Surfside Beach

[teklord]

Recently spent 2 weeks at a resort in Surfside Beach which is south of Myrtle Beach. Worked the sand north to the state park and south to the pier. Braved the water to thigh deep with the water temp about 66 and the air 43 and windy. Was warm enough with a full skin and dive boots. After Christmas everyone who found a detector under the tree was out giving it a try. Plenty of horses and dogs on the beach, they are permitted this time of year. Not much for finds, 2 bucks in clad and some junk earrings. Oddly almost all of the coins were from the 1980's and most came from a cut in front of the trailer park that a passing storm opened. Most days I had the beach to myself. Would love to try here in the summer, everyone said it gets packed then. Was told there had been some replenishment sand added to the North Myrtle beach area, I did not hunt there.

Tek

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[lookindown]

HaHaHa. My point is DONT BELIEVE ME, or anyone else on the internet. Go to the source if you aren't certain.
fwiw, the sign I saw had an extensive list of what wasnt allowed on the beach and cited state and city codes that applied. It wasn't some crayon hand lettered sign, it was quite obviously a goobermint sign that some agency had paid someone's brother in law's sign shop too much to make. Professionally done, like a highway sign. But again, KNOW for yourself unless you want to take the risk. It isn't some 3rd world country where they might throw you in jail and extort your family for your release. (oh wait, has someone advocated doing this in a 3rd world country too......?)

But hey, if signs and laws don't matter to you, or are something that you feel you have no duty to investigate, why bother. Just claim you didn't see the sign. (hey, that might even work with permissions on private property too!) Tip tho, don't be as arrogant as some come across on the boards with the cop- that seems to have the opposite of the desired effect.

I honestly wish those that try this route the best of luck in not getting prosecuted as it is bad for the rest of all the honest law abiding detectorists.[/QUOTE ] If there is a sign saying no detecting, then don't detect...if there are no signs, don't ask just do it. You seem to think someone advocates detecting where its prohibited...your the only one Ive ever heard say to do that.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[wildcarrot]

Flex68, by this I gather than you mean that if any of us can find "dire sounding wording" about md'ing in our respective state park's verbage, that it doesn't necessarily mean beaches are included in that. Right? Thus such verbage which can be interpretted as such (cultural heritage, etc...), is meant to apply to the state's LAND parks, NOT the ocean's beaches. Is that what you're trying to say?

If so, that is also the common interpretation here in CA too. For whatever reason, in the last 30+ yrs. of this here, there's this belief (perhaps it's true) that "you can't hunt state of CA parks". But that's always been deemed to be the inland parks, not beaches. No one has ever thought for a second that you can't hunt state-of-CA beaches. (which are most of the coast-line in the entire state). That's always been seen as different (afterall, you CAN'T hurt the beach by digging afterall , right? no sacred historic monuments on the beach, right? doh!). And they've just always ever been hunted, since the earliest days of detecting.

However, the same state "parks dept" that manages/administers those land parks, is the very same state "parks dept" that manages their beaches. Same exact entity. Same exact rules. There's actually no reason why the same rules that might be said to prohibit you at in-land parks, doesn't also apply to the beaches. Yet as anyone here knows, you can hunt beaches here till you're blue in the face, and never have a problem.

So I suspect it's the same at other states too, where it's just considered obvious that such things are applied to land sites (specifically historically themed or sensitive ones, etc...), but that don't mean beach sand. And for the most part, the average beach lifeguard or rangers must think the same thing (perhaps never gave it a moment's thought!).

So what does that tell us all? That ACTUAL REALITY is what really guides us. Not what vebage *could* be found to apply, if you kept asking long enough and hard enough of enough purist archies. So let's just hope that those beaches where it's not a problem STAY that way, and that no one goes asking for clarifications. Doh!

My experience last month. Camping at a central CA. costal State Campground I was metal detecting my campsite at 7 am. Ranger rolled through, stopped and informed me I couldn't use a detector in the campground...He was very nice about it. So I said "thanks I'll just take it down to the beach later" he then says "not allowed at the beach either you need to go north of San Simeon Pier where it's private property? I worked that area, around the pier, the next day. A different Ranger stopped to say hello and asked if I had any luck? Sooooo I'm confused...What's the deal?I've been detecting on the beaches from San Diego to San Francisco, never had any issues ....

 

[ChampFerguson/TN]

HaHaHa. My point is DONT BELIEVE ME, or anyone else on the internet. Go to the source if you aren't certain.
fwiw, the sign I saw had an extensive list of what wasnt allowed on the beach and cited state and city codes that applied. It wasn't some crayon hand lettered sign, it was quite obviously a goobermint sign that some agency had paid someone's brother in law's sign shop too much to make. Professionally done, like a highway sign. But again, KNOW for yourself unless you want to take the risk. It isn't some 3rd world country where they might throw you in jail and extort your family for your release. (oh wait, has someone advocated doing this in a 3rd world country too......?)

But hey, if signs and laws don't matter to you, or are something that you feel you have no duty to investigate, why bother. Just claim you didn't see the sign. (hey, that might even work with permissions on private property too!) Tip tho, don't be as arrogant as some come across on the boards with the cop- that seems to have the opposite of the desired effect.

I honestly wish those that try this route the best of luck in not getting prosecuted as it is bad for the rest of all the honest law abiding detectorists.[/QUOTE ] If there is a sign saying no detecting, then don't detect...if there are no signs, don't ask just do it. You seem to think someone advocates detecting where its prohibited...your the only one Ive ever heard say to do that.

OK. I have no idea what you have and haven't heard. I know what I've read. Glad you chimed in.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

My experience last month. Camping at a central CA. costal State Campground I was metal detecting my campsite at 7 am. Ranger rolled through, stopped and informed me I couldn't use a detector in the campground...He was very nice about it. So I said "thanks I'll just take it down to the beach later" he then says "not allowed at the beach either you need to go north of San Simeon Pier where it's private property? I worked that area, around the pier, the next day. A different Ranger stopped to say hello and asked if I had any luck? Sooooo I'm confused...What's the deal?I've been detecting on the beaches from San Diego to San Francisco, never had any issues ....

wild-carrot, if you got told by a state-of-CA ranger, that you couldn't detect a state beach (without any solicitation or "asking" from you, mind-you), then this becomes one of only a small handful (3 or 4?) such instances that I know of, in the entire state, in my 30+ yrs. of beach hunting here. Because it's as you say: you can hunt state-of-CA beaches over the entire state, even in full view of such employees, and never have anyone pay you any mind.

HOWEVER, it's as I say: this doesn't mean that there might *not* be something that *could* be morphed to apply to us. SURE! Because the same parks dept. that administers the land parks, is the same exact dept. (and rules, etc...) that govern their beaches as well. But the REALITY is, that it's simply not an issue, and not seen or looked at in that fashion, by 99% of any state employee who might happen to see you there.

All I can figure, for your particular person you bumped into, is that someone in the past must have gone and asked that person "can I metal detect on the beach?". And maybe this person had to pass it by his superiors, call their legal dept, consult an archie, in order to get this guy's "pressing question" answered. The lo & behold guess what will happen when that same ranger see any other md'rs from then on out? He'll remember the earlier inquiry and start booting others! I bet you that's why he's different than the other 99%. I have md'd right in front of oodles of rangers, lifegaurds etc... on state of CA beaches for 30+ yrs. now, and never heard "boo".

All I can say is, that's a very isolated thing (as you yourself have seen and know). So let's KEEP it that way, and avoid just that one person(s) and continue to leave good enough alone. The LAST thing we want to do, is to go get something like that "clarified". Doh!

 

[TheSleeper]

Disclaimer: Always check the fed, state and local laws, do not take my word pertaining to the laws in your area. I will not be held responsible for any fines, or poky time.

With that said, from past research i have done, and please do not ask me to show proof, been too dang long ago, so perhaps even the laws I found then are not in effect now. There is/was a statement from the feds that metal detecting was allowed on any water way on NON federal property (including fed parks) that was tidal and used as a transportation route, up to and including the low tide line.

State parks are at the discretion of the park superintendent as to the use of metal detectors on the state property. The state parks I desired to hunt, my first stop without a detector was the superintendents office to gain permission, my main selling point was all ground would be left intact as it was before me, and I would remove any and all dangerous materials which " Could " cause harm to the people visiting his park to enjoy themselves. Needless to say I was never declined.

Anytime there is a sign, research the city rules.
State property check with the superintendent.
Fed property stay off completely with a detector, even if your detector is in the trunk without batteries, it is against the law. According to the feds, even if you are traveling in a RV and have a detector on-board you stand the risk or being arrested.

 

[Beach Papa]

I know of someone who has camped at both MB state parks. Detecting is NOT permitted anywhere in the campground or the park but is allowed on the beach except in the dunes. Happy Hunting.

 

[ChampFerguson/TN]

A link for some state parks laws: Federation of Metal Detector & Archaeological Clubs Inc.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....Always check the fed, state and local laws.....

Ok, and persons can look up those laws for themselves, right?

.... State property check with the superintendent.....

If you were coming to CA (let's just say) and were thinking about hitting a state-of-CA beach, would you "check with the superintendent" as you say? Or how about if you knew local hunters here, who simply told you "nah, you can hunt beaches here no problem", would that be sufficient enough ?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

A link for some state parks laws: Federation of Metal Detector & Archaeological Clubs Inc.

champ, do you know how such lists came about, in the first place? How they assembled their info? Someone, way-back-when went and asked. Sounds reasonable enough, right? Who better to ask, than the state's themselves, eh? But notice that a lot of those states just refer you to something they believe is morphed to fit your question (don't disturb the wildlife or flora, cultural heritage, etc....), with no specific mention of metal detecting.

Such was the case in a book that came out in the early to mid 1980s: "Treasure Laws of the United States". Same priniciple: the author merely sent out 50 xeroxed letters to each state capitol @ park's dept. headquarters, asking something like "what are the laws/rules regarding the use of metal detectors in your state parks?" And then the author merely put the 50 answers he received, in alphabetic order, in his book. Genius idea, right? Now RV travellers, for instance, could travel state to state and not have to wonder or worry. And if any busy-body tried to "tell them otherwise", they merely pull out the book, and show the busy-body the citation on letter-head from their own state headquarters. Ah how nice, right?

But a curious thing happened when that book started making the rounds (and continues to this day with compendiums like that FMDAC list) is that there were states, prior to that, which you could hunt state parks in till you were blue in the face, and not have a problem. I mean, sure, md'rs had the sense to stay out of the obvious historic monuments, but other than that, no problems. Now some of those states had some book giving them dire restrictions, or out-right no's ?? You had old-timers scratching their heads saying "since when??"

See how that works? Put yourself in the position of that desk-bound bureaucrat tasked with answering this letter . What would be the "easy" answer? Because admittedly, there's bound to be some historic monuments in any given state. Or perhaps the letter gets pushed past the purist archie's desk for "his review and comment". Or perhaps their image was geeks with shovels leaving a mess, etc.... So a lot dire sounding things made it on that/those lists, for places which were never a problem before! Ah wonderful.

You gotta love it. It's as if we can be our own worst enemies, eh?

 

[TheSleeper]

Ok, and persons can look up those laws for themselves, right?

Yes tom they can, I did.



If you were coming to CA (let's just say) and were thinking about hitting a state-of-CA beach, would you "check with the superintendent" as you say? Or how about if you knew local hunters here, who simply told you "nah, you can hunt beaches here no problem", would that be sufficient enough ?

Tom, as I said check with the superintendent, there is no federal law forbidding someone from hunting on state property, fed prop yes, state no, although some superintendents believe there is a fed law regulating them, there are none that i have been able to find, all that i could find left decisions up to the discretion of the superintendent.

Tom If i am going somewhere i have not hunted before, I always check the laws, not word of mouth from others. Nor am i trying to influence others, hence my disclaimer at the start of my post.
Disclaimer: Always check the fed, state and local laws, do not take my word pertaining to the laws in your area. I will not be held responsible for any fines, or poky time.

Tom I will say this much, as far as state parks go. you have to sell yourself to those people. Describe how you are going to clean their beach, remove dangerous materials which could harm their paying customers, take an old bag full of old fishing hooks, sharp pieces of metal and state all these items i have removed from other beaches, each piece could have ruined a tourist vacation. Think of some poor lil child hurting his/her foot on any of these objects. Sell yourself as a dedicated sportsman, willing to clean their beaches in lieu of payment for the chance to find any dropped coins.

With this approach and going directly to the superintendent I have been on many state parks, at the end of each day I "always" go back and show him/her the dangerous items I have removed.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

sleeper, so on the one hand you say that someone can look up the laws for himself. Ok, fine. But on the other hand, you say that if you're coming to CA (just as an example), you would "go directly to the superintendent". Ok, so I don't get it. Why not look it up for yourself as you say you can? Why do you need to go to a superintendent then?

Maybe I'm reading between the lines of your post to guess that it's because .... even though there may not be a "specific" prohibition (eg.: "no metal detecting"), or a specific allowance, yet there might be something ancillary that someone could morph to fit? Ie.: cultural heritage, etc... ? Ie.: "the discretion the superintendent", etc.. ? To that extent, sure, you're right: someone can say you're bothering the earthworms, or some such morphing. Is that why you think you should ask ?

 

[lookindown]

OK. I have no idea what you have and haven't heard. I know what I've read. Glad you chimed in.

I don't know what you've read, so please tell me...thanks.

 

[Sir Gala Clad]

Most likely, it has to with Hearst Castle being a National and California Historical Landmark
designed by architect Julia Morgan between 1919 and 1947 for newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst, who died in 1951.
In 1957, the Hearst Corporation donated the property to the state of California.
Since that time it has been maintained as a state historic park where the estate,
and its considerable collection of art and antiques, is open for public tours.
Despite its location far from any urban center, the site attracts about one million visitors per year
Address: 750 Hearst Castle Road, San Simeon, CA ·

 

[TheSleeper]

Tom it has been my experience that state park super's believe that there are fed laws prohibiting detecting on state grounds, of which I have not been able to find any.

It is in this instance that I am referring, since many state park supers believe there are fed rules that apply to them, they are hesitant to allow us on their park. It is our duty to not only them but also us to enlighten them, politely I might add, also it is our duty to educate them about how useful we as detectorist are to the safety of their customers.

Each piece of sharp metal, fishing hooks, tin can tops, rusted cans, the list is endless, that we remove from the ground is "possibly" a tourist not injured.

It has been my experience that most state park super's are the final say as to what transpires on the property they are hired to protect. So if you cannot find the laws pertaining to the park, sure go visit the super, explain who you are, explain what you can do for him and his park, especially his customers to make their visits safer.

Now I do not know about your area, we are on opposite ends of this country. So that is why I said check the laws and rules of the area's one would like to hunt on. Will I hunt them up for Calif heck no, not gonna go there, was stationed there 30+ years ago (Oceanside and 29 stumps) and did not leave anything to have to go back after.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

......... So if you cannot find the laws pertaining to the park, sure go visit the super.....

Ok, then if you CAN find the laws pertaining to a park, the you DON'T need to "go visit the super", right?

As for the part about some state's parks people thinking that fed law. reaches down to their state parks, you are corrrect: Things on the federal level do NOT necessarily apply to individual state parks. They would only subrogate down to state level parks if brought in by actual inclusion/reference. Thus simply because the states are a sub-part of the larger fed, does not mean that states can't set their own individual different rules for state parks (and/or be silent on an issue and leave something un-addressed entirely). Afterall, park rules vary all the time! For example: One park allows dogs off-leash, while another doesn't. One park allows overnight camping, while another closes at sunset. One park allows fireworks while another doesn't. So therefore just because the fed might say something about their parks, does NOT mean it subrogates down to state level. No more so than state park rules subrogate down to city parks levels, and so forth. (unless brought in by inclusion reference).

However, I would not believe we need to go "pre-empt" that and clarify with each state park person we come to "just in case he makes this mis-interpretation". I would only bring up the correction to him, if he approached me in the field. There is no need to think we need to "pre-emptively strike" to show mistaken persons something like this. If someone has an issue, they're welcome to tell me when I out there. If I've already checked the rules and it's not dis-allowed, then I have nothing to worry about.

 

[ChampFerguson/TN]

I think some of what I've said has been misunderstood or misconstrued.

I agree with the last line in Toms last post:

If I've already checked the rules and it's not dis-allowed, then I have nothing to worry about.

I do my due diligence and hunt armed with knowledge and clean conscience.