Virginia people, question

[FarmerChick]

On my metal detecting for the states, it says Virginia State Parks you can detect with a permit.
going next summer to a state park in Cape Charles on the beach.

Then I read a review of the campground on the net checking into it, and someone posted no metal detecting allowed.

huh?

I will probably call the state park later....but wondering, is anyone detecting in the viriginia state parks with a permit like my list of states says is allowed?

thanks

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[lookindown]

Jason, Thanx for agreeing with me "normally" you are absolutely right. Anytime such a "decision" goes to pass in front of an archie (who as you say, is on the payrolls of various govt. agencies), then sure, they say "no". Because as you say, they are innately at odds with the idea of our hobby. And then we md'rs say "durned those archies anyhow", right? But I bet you 99% of the time, the reason it ever reached that archie's desk, for his in-put TO BEGIN WITH, was the "pressing issue" that makes the rounds to them, to begin with. Ie.: Someone asks (maybe not NOW, but perhaps 10, or 20 yrs. ago, etc...). Thus the question needs to go to various channels of approval, and then yes, the archies say "no". I can give you MANY examples of this, where ...... sure ......an archie said "no". But when you look deeper, to see why it was even on the archie's desk for his say-so, it is just as I've said. If you doubt me, I'll give you case examples of this happening time and again, at various govt. levels, where the chain reaction was/is documented.

OBN, you say: " ..... you cannot significantly impact the water bottoms and you cannot use any mechanical equipment. You would need a permit to do so from this agency. " Well gee, I don't think digging with a sandscoop "significantly impacts" anything. And ... no .... I'm not using "mechanical equipment" to dig either. So why, therefore, would we need a "permit" from that agency?

Big-scoop, you say: "Having that conclusive answer beforehand is what prevents all of this non-sense" Why can't the "conclusive answer" be from a person looking it up for themselves? And if the law is silent on the issue (nothing specifically saying "no metal detectors"), then presto, it must not be dis-allowed then? Why can't that be "conclusive"? For example, if I see no rules on the books forbidding the flying of frisbees, I'm going to assume that ... therefore ... flying frisbees is not disallowed. Can that stop a cop from coming up and saying that "frisbee flying is a dangerous nuisance" (might poke someone's eye out), and writing me a ticket? SURE! But does that therefore mean I stop in at all parks before arriving and asking if I can fly frisbees? NO!

And to say that asking ahead of time prevents the nonsense, be aware that it can also CAUSE nonsense to START, where no one ever had a problem before. There are multiple real-life examples of this, from city and up to state scale, that I can give, where no one ever had a problem, till people went "seeking clarification".

You are right, something is wrong when you cant determine if something is legal by looking it up yourself. When you leave it up to authority to make the determination, it is going to go against you most times. If Farmerchick asks enough people enough questions she will be told NO.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[bear2442]

It was the reply to Farmchicks from John M.R. Bull Virginia Marine Resources Commission not to obn
http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/b...377-virginia-people-question.html#post3065857

 

[Tom_in_CA]

You can get permits in about any state park but most keep everything you find.

Franklin, what you are saying is probably going to be true of any sand box, at any level, (city, county, state, or fed), if you asked long enough and hard enough. I mean, sure, every penny you find, I suppose a city lawyer could say "that belongs to the city, because you found it on city property".

But let me ask you this: In all your years of metal detecting, has ANYONE ever gone through your apron, at the end of the day, to see what you've found? I've been at this for over 35 yrs, and have YET to ever have someone riffle through my apron seeing if there's something there that should belong to the beach, or the park, or the school, etc.... No one's looking over my shoulder with a calculator doing the math on the age of coins, etc....

 

[Tom_in_CA]

It was the reply to Farmchicks from John M.R. Bull Virginia Marine Resources Commission not to obn
http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/b...377-virginia-people-question.html#post3065857

Yes, you're right. OBN was merely continuing on the quote. But yes, it was initially an answer given to farm-chick. Point remains still, the answer/response is the same to Farm chick.

 

[FarmerChick]

WOW I had no idea this took off.


I understand what you are saying. I did get a YES to detect the bay. Why should I bother to ask if I can enter the bay with the detector off a state park beach?

I think I am being overly cautious because this is a family vacation. I really don't want to end up in court. It isn't worth it to me so before I even think of stepping foot on that state park beach, getting into the water with my detector, I am making sure I can do it.

Since I will be in the area of 'legal beaches' and Delaware is very close drive to its' public beaches, I have tons of places to detect. the one in the state park of course is easiest since I am there. But if I get into a big old mess with citations, court and all that mess, hubby will be ticked off family vacation to him means no arrests or charges HAHA

This is the first time I questioned detecting laws so deep. It is very interesting and confusing with the state parks seemingly having their own rules individually and yet no set rules over all the parks

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

courts? mess? arrests? citations? confiscations? Jail? etc...

Anytime this type subject comes up ("can I detect in such & such place?") , someone will invariably post a scary story (as isolated as it may have been). And then everyone else reads and thinks "oh me oh my, I might get arrested", etc... But if you press them, and ask them how many people they know who have EVER "been arrested" or "thrown in jail" or "had confiscations", for detecting an innocuous un-posted area, no one ever seems to know of any examples. Besides a few extremely rare incidents, which would be no different than occasional stories of drivers being roughed up for nothing but a tail light out.

 

[bigscoop]

Tom, you ask;

Why can't the "conclusive answer" be from a person looking it up for themselves? And if the law is silent on the issue (nothing specifically saying "no metal detectors"), then presto, it must not be dis-allowed then?

Are you kidding with this argument? Have you ever even read some of wording in these many laws and restrictions? If you had you are fully aware that "metal detector" does not have to be spelled out to be included. And again, the park management has said, "NO" to beach detecting. Max has told that they have made repeated attempts to gain access to this very beach, and were told...."NO". Once again, in many states the park manager has the ability to set their own individual park rules.......and this may include....."access to the water from their beach with a metal detector." You say, "don't ask because you already know the answer", already have a conclusive answer....of "yes"....so please do tell......where did you see/find that, "yes"...? So far I have seen nothing from the park indicating that this access has been granted/approved by the park. So please, by all means, help Chick out and show her where you found that conclusive, "yes."

 

[FarmerChick]

I don't fear going to jail really. I just don't even want an incident. right now I am curious to see how far I can get with emails and seeing what access might be granted.

like I said, family vacation isn't my time to push anything. it isn't worth it to me.

 

[bigscoop]

courts? mess? arrests? citations? confiscations? Jail? etc...

Anytime this type subject comes up ("can I detect in such & such place?") , someone will invariably post a scary story (as isolated as it may have been). And then everyone else reads and thinks "oh me oh my, I might get arrested", etc... But if you press them, and ask them how many people they know who have EVER "been arrested" or "thrown in jail" or "had confiscations", for detecting an innocuous un-posted area, no one ever seems to know of any examples. Besides a few extremely rare incidents, which would be no different than occasional stories of drivers being roughed up for nothing but a tail light out.

I've given you two examples in these matters already. And if you'd take the time to talk to Chuck you'll have even more. And that's just one state! But I'm betting you won't take the time to talk to Chuck, to listen to his story that effected several. I wonder why you won't do this? "no one ever seems to know of any examples." I'm sensing some denial issues.

 

[Crispin]

It appears that this thread has grown outside of its original intent; so, I have no problems throwing my two cents in. Good luck on the metal detecting in Virginia Beach. I recommend the boardwalk between 23 and 27th street if you get out that way.

The question boils down to several psychological priniciples: 1. Forgiveness is easier to obtain then permission. 2. It is easier for people to say 'no.' 3. An answer of 'no' stops future discussion; whereas, 'yes' is only that for moment and can be taken back with a 'no.'

BigScoop is right: Getting arrested, paying a fine, and going to court really suck. The risk may not be worth the reward.
Tom_in_Ca is right: You should never draw attention to yourself because it will only increase the likelihood of somebody telling you not to do something. The reward is worth the risk.

There is no right answer to this situation. It depends on the individual and their preference. Worst case scenario is arrest and fine. Best case scenario is relics, gold, and memories. The beautiful thing about living in this country...the choice is yours.

All the other stuff is mostly irrelevant. I doubt any isolated situation will seriously alter the perception of people's minds on this hobby. Lets be honest. If you are not a MD, archie, or state park employee then you probably don't give a hoot about a bunch of crazies digging around in the sand.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

scoop, when I said there are no examples of these fears of "getting arrested" etc... I did clarify that (as you can see, if you re-read), that yes, of course, there are examples. Sure. And so too (as I said) are there examples of persons getting roughed up for nothing but a tail-light out. But that doesn't stop persons from driving (or thinking they'd be "arrested" for driving), nor do they "ask permission to drive", from then-on-out, after reading of the motorist roughed up by an over-zealous cop.

I am about as brazen as they come, and have been "appraised" (or booted or whatever you want to call it) COUNTLESS times. But have never in any one of those times been "arrested", or had "confiscations" or "tickets" or "jail", etc... Say it isn't so. How could that possibly be? With the skittish pre-emptive-move policy that some people on forums have, you'd think that jail is lurking for anyone who dare go to a city sandbox without the mayor's written permission.

You say:

"Have you ever even read some of wording in these many laws and restrictions? If you had you are fully aware that "metal detector" does not have to be spelled out to be included."


Yes, this has been discussed on many threads before. You're right: The laws are purposefully written vaguely, so as to apply to a myriad of circumstances as they may arise in the field. You know, vague laws that disallow "nuisances" or "annoyances", etc... And as it *might* apply to detecting, you could worry yourself silly wondering if things like "defacement" and "alterations" and verbage forbidding "collecting", etc... might apply to your hobby. And yes, any cop or ranger can come up at any time and tell that .... in fact, YES it does. And sure enough, their superiors (if you cared to contest it) will usually side on the side of the rank-&-file city employee, cop, gardener, etc....

You are right that certainly a cop or gardener CAN come up and say you are disturbing the earthworms or whatever. So YES, you can get booted even in the absence of specific wording specifically saying "no metal detecting". So what? You give lip service, and move on.

But no, the mere fact that something *might* be morphed to apply to md'ing, does NOT mean that we should, therefore, go pre-empt it by grovelling at city hall ahead of time. Because for example: If someone wonders if verbage disallowing "vandalism" or "alterations" applies to md'ing will certainly find themselves an answer saying "yes it does", if they ask long enough and hard enough, of enough desk-bound bureaucrats. But truth be told, as long as you're not being a nuisance, and leaving no trace, you are ignored as harmless the other 99% of the time.

I can give you endless examples of places where no one ever had a problem before (despite laws that *COULD* be applied to the question, if you tried hard enough). Yup, you could detect right in front of rangers, cops, gardeners, mayors, etc.... and no one ever paid you a 2nd glance. But then lo & behold someone (who takes your stance on this issue) takes it upon themselves to go ask at city hall. The question gets passed back and forth to multiple city personell, the city lawyer, the city arborist, and then goes to a vote of the city counsel. OH JOY, right?? And then you get your answer: "no". As you can see, situations like this are an obvious case of "no one cared, till you ask". But it doesn't matter. The person who felt the need to "ask", was worried they'd be arrested, jailed, ticketed, etc....

 

[bigscoop]

Unfortunately this isn't the 70's or even the 80's anymore, wish it was. There are so many laws and amendments on the books these days it takes multiple personnel and multiple offices just to address/clarify many of these restrictions. Gone are the days of a Park/DNR/BLM/etc., officer having a simple reference book or two in his vehicle. Today there are so many overlapping jurisdictions and regulations it's nearly impossible to reference them all or to know them all without much further consultation. Sad, but true. What we must deal with is the today, and not the yesteryear of times passed. This is the real issue at the heart of the matter, today. Attitudes toward the enforcement of many of these restrictions have also changed, just about everyone that has been involved in this hobby, and other related hobbies very long is fully and painfully aware of this. This "don't ask and nobody will care" is just one example as to why we have a lot of these new restrictions. "Knowledge" is more important then ever in these matters now and seeking the correct information, as difficult and drawn out and as time consuming as it can be, is the responsibility of the individual. To advocate otherwise, for any reason, is irresponsible advice and bad for the hobby. So I will leave this issue here, each to do for themselves however they so choose.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

scoop, you say:

" This "don't ask and nobody will care" is just one example as to why we have a lot of these new restrictions. "

Or conversely someone could equally say:

"This "go grovel for permission to do something not explicitly forbidden is just one example as to why we have a lot of these new restrictions"


and you say:

"Knowledge" is more important then ever in these matters now and seeking the correct information, as difficult and drawn out and as time consuming as it can be, is the responsibility of the individual."

Or conversely someone could say:

"knowledge is more important than ever in these matters now and seeking the correct information by looking it up for oneself, as difficult and drawn out and time consuming as it can be, in the responsibility of the individual"

And you say:

" To advocate otherwise, for any reason, is irresponsible advice and bad for the hobby."

or conversely someone can say:

"to advocate for asking where there's no specific prohibitions, is irresponsible and bad for the hobby"

bigscoop: If I gave you a case example, of a) a place where no one ever had a problem before, but then b) someone goes asking permission (or should we say "seeking clarification") to detect at this certain public spot, and then c) being told "no" (effectively getting rules morphed to apply to their pressing question), then d) would you then realize the psychology to which I speak of can be a very real danger?

Or how about this: Read this and you tell me if in this example, it would "irresponsible" for md'rs to line up and seek permissions and clarifications in this case?
An example of why NOT to ask at innocuous public places (Long) As you can see (I can't see how you'd deny), you would be public enemy #1, for legions of md'rs in this region, if you went and did what you're advocating. So how, oh how, oh how, is it the "right thing to do"?

 

[bigscoop]

Tom you're obviously someone who is "brazen" and going to do whatever he wants to do the way he wants to do it, throw in some, and I quote, "lip service" when it doesn't go the way you wished. I'm just glad most MDer's are not this way. So conduct yourself as you wish, that's you're right/choice.

 

[lookindown]

Tom has never once said to break the law...he is just saying not to be afraid of doing something that is legal...if I get in trouble for doing something I thought was ok, then so be it, but Im not going to be afraid, Im going to enjoy myself...everyone has the right to do what they want so if someone wants to be afraid and ask questions its their right.

 

[FarmerChick]

I sure don't see myself as afraid if I ask what the legal law is when pertaining to an activity I wish to conduct. I don't want trouble, who does? So it is better for me personally to know the real laws.

It is my choice to find out the legal law. others might not want to, but for me, if I know a state park DOES have rules about detecting, AND we all know 'they do', and you pretend you are not knowing, don't check and decide to detect and find you are in the wrong....what does that say for character? Only because we know lip service will get us off usually. No real charges most times etc.

So if that is the case, is it still right to do whatever you want even if you are a detector who is somewhat knowledge and just decides to pretend they don't know ANY laws exist. Doesn't float in my boat really. I would rather know my situation. others can wing it if they want. As everyone stated, do what ya want cause we all will anyway

 

[Tony in Virginia]

I was wondering about the under water thing too. Thanks for sharing the info. I live and hunt around the Yorktown , Williamsburg area , so I will be putting your info to the test.

 

[DocBeav]

Good info here.......and to think ALL this just started with a simple question (which was fairly quickly answered) and has now moved into a back and forth argument. Sorry your thread got hijacked FarmerChick! LOL

If it is a "problem" crossing the beach with a detector (or entering the park), may I suggest breaking it down into its carry case or a backpack so that it isn't assembled and functioning when you enter the park and can wait till you hit the water's edge to put it together and start swinging? Just a thought, may not even be necessary but may help if you catch some flack from other park officials.

 

[bigscoop]

I think Chick will walk away from her investigation well educated in the various effected areas. She's already discovered at least one positive thing and I suspect she'll discover a few more before it's all said and done. In the end she'll know a few things many do not.

 

[DocBeav]

Oh, no doubt! She has certainly done the proper DD before moving out on this! Great job!