Public Trust Doctrine / State Parks Authority

[fishbackbay]

Public Trust Doctrine / State Parks' Authority

I was recently told by an official from False Cape Landing State Park (Virginia) that metal detecting in VA was only allowed on "swim beaches" (I don't believe that's a legally descriptive term) and since none of False Cape Landing's miles of beaches are officially "swim beaches" - metal detecting was not allowed. My counter argument is that this stance violates the Public Trust Doctrine, which states: “Under the common law public trust doctrine, all coastal states as sovereigns hold the submerged lands and waters water ward of the mean high water line in trust for the public. The general public may freely use these lands and waters, whether they are beach, rocky shore, or open water. On the ground, the public trust area extends from the water up to a prominent wrack line, debris line, or water mark.”

As I see it, everything from the high tide line landward is off limits - but the state park system has no jurisdiction over the ocean, which includes the land up to the high tide line.

Has anyone else come across this situation?

Thanks!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tom_in_CA]

question

I was recently told by an official from False Cape Landing State Park (Virginia) that metal detecting in VA was only allowed on "swim beaches" (I don't believe that's a legally descriptive term) and since none of False Cape Landing's miles of beaches are officially "swim beaches" - metal detecting was not allowed. My counter argument is that this stance violates the Public Trust Doctrine, which states: “Under the common law public trust doctrine, all coastal states as sovereigns hold the submerged lands and waters water ward of the mean high water line in trust for the public. The general public may freely use these lands and waters, whether they are beach, rocky shore, or open water. On the ground, the public trust area extends from the water up to a prominent wrack line, debris line, or water mark.”

As I see it, everything from the high tide line landward is off limits - but the state park system has no jurisdiction over the ocean, which includes the land up to the high tide line.

Has anyone else come across this situation?

Thanks!

fishbayback, what precipitated such a conversation with this fellow? I mean, why was he telling you of such things, in the first place? How did you enter into the conversation with him? Like: did he come out to you while you were detecting to appraise you of such silly interpretations?

Because yes, this seems like someone's personal notions or whims of what they think the policies/rules are. Not actual rule/law itself. I may be wrong. If it's written somewhere, fine. But if not, then so be it. Because even though you're right about public access, yet .... let's be honest: the fact that the public can be in a certain place, for public enjoyment, doesn't mean that certain activities might not be dis-allowed. You know, like: murder, dogs off-leash, off-road vehicles, fireworks, etc...

But getting back to my original question: please enlighten us as to how you came to be talking to this fellow, in the first place.

 

[fishbackbay]

I actually contacted the state park first via their website to inquire as to their position on metal detecting. I had planned to take my girlfriend's son with me (trying to get him interested in something other than TV & video games) and wanted to confirm that I wasn't breaking any laws. After receiving their email, I replied back requesting documentation explaining how their position is not in direct contradiction of the Public Trust Doctrine. I don't believe the person who replied is in any position of authority, so will likely not get a response from her - which means I will have to try to find someone higher on the food chain at the state parks dept. I agree that there must be limitations as to what someone can do on public land - but since metal detecting is 100% legal on the beaches north & south of the park, and the land from the high tide line water-ward is considered by every coastal state to be part of the ocean & in the public domain - I can't see how they can legally prohibit me from detecting there...unless there is a statute on the books - and that's what I'm trying to find out.

 

[rickv14623]

I don't believe the person who replied is in any position of authority

So the "official" who told you it is not allowed is the person you then say you think has no authority. Without seeing the exact emails, sounds like the intern working on the website gets to make the rules?

 

[rickv14623]

Reading further this beach area is landlocked by wildlife refuge and the park shows a wreck location. Relic hunting would be about the only thing there since it is not a "swimming beach" Doubt the arichies are going to let you "loot" such a historical area.

 

[NJcigarman]

In Jersey not allowed on the beach at Cape May Point State Park

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

I actually contacted the state park first via their website to inquire as to their position on metal detecting. I had planned to take my girlfriend's son with me (trying to get him interested in something other than TV & video games) and wanted to confirm that I wasn't breaking any laws. After receiving their email, I replied back requesting documentation explaining how their position is not in direct contradiction of the Public Trust Doctrine. I don't believe the person who replied is in any position of authority, so will likely not get a response from her - which means I will have to try to find someone higher on the food chain at the state parks dept. I agree that there must be limitations as to what someone can do on public land - but since metal detecting is 100% legal on the beaches north & south of the park, and the land from the high tide line water-ward is considered by every coastal state to be part of the ocean & in the public domain - I can't see how they can legally prohibit me from detecting there...unless there is a statute on the books - and that's what I'm trying to find out.

fishbayback, thanx for answering. Is it ok if I answer back, point by point, to your answer?

For starters, I would ask you why, back when you started, you didn't merely look up to see if there were any "no detecting" rules yourself? (rather than subject yourself to the nilly willy opinions and feelings of how some desk-bound bureaucrat couches your question?)

You say:

" After receiving their email, I replied back requesting documentation explaining how their position is not in direct contradiction of the Public Trust Doctrine. I don't believe the person who replied is in any position of authority"

Dissecting that statement apart very slowly, it reveals a lot:

a) you had to explain to her how she was mistaken (whether or not you are correct in your stance, is a mute point for the moment, so bear with me for a moment). So you:

b) asked her to document (aka prove) was she was saying. Another way of putting forth this challenge to a bureuacrat is to have asked "....but where is that written?". And that's a fair question afterall. Because if someone is going to say "you can't do such & such", it only stands to reason that they must have some fact or law to say such a thing, in the first place! Doh

c) how did you come to the opinion that this person was mistaken? Because you got to thinking about it, looking up rules for yourself, seeing a weakness in her silly answer, and so forth. Great.

d) But that merely begs the question, that if you could do all those things after the fact (look things up for yourself, find grounds to challenge her , etc...), then why oh why oh why didn't you just look it up for yourself, to begin with? Heck, you can even print out a copy of laws for yourself if you are skittish (laws which show there is silence [ie.; no prohibitions] on the subject of metal detectors). And carry it with you. If some busy body says something, you can show them that you looked, and there's no prohibitions.

e) you say you don't think she has the authority to answer. And that might be true. But ask yourself, if that is true, then what were you doing asking someone who "has no authority", in the first place? I guess you figured that if you got a "no", you would merely go higher than them up the ladder?

The trouble is, the average desk -clerk getting such an email that asks "can I metal detect", is maybe someone to whom the thought had never occured. Perhaps they don't know, nor ever gave the matter thought before. So what do they do? They take the "safe" answer, and look for something ELSE to apply to your "pressing question", so that they can tell you "no". You know, stupid stuff like what you've already heard. Or "you can't bother the sand crabs" or "we have lost & found laws" and other such things.

Why do authorities instinctively do such things? As I say, it's the easy answer. And you have to put yourself in their shoes for a minute: If you got a question where someone asks to do something wierd like this, it only conjurs up images that something must be inherently wrong with this activity. I mean, "why else would the person be asking if they can do it, if it were innocuous and harmless?" This inference is not lost on the person you're asking. I mean, would you think you need to ask if you can fly frisbees? No. Of course not.

So in the future, look up location rules for yourself. Don't put yourself at the mood or whims or arbitrary interpretations of a desk-bound clerk. If you see no rules that say "no metal detecting", then why go looking for someone to tell you "no"?

And what's worse yet fishbayback, is that it's inquiries like this (eliciting princely "no's") that simply lead to laws and rules that say "no detecting". Why? Because they must address this "pressing issue" from all these people are inquiring. I've actually seen this happen before! Someone goes to city hall, or a ranger kiosk, and asks "can I?". The confused bewildered desk clerk or kiosk clerk looks long and hard at their rule book, and can find nothing about. But hey, what's their knee-jerk mental connotation? HOLES! So what do you think they're going to say (even if they'd never paid you any mind)? Or the clerk passes the "pressing question" up the chain of command to various other state or city people. Well gee, now the arborist "needs to sign off on this" and the archaeologist "need to sign off on this", the lawyers "need to sign off on this" and so forth. So they come back to you and say "no". Meanwhile, the old-timers who've detected there for 30 yrs and never had a problem, are left scratching their heads saying "since when?"

So please, look it up for yourself in the future, is the best way.

 

[cudamark]

Yup, I wish you had come to us first before you went searching for a "NO". You try hard enough and you will find one every time.