gravediggermax-vabeachva
Bronze Member
- Nov 24, 2005
- 2,027
- 474
- 🏆 Honorable Mentions:
- 1
- Detector(s) used
- se pro, excal. II, ctx 3030
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
F Y I
***********************************
Treasure hunters in Currituck may have fewer places to search if a proposed ordinance banning metal detectors on county property is approved.
The ban was first requested by the Whalehead Club to protect historical artifacts nearby, but county officials are now thinking about expanding the ban countywide.
The proposal sparked debate among Currituck commissioners last week over whose rights — public or private — most need protecting. The board is expected to make a final decision on the ordinance at its Sept. 7 meeting.
The Whalehead Preservation Trust board requested the ban out of concern that artifacts may be taken from the historic site, said Edna Baden, the trust’s executive director. Some people with metal detectors have been spotted on the Whalehead site, and staff members are concerned that items of historical value will end up in private hands rather than on public display.
An archaeological dig last year uncovered several items — nails, pottery, and a perfume bottle dating back to the 1920s — that are on display at the historical mansion, Baden said. Other items may be lost if the county-owned property is not protected, she said.
Commissioner John Rorer questioned the need to protect historical finds by banning metal detectors.
“I am not sure honestly that there’s anything valuable there at the Whalehead Club,” Rorer said during a recent county commissioners meeting. “I think it’s all in somebody’s garage. It’s been removed years ago — I won’t mention any names.”
The proposed ban drew mixed reactions from other commissioners after County Attorney Ike McRee presented an ordinance prohibiting metal detectors from all county property, not just the Whalehead Club.
McRee explained that other county sites, like the historic county jail, would also be protected under the new ordinance.
The proposal drew immediate opposition from Rorer who said a countywide ban is “overreaching.”
Commissioner Owen Etheridge also had reservations. He said people at the beach are allowed to use metal detectors and he frequently sees people with them on school grounds as well.
“I think we need to be very careful here,” Etheridge said.
Rising to the defense of the Whalehead Club, Board of Commissioners Chairman Paul O’Neal explained that the ban was needed to help protect the historical site.
“They’ve caught people literally removing things from the grounds,” he said.
Commissioner Vance Aydlett said he, too, supports the Whalehead Club’s concerns.
Both sides did consider a compromise.
Instead of an outright ban on metal detectors, commissioners discussed the possibility of erecting signs on county property prohibiting anyone from removing items. That proposal drew even more questions, however, about how such a policy would be enforced.
Rorer said the county sheriff’s department is already overtaxed and did not need the additional burden of another ordinance to enforce.
Rorer also questioned if the historical items needed protecting from people using metal detectors. He said most of the people combing the historical sites have an interest in preserving artifacts and that a ban on metal detectors would “bring exploration to a halt.”
***********************************
Treasure hunters in Currituck may have fewer places to search if a proposed ordinance banning metal detectors on county property is approved.
The ban was first requested by the Whalehead Club to protect historical artifacts nearby, but county officials are now thinking about expanding the ban countywide.
The proposal sparked debate among Currituck commissioners last week over whose rights — public or private — most need protecting. The board is expected to make a final decision on the ordinance at its Sept. 7 meeting.
The Whalehead Preservation Trust board requested the ban out of concern that artifacts may be taken from the historic site, said Edna Baden, the trust’s executive director. Some people with metal detectors have been spotted on the Whalehead site, and staff members are concerned that items of historical value will end up in private hands rather than on public display.
An archaeological dig last year uncovered several items — nails, pottery, and a perfume bottle dating back to the 1920s — that are on display at the historical mansion, Baden said. Other items may be lost if the county-owned property is not protected, she said.
Commissioner John Rorer questioned the need to protect historical finds by banning metal detectors.
“I am not sure honestly that there’s anything valuable there at the Whalehead Club,” Rorer said during a recent county commissioners meeting. “I think it’s all in somebody’s garage. It’s been removed years ago — I won’t mention any names.”
The proposed ban drew mixed reactions from other commissioners after County Attorney Ike McRee presented an ordinance prohibiting metal detectors from all county property, not just the Whalehead Club.
McRee explained that other county sites, like the historic county jail, would also be protected under the new ordinance.
The proposal drew immediate opposition from Rorer who said a countywide ban is “overreaching.”
Commissioner Owen Etheridge also had reservations. He said people at the beach are allowed to use metal detectors and he frequently sees people with them on school grounds as well.
“I think we need to be very careful here,” Etheridge said.
Rising to the defense of the Whalehead Club, Board of Commissioners Chairman Paul O’Neal explained that the ban was needed to help protect the historical site.
“They’ve caught people literally removing things from the grounds,” he said.
Commissioner Vance Aydlett said he, too, supports the Whalehead Club’s concerns.
Both sides did consider a compromise.
Instead of an outright ban on metal detectors, commissioners discussed the possibility of erecting signs on county property prohibiting anyone from removing items. That proposal drew even more questions, however, about how such a policy would be enforced.
Rorer said the county sheriff’s department is already overtaxed and did not need the additional burden of another ordinance to enforce.
Rorer also questioned if the historical items needed protecting from people using metal detectors. He said most of the people combing the historical sites have an interest in preserving artifacts and that a ban on metal detectors would “bring exploration to a halt.”
Upvote
0
