantic. But trust me: it will never happen. The moment anything like this comes up for review and passing, guess who's desk it crosses? Archies, lawyers, landscapers, etc... And what do you think their mental go-to image is going to be? Archies simply dislike md'rs (or anyone who dares have a relic of their own) from the git-go. Do you *really* think you're going to get them to love you? And landscapers will have a "go-to" image of geeks with shovels descending on parks (even though *you* know that you'll be neat and clean, yet in their minds eyes, why bother?). The only thing you will accomplish by suggesting such a thing, is a new rule forbidding detecting, to "address your pressing issue".

And don't get me started on your "museum" idea. Trust me, I work at two of them. And no, unless you've got something STUPENDOUS, they don't want your donations of grubby pennies, toe-taps, pistol balls, and endless whatzit's. They've got drawers and rooms of things that *already* don't see the light of day. They don't rush to re-arrange the displays anytime a well-meaning public person comes in with "grandmas sewing machine". It has to be something stupendous and earth-shattering, otherwise they just don't have the volunteer archivist staffs to go sorting through stuff that's brought in all the time, by well-meaning people. And let's be honest: I can think of a park in my town that dates to the late 1800's. Over the years, thousands of silver coins have been harvested from here. Do you *really* think they want to open back up the displays each time, and have staff waiting there to proccess your stuff each time you go ply the sandbox for loose change? Govt. is *already* maxed and budget conscious. The LAST thing they want to do is: "go enact more programs".


Please please please papaw: go to ANY permit talked about on these forums, across the entire USA, and satisfy yourself that in all those cases, any such "permits" bring only restrictions, less abilities, and silly rules, than if there was simply no rules or permits (ie.: silent on the issue). I mean, silly things like "yes but you can't dig", or "not within 25 foot of a tree" or "no targets over 4" deep", or "only on sandy beaches", etc...... You WANT that kind of cr*p? GEE I'm glad my city doesn't have "permits".

 

[WVPapaw]

I agree we would not want every state or city putting more restrictions on Metal detecting.There are too many the way it is. I sure wish we could influence some changes in existing laws, however. Term limits is one step to doing that, but we also have to be smarter in our voting and do more research on political candidates so we know how they think. That is the only way to head off bad legislation and subsequent stupid regulations.

 

[WVPapaw]

WV-papaw, you're amongst those whose eyes wax romantic at the thought of "permits". And as you say, you are a newbie to detecting.

I can understand how the thought of "permits" to a newbie, conjurs up images of being able to dig nillie willie in parks and historic sites. And then have their "stuff displayed at museums". And then your "image you project is wonderful". And we are no longer viewed as "greedy dirtbags". Oooohhhh I wish it were that simple. To a newbie, who has images of red-carpets rolled out for him, and images of archies who will "love him" once he has a "permit", and images of "museums running out their doors to greet md'rs who bring in their latest coins, bullet shells, and whatzits".

But no, let me alert you: although this is the romantic notion you have, it's not that simple. Oh I wish it was. A few misconceptions in your text:

"The current thinking in the regs is that metal detecting is not allowed in places designated as such."

This would only be true, if there were a specific rule saying such a thing. Because think of it papaw: go to the "finds" section of this forum. Scroll back through the weeks and months of finds. You will see NO SHORTAGE of old coins and relics found there, posted by forumites, RIGHT? Now ask yourself: After minusing out the items found on private land, so the topic is restricted to items found in parks, schools, beaches, forests, etc...: Did all those things get found in places that had "permits"? Maybe a few, but I'd venture to say that a LOT of them are found in parks and such where there is no "permits" offered. And even seateds, reales, busts, etc.... (if those aren't "historic", then what is?). Thus your premise that "historic" spots are all off-limits (simply by their virtue of being "historic") is simply false. I mean SURE, if it's an obvious historic monument (Shiloh, Ghettysburg, etc...) fine. But there's scores of city and county parks, especially on the east coast, that can date to the mid 1800s (or earlier) and have no "historic district" specialty status. I have a buddy who flies in to the east coast, gets a rental car, and drives around to all the small towns in the back-countries, checking old parks, schools, etc... And he's even gotten coins back to busts, reales, early seateds, etc.... doing this. Yup, all at innocuous curb strips, lawns around old public buildings, old parks, schools, etc..... (Sure you/he has to use a bit of "due discretion" and not be a pain-in-the-b*tt eyesore....... )

Next you say:

"We can't just stick our heads in the sand and say don' ask for permission"

This merely presumes that a person is "sticking his head in the sand" if/when he "doesn't ask for permission". In other words, in infers that permission was "needed", to begin with. Why is that the starting premise? Since when is that a "given"? Yes if it were true, then the rest of what you say would logically follow. Ie.: if the action were inherently evil and lawless, then yes, we'd "need permission" and "need permits". If you think your hobby is inherently damaging and evil, then everything else you think does logically follow. By why must that be your starting point of reference? You've lost the battle already when you do that. Am I saying that "everyone will love you" and that you'll never get questioned? No. So too can I not gaurantee you that you won't get flipped off in traffic by someone who doesn't like your lane-changes. Does that stop you from driving?

And if it were true that we could petition all the cities across the USA to enact a "permit" system that would "allow" of to waltz nilly willy everywhere and never be bothered for evermore, then your premise would also logically follow. Which of us would argue with that? We'd ALL like to have something like that to whip out and show busy-bodies, who .... in the newbie's mind, would then slink away in embarassment for having questioned you. Oh but I wish it were that simple and romantic. But trust me: it will never happen. The moment anything like this comes up for review and passing, guess who's desk it crosses? Archies, lawyers, landscapers, etc... And what do you think their mental go-to image is going to be? Archies simply dislike md'rs (or anyone who dares have a relic of their own) from the git-go. Do you *really* think you're going to get them to love you? And landscapers will have a "go-to" image of geeks with shovels descending on parks (even though *you* know that you'll be neat and clean, yet in their minds eyes, why bother?). The only thing you will accomplish by suggesting such a thing, is a new rule forbidding detecting, to "address your pressing issue".

And don't get me started on your "museum" idea. Trust me, I work at two of them. And no, unless you've got something STUPENDOUS, they don't want your donations of grubby pennies, toe-taps, pistol balls, and endless whatzit's. They've got drawers and rooms of things that *already* don't see the light of day. They don't rush to re-arrange the displays anytime a well-meaning public person comes in with "grandmas sewing machine". It has to be something stupendous and earth-shattering, otherwise they just don't have the volunteer archivist staffs to go sorting through stuff that's brought in all the time, by well-meaning people. And let's be honest: I can think of a park in my town that dates to the late 1800's. Over the years, thousands of silver coins have been harvested from here. Do you *really* think they want to open back up the displays each time, and have staff waiting there to proccess your stuff each time you go ply the sandbox for loose change? Govt. is *already* maxed and budget conscious. The LAST thing they want to do is: "go enact more programs".

Please please please papaw: go to ANY permit talked about on these forums, across the entire USA, and satisfy yourself that in all those cases, any such "permits" bring only restrictions, less abilities, and silly rules, than if there was simply no rules or permits (ie.: silent on the issue). I mean, silly things like "yes but you can't dig", or "not within 25 foot of a tree" or "no targets over 4" deep", or "only on sandy beaches", etc...... You WANT that kind of cr*p? GEE I'm glad my city doesn't have "permits".

Wait......... I think my comments have been interpreted as broader in scope than I ever intended. I am definitely not advocating permits where there are no restrictions now. I was referring to areas designated as national or state historic sites or historic districts which I understand are protected against metal detecting, digging and removal. We need to influence changes to those laws so responsible recovery of lost items and historical artifacts can be made so they will be preserved rather than lost forever. I also don't believe the lack of posted signs means it is ok to metal detect in parks and other public places. This is where we can't just put our heads in the sand and take a chance on being arrested because the site is protected. Sometimes asking if there are regulations prohibiting the activity is the only practical way to find out. Yes, there is danger that it will give someone the idea that we need a regulation to prohibit the activity, but again we need to know how elected officials think and keep the ones who favor regulating everything from being elected.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

Wait......... I think my comments have been interpreted as broader in scope than I ever intended. I am definitely not advocating permits where there are no restrictions now. I was referring to areas designated as national or state historic sites or historic districts which I understand are protected against metal detecting, digging and removal. We need to influence changes to those laws so responsible recovery of lost items and historical artifacts can be made so they will be preserved rather than lost forever. I also don't believe the lack of posted signs means it is ok to metal detect in parks and other public places. This is where we can't just put our heads in the sand and take a chance on being arrested because the site is protected. Sometimes asking if there are regulations prohibiting the activity is the only practical way to find out. Yes, there is danger that it will give someone the idea that we need a regulation to prohibit the activity, but again we need to know how elected officials think and keep the ones who favor regulating everything from being elected.

Papaw, to disect line-by-line, you say:

" I am definitely not advocating permits where there are no restrictions now. I was referring to areas designated as national or state historic sites or historic districts which I understand are protected against metal detecting..."

That's good to know. You'd be surprised to know how many advocate doing JUST THAT. I guess they think we need to "pre-empt" any more places from being put-off-limits, so they think "permits" is the way to do this. In which case they merely bring attention and scrutiny to places where perhaps it was never an issue.

Ok then, since you've made that part clear (that you're only talking about places that have "no metal detecting" rules), then let's pick 2 examples, and follow through this logically: Shiloh, or Bodie. There's two places with distinct "no metal detecting" rules, right? And now: do you think you, or ANY number of metal detectorists in solidarity, are going to go get those places "opened up" to detecting? You're welcome to try if you wish. I work at one such historic monument (lower presidio of Monterey, CA), and trust me: EVEN FOR AN ARCHIE to go disturb the ground takes legions of paperwork, agencies to weed through, paperwork to process, etc.... all to dig a 4x4 pit. Now seriously, do you think they're going to open up Shiloh or Bodie or the White house lawn to casual hobbyists?

Next you add to your list of places you have in mind, as places that have verbage against "digging and removal." If you are including THOSE things as amongst the list of places you feel are "off-limits" to detecting, then let me save you some time: pick another hobby. Yup, every single park across the entire USA (not just "historic district" ones) have rules that disallow things like "harvesting" "removal" "collecting", "defacing", "alterations", and so forth. If you think those things automatically preclude metal detectors, then you're going to have to get those "permits" enacted that you want (or stick to private property). Your mistake is to automatically assume that those things apply to detecting. If you start with that premise, then the rest of your thoughts do logically follow. But think of it papaw: verbage about "removal" (or harvesting, or collecting, or taking, etc....) predate metal detectors. They were/are there so no one thinks they can go help themselves to all the tanbark in the tot-lot to use in their own garden. Or someone thinking they can back up their truck and harvest all the roses, and so forth. Could the be applied to singular coins and pulltabs? SURE. But does that happen very often? No. Not unless you're being a eye-sore nuisance, and thus someone needs to dream up something to morph to fit your activity. I detect places all the time with such verbage, and no one cares. Just like if a little girl picks up a seashell at the beach for her grade school art project, no one cares. But if I back up a truck to the beach and start taking loads of sand with a back-hoe, then sure, someone applies the "removal" clauses.

Same for "digging". Think of it papaw: all such verbage (alterations, defacement, etc...) all inherently apply to the END result, right? So if you've left no trace of your presence, then by logical definition, you have not alterED or defacED anything, now have you? Can someone can debate the semantics of that? Sure. But do you really think the solution is to go "get permission" to "dig" in the park? What do you think the desk-bound clerk's mental image of THAT is going to be? HOLES, of course. Thus no, they're not going to let a bunch yahoos out there to "dig". And even if you could get them to allow this, it'll be silly things like 'only on beaches' or 'not beyond 4 inches'. And so forth. I (and legions of others) hunt parks ALL THE TIME where verbage disallowing vandalism, alterations, and I suppose even "digging". But as long as you're not being an eye-sore begging for attention (in the middle of deep retrievals when busy-bodies are watching), you're typically ignored. Is this a guarantee? No. But so too is it not gauranteed that you won't occasionally be flipped off in traffic when another motorist thinks you did a poor lane change. And it's not a guarantee that an over-zealous cop won't pull you over and rough you up for nothing but a tail-light out.

Next you say:

"Sometimes asking if there are regulations prohibiting the activity is the only practical way to find out."

Huh? Why is that. Why can't you look up rules for yourself? If there really is a rule on the books that says "no metal detecting", then .... presto .... it must be "on the books" available for the general public to see it. Thus, no, asking is not the only way to find out.

And you do add "practical". By that I guess you mean: "easy" (as in ... easy to see/find your city's rules?). If so, (if you can't locate the city charter, municipal codes, etc...), then how about this: go ask the clerk: "Where can I find the publically available list of all the municipal codes, laws, rules, charter, etc...?". And they will direct you to where that is. Perhaps an internet link. Perhaps they'll pull out the binder from behind the counter and hand it to you to view. Perhaps they'll tell you where it can be found. It simply HAS to be somewhere for public viewing. There are no laws that are "secret", which can't be viewed in print somewhere (lest it wouldn't be a "law", doh). And once you've got it, and see no rules that say "no metal detecting", then presto, it must not be prohibited.

 

[WVPapaw]

Papaw, to disect line-by-line, you say:

" I am definitely not advocating permits where there are no restrictions now. I was referring to areas designated as national or state historic sites or historic districts which I understand are protected against metal detecting..."

That's good to know. You'd be surprised to know how many advocate doing JUST THAT. I guess they think we need to "pre-empt" any more places from being put-off-limits, so they think "permits" is the way to do this. In which case they merely bring attention and scrutiny to places where perhaps it was never an issue.

Ok then, since you've made that part clear (that you're only talking about places that have "no metal detecting" rules), then let's pick 2 examples, and follow through this logically: Shiloh, or Bodie. There's two places with distinct "no metal detecting" rules, right? And now: do you think you, or ANY number of metal detectorists in solidarity, are going to go get those places "opened up" to detecting? You're welcome to try if you wish. I work at one such historic monument (lower presidio of Monterey, CA), and trust me: EVEN FOR AN ARCHIE to go disturb the ground takes legions of paperwork, agencies to weed through, paperwork to process, etc.... all to dig a 4x4 pit. Now seriously, do you think they're going to open up Shiloh or Bodie or the White house lawn to casual hobbyists?

Next you add to your list of places you have in mind, as places that have verbage against "digging and removal." If you are including THOSE things as amongst the list of places you feel are "off-limits" to detecting, then let me save you some time: pick another hobby. Yup, every single park across the entire USA (not just "historic district" ones) have rules that disallow things like "harvesting" "removal" "collecting", "defacing", "alterations", and so forth. If you think those things automatically preclude metal detectors, then you're going to have to get those "permits" enacted that you want (or stick to private property). Your mistake is to automatically assume that those things apply to detecting. If you start with that premise, then the rest of your thoughts do logically follow. But think of it papaw: verbage about "removal" (or harvesting, or collecting, or taking, etc....) predate metal detectors. They were/are there so no one thinks they can go help themselves to all the tanbark in the tot-lot to use in their own garden. Or someone thinking they can back up their truck and harvest all the roses, and so forth. Could the be applied to singular coins and pulltabs? SURE. But does that happen very often? No. Not unless you're being a eye-sore nuisance, and thus someone needs to dream up something to morph to fit your activity. I detect places all the time with such verbage, and no one cares. Just like if a little girl picks up a seashell at the beach for her grade school art project, no one cares. But if I back up a truck to the beach and start taking loads of sand with a back-hoe, then sure, someone applies the "removal" clauses.

Same for "digging". Think of it papaw: all such verbage (alterations, defacement, etc...) all inherently apply to the END result, right? So if you've left no trace of your presence, then by logical definition, you have not alterED or defacED anything, now have you? Can someone can debate the semantics of that? Sure. But do you really think the solution is to go "get permission" to "dig" in the park? What do you think the desk-bound clerk's mental image of THAT is going to be? HOLES, of course. Thus no, they're not going to let a bunch yahoos out there to "dig". And even if you could get them to allow this, it'll be silly things like 'only on beaches' or 'not beyond 4 inches'. And so forth. I (and legions of others) hunt parks ALL THE TIME where verbage disallowing vandalism, alterations, and I suppose even "digging". But as long as you're not being an eye-sore begging for attention (in the middle of deep retrievals when busy-bodies are watching), you're typically ignored. Is this a guarantee? No. But so too is it not gauranteed that you won't occasionally be flipped off in traffic when another motorist thinks you did a poor lane change. And it's not a guarantee that an over-zealous cop won't pull you over and rough you up for nothing but a tail-light out.

Next you say:

"Sometimes asking if there are regulations prohibiting the activity is the only practical way to find out."

Huh? Why is that. Why can't you look up rules for yourself? If there really is a rule on the books that says "no metal detecting", then .... presto .... it must be "on the books" available for the general public to see it. Thus, no, asking is not the only way to find out.

And you do add "practical". By that I guess you mean: "easy" (as in ... easy to see/find your city's rules?). If so, (if you can't locate the city charter, municipal codes, etc...), then how about this: go ask the clerk: "Where can I find the publically available list of all the municipal codes, laws, rules, charter, etc...?". And they will direct you to where that is. Perhaps an internet link. Perhaps they'll pull out the binder from behind the counter and hand it to you to view. Perhaps they'll tell you where it can be found. It simply HAS to be somewhere for public viewing. There are no laws that are "secret", which can't be viewed in print somewhere (lest it wouldn't be a "law", doh). And once you've got it, and see no rules that say "no metal detecting", then presto, it must not be prohibited.

Tom, you don't know me at all, and you know what they say about the word "assume". I spent 37 years in a career that required me to review and interpret laws and regulations, provide guidance on compliance, and comment on proposed rulemaking. I have also dealt with regulators at all levels so I know the ins and outs of enforcement proceedings and how to stay in compliance. I am very good at doing all of that, and I am not looking for an easy way out. What I am talking about are small towns and cities that have rules for parks and public areas which are not posted on the Internet and cannot be found in a library or code of Federal Or State Regulations.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

..... What I am talking about are small towns and cities that have rules for parks and public areas which are not posted on the Internet and cannot be found in a library or code of Federal Or State Regulations.

Impossible. There is no laws that are "secret". All laws can be found SOMEWHERE for public viewing. It has to be available to be looked up SOMEWHERE.

Let me give you an example papaw: If a cop came up to you tomorrow, and said "I'm giving you a $200 ticket because you wore blue tennis shoes today". And you said to him: "Since when is it illegal to wear blue tennis shoes?" And he says to you: "It's a big secret, and it's not written anywhere that you can find out. The only time you'll find out, is when we write you the ticket". What would you say?

ALL laws, rules, muni-codes, etc... are on the books SOMEWHERE for public viewing. No, none of them are "hidden" so that the public can't know them. Think of it papaw, even you yourself, if told "no you can't detect" would be able to ask "where is that written?" (as if to put the burden on them to cite such a rule, RIGHT?). And then whatever they cite you (if indeed there were really a rule that says "no metal detecting") will ALWAYS be a place that you, as a tax-payer in that region, could have availed yourself of. There's no "hidden laws" that the public "won't know about" till arrested. That makes no sense at all. How else can a person know the law, if it's a "secret" ? Makes no sense. Yes it's available somewhere.

Now if you're talking "policy" (as in, the potential for getting booted because they think you'll harm the earthworms?). If THIS is what you're talking about, maybe this isn't the hobby for you. If that's what you're talking about, why stop there? heck, include IRS laws (declare all those pennies on your income), or lost and found laws (turn in everything you find) and so forth. I mean, if you want to worry long and hard enough, you'd never get out of bed "lest someone get mad".

 

[cudamark]

I agree we would not want every state or city putting more restrictions on Metal detecting.There are too many the way it is. I sure wish we could influence some changes in existing laws, however. Term limits is one step to doing that, but we also have to be smarter in our voting and do more research on political candidates so we know how they think. That is the only way to head off bad legislation and subsequent stupid regulations.

Always a good idea but in our case, politicians are only a small part of the problem. The main force against us are unelected bureaucrats and related institutions. The archies get grants from the government and/or universities. Once they have their money and a project approved, they don't give a hoot as to who is the Mayor, Governor, county commisioner, etc.

 

[WVPapaw]

Impossible. There is no laws that are "secret". All laws can be found SOMEWHERE for public viewing. It has to be available to be looked up SOMEWHERE.

Let me give you an example papaw: If a cop came up to you tomorrow, and said "I'm giving you a $200 ticket because you wore blue tennis shoes today". And you said to him: "Since when is it illegal to wear blue tennis shoes?" And he says to you: "It's a big secret, and it's not written anywhere that you can find out. The only time you'll find out, is when we write you the ticket". What would you say?

ALL laws, rules, muni-codes, etc... are on the books SOMEWHERE for public viewing. No, none of them are "hidden" so that the public can't know them. Think of it papaw, even you yourself, if told "no you can't detect" would be able to ask "where is that written?" (as if to put the burden on them to cite such a rule, RIGHT?). And then whatever they cite you (if indeed there were really a rule that says "no metal detecting") will ALWAYS be a place that you, as a tax-payer in that region, could have availed yourself of. There's no "hidden laws" that the public "won't know about" till arrested. That makes no sense at all. How else can a person know the law, if it's a "secret" ? Makes no sense. Yes it's available somewhere.

Now if you're talking "policy" (as in, the potential for getting booted because they think you'll harm the earthworms?). If THIS is what you're talking about, maybe this isn't the hobby for you. If that's what you're talking about, why stop there? heck, include IRS laws (declare all those pennies on your income), or lost and found laws (turn in everything you find) and so forth. I mean, if you want to worry long and hard enough, you'd never get out of bed "lest someone get mad".

They are available at the municipal building or the magistrates office for sure. So I would go there, but I could go to a lawyers office and have him find it too ....for a fee. I guarantee you it is not anywhere else in my small hometown.

 

[WVPapaw]

Over regulation can definitely be a problem. All this posting on government control makes me sick at my stomach. I would rather be metal detecting and learning how to find good stuff from treasure net members. Detectorists start your detectors. Let the metal detecting begin.