Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,335
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
reply
Yes, this is a common misconception on forums amongst md'rs, that "state parks are off-limits". The truth is, if you look through that fmdac list of state-by-state, not all of them say such a broad thing:
Federation of Metal Detector & Archaeological Clubs Inc.
Very few have an outright "no". However, very few have a "yes" without some sort of odd "comment". So it's a "mixed bag". But to understand that, you have to put yourself in the evolution of how-such-lists came to be ...... TO BEGIN WITH. How did the FMDAC (or anyone else compiling such a list) to make them, way-back-when? Here's how: they went and asked! Sounds logical enough, right? I mean ....... who better to ask, than the state's powers-that-be themselves? Doh
For example: such was the method used by a fellow named "R.W. 'doc' Grim" when he wrote his book "Treasure Laws of the United States". He merely sent out a letter, to all 50 states state capitols, xeroxed off 50 times. It asked "what are the laws regarding the use of metal detectors in your state parks?". Then he merely sat back, and waited for 50 replies. He puts the 50 replies in alphabetic order, and publishes them in his book (complete with their own letterhead, etc... copied off for the book). The idea was, that anyone travelling around, could use this to "deflect busy-bodies" when approached. Or to know "where to avoid", etc.... Sounds reasonable enough, right?
But an odd thing happened when this book (and lists like the FMDAC's) started making the rounds: There were a lot of those states with "dire sounding wording", where .... quite frankly .... the parks had just been detected, and no one had ever had a problem. So now you had people scratching their heads, looking at things like this, saying to themselves: "since when?"
The reason for this, was very simple when you think of it: Put yourself in the shoes of the person answering such a letter. Admittedly there *might* be some sensitive historic monuments in their state, right? And thus they have to "pass this letter before the state archaeologist" for his review. Blah blah blah blah. Thus what do you THINK the easy answer was going to be? Either "no", or "inquire at each kiosk you come to", and so forth.
So to be honest with you, I don't put a lot of stock in lists like those either. I mean, sure, if you go asking enough questions, and wearing a big-red-x on your back, then sure, you'll find yourself a no or a scram. But most of the time, if you're not waltzing around historic monuments, and aren't a sore thumb, well....... you get the picture.
Yes, this is a common misconception on forums amongst md'rs, that "state parks are off-limits". The truth is, if you look through that fmdac list of state-by-state, not all of them say such a broad thing:
Federation of Metal Detector & Archaeological Clubs Inc.
Very few have an outright "no". However, very few have a "yes" without some sort of odd "comment". So it's a "mixed bag". But to understand that, you have to put yourself in the evolution of how-such-lists came to be ...... TO BEGIN WITH. How did the FMDAC (or anyone else compiling such a list) to make them, way-back-when? Here's how: they went and asked! Sounds logical enough, right? I mean ....... who better to ask, than the state's powers-that-be themselves? Doh
For example: such was the method used by a fellow named "R.W. 'doc' Grim" when he wrote his book "Treasure Laws of the United States". He merely sent out a letter, to all 50 states state capitols, xeroxed off 50 times. It asked "what are the laws regarding the use of metal detectors in your state parks?". Then he merely sat back, and waited for 50 replies. He puts the 50 replies in alphabetic order, and publishes them in his book (complete with their own letterhead, etc... copied off for the book). The idea was, that anyone travelling around, could use this to "deflect busy-bodies" when approached. Or to know "where to avoid", etc.... Sounds reasonable enough, right?But an odd thing happened when this book (and lists like the FMDAC's) started making the rounds: There were a lot of those states with "dire sounding wording", where .... quite frankly .... the parks had just been detected, and no one had ever had a problem. So now you had people scratching their heads, looking at things like this, saying to themselves: "since when?"
The reason for this, was very simple when you think of it: Put yourself in the shoes of the person answering such a letter. Admittedly there *might* be some sensitive historic monuments in their state, right? And thus they have to "pass this letter before the state archaeologist" for his review. Blah blah blah blah. Thus what do you THINK the easy answer was going to be? Either "no", or "inquire at each kiosk you come to", and so forth.
So to be honest with you, I don't put a lot of stock in lists like those either. I mean, sure, if you go asking enough questions, and wearing a big-red-x on your back, then sure, you'll find yourself a no or a scram. But most of the time, if you're not waltzing around historic monuments, and aren't a sore thumb, well....... you get the picture.
Amazon Forum Fav 👍
Last edited:
When word leaked out via the rumor mill, that I'd been in there, you can only imagine the "angst" it caused amongst some members. In their minds eyes, I had "trespassed" or "gone in without them as a club group", etc... So it was episodes like this, which caused me to take my "just go" stance. I simply can not stand back and become victim to the "know one cared till you asked" psychology. 
