To All Treasure Hunters - Our Legal Rights are at Risk! WE NEED YOUR HELP!

[N.J.THer]

Left comments...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[rgecy]

I KNOW WE CAN GET MORE RESPONSES THAN THIS! COME ON GUYS, WE NEED YOUR HELP!
This affects all of us. They are trying to take away our rights and we have got to fight to keep them.

Even if you are not from Florida, please follow the link below and go to Send a One Time Comment. Copy and paste the comments from above or send your own!

SHOW YOUR OPPOSITION TO THIS UNFAIR RULE! We only have until tomorrow to get them in!

https://www.flrules.org/Gateway/View_notice.asp?id=6172515

 

[greydigger]

sent my responce last week. if dead people can vote there maybe out-of-staters can too.
Please keep us informed of the outcome.

 

[lou423]

I sent my reply some time ago...
Our hobby is under siege no matter where we go, even on private property.
Maybe if outdoorsmen are elected to office things would change.

 

[Atticus Finch]

I'm in.

 

[pookie-princess of rust]

i sent comments

 

[CoinFinder52]

we can't let them do this!! It's not right,[size=10pt]FINDERS KEEPERS
What you find and put your own money into is yours!
The goverment can't take that right away from us!
The only thing the goverments want is the money and the public does not have the chance to find it!
TELL THESE GOVERMENTS THAT IT'S WRONG TO DO THIS ALL UNITE AND STAND AGAINST IT.

 

[jlb783]

I'm sorry I'm too late.

 

[LuckyLarry]

I have posted on here before concerning the onslaught of "greenies", idealists, and far-left agenda individuals who want to rid us of this great hobby, but I'll do it again just one more time anyway:

Our rights are being threatened by those individuals and causes who and which wish complete government control over our lives, be it economical, social, emotional, religious, or political. We can only continue our perseverence in fighting off with diligence and fortitude those and that which threatens our freedoms and our rights to enjoy things in a reasonable way that pleases us. Even to this day there are still unread and unstudied ballets sitting in the hallows of the government's Socialistic halls which would cause us to be fined or even imprisoned if we even so much as entered a public school ground or park etc. with a metal detector, when using it or not. Additionally, there have been several attempts to even stop the manufacturing of personal and private (non-government) metal detectors too. In such cases the US legislature would mandate "only the use of metal detectors by government or business", and all else would be excluded by law.

In my view, much of this problem has been instigated and even exacerbated by the simply moronic methods in which certain metal detector manufacturer's advertizements are "pushed" encouraging buying their products while stating ideologies as facts, when in fact they are primarily fantasies and nothing more. It gives us all a bad name.

This will be a continual battle for us until allHades freezes over. You can count on it.

LuckyLarry

 

[capt1989]

I tried to do this but the time has expired.

john

 

[docmann]

Rgecy,
Indeed, I agree with your position relative to the proposed legislation. However, it appears that the public comments period has indeed passed.
Will stay tuned.
Good luck,
docmann

 

[rgecy]

Thanks guys for the response. Yes, the period for submittals has passed. Thanks for all the post. I think it really made a difference. The state of Florida has proposed some new changes to the law and we are hoping to see if the new rules will work for both sides.

Thanks again to everyone who made the effort to post a comment.

Robert Gecy

 

[detector99]

An Important Message from Frank Pandozzi

Dear friends, some of you know me from my Exploring Historys Treasures TV series. From that television show, you may also remember that I was harassed, criticized, and portrayed as a looter by the Archaeological community. For almost five years the Archie’s tried to shut down my production, during that time many of you who were supporters stuck with me.

Over the years, because of my experience with the Archaeologists, and my self imposed education of the antiquities laws, many have asked me to become more vocal against our intrusion of rights as metal detectorists and public land users. Many have told me that all though the other organizations that are helping our hobby gain our rights back, have not had enough power behind them to fight. Now, the time has come for me to announce the formation of the National Land Rights Foundation (NLRF).

In a moment I will explain why I believe that this organization will not only lay the foundation for land rights change, but will also have the power and the voice needed to command respect of our hobby, as well as respect in every recreation involving our public lands.

Our country is changing. More and more laws are being passed that are infringing upon our rights as free Americans. Many of these laws are unconstitutional, and are passed so swiftly that congress, nor the public has any idea what is happening. Honestly, I think our forefathers are turning over in their graves.

Already, our rights to use public lands has slowly been taken away. Ever since the unconstitutional passing of the Antiquities Law of 1906, we have also seen State laws that have been passed that infringe upon our hobby and our right to use city, town and village parks. This is why Mike Austin and I started NLRF.

You may be asking yourself, why will the National Land Rights Foundation be any different that some of the other organizations that have been in existence for many years?

The answer is simple. The NLRF will be a powerful voice for public land rights issues because we have a paid membership. Because of a paid membership, we will be able to involve lobbyists, and others to help us gain back what is rightfully ours.

Over the years, Mike Austin and I have formed a relationship with many individuals who can help our members in this issue. We have already reached out to them for their service, however, we need members, and we need membership dues in order to secure help from these individuals.

I am asking you to go to our website at

http://www.national-land-rights-foundation.org and see for yourself what we can offer. Take a look at our mission statement, see the benefits of joining, and then tell your friends and family about us.

We are all students of history, whether by land or sea, for gold nuggets or coins, searching for bottles or bullets. The use of a detector vs. trowel doesn’t criminalize our behavior or rationalize another.

This is a cause of which we are all joined and we will fight for all individuals who use public lands for recreation.

The time has come to speak out. Never before in the history of our great country have we been so blindsided by our government. If you care, then please go to the website. Help us to help you. Become a member of the NLRF, and then spread the word.

Thank You,
Frank

PS: Mike and I will be traveling the country speaking at clubs and various functions. If you want us as speakers please let me know.

 

[veronasteve]

funny i was thinking the other day about metal detecting in various countries and all the problems with the archaeologists that want to see this fine hobby banned
in fact all forms of treasure hiunting,
It's true there are some good reasons to protect important sites but most of us are not making a fortune removing valueable relics and coins,but the thing i did conclude was at least in the states you wouldn't have this situation arise ,an infringement on your rights..........seems i was wrong.

 

[itmaiden]

I had gone to the state website, and the proposal had been amended. Better read the amended version.

As a land hunter though, I do feel commercial salvors should have to re-fill their blowholes if they are within 300 yards of the beach as they present hazards to waders, swimmers and surfers as they not only alter the ocean bottom, but also affect water forces. This idea that leaving blowholes helps to trace a pattern of where the big treasure may be is nonsense when a ship is sunk due to a hurricane or violent storm. The waves, currents, winds can deposit anything anywhere under those conditions.

I personally do not like the idea of wading out and then "dropping" into someone's blowhole oblivion. It is very hard for a potential drowning victim to fight their way out of such a drop off. Been there done that, and praise the Lord for a little boy who saved mine and my step-sisters life many years ago. Drop offs are dangerous to waders and swimmers. So fill in those blowholes. No treasure is worth costing someone else their life.

itmaiden

Dear Fellow Treasure Hunters,

Even if you do not have any interest in Shipwreck Salvage or the Shipwreck forum, WE NEED YOUR HELP!

I know this is The General Discussion forum, but Our legal rights for Shipwreck Salvage within State waters are at risk!

We need your help to show our opposition to the proposed changes to the State of Florida's Rule 1A-31. We are asking everyone, even if you do not live in Florida, to please take a few minutes of your time and send a comment to the State of Florida showing you are against the proposed changes in rule 1A-31 and that you support responsible commercial salvage of historic shipwrecks within Florida's State waters.

We only have until October 17th so please act soon and get everyone you know to send a comment!

Please go the to the following link : https://www.flrules.org/Gateway/View_notice.asp?id=6172515

Scroll down and check Send One Time Comment to the Agency and then click the Make Comment button. Post your own commnets or copy and paste comments from below.

There are over 20,000 members here at TNet. If we all come together we can stop this legislation. I am not asking for money, just 1 minute of your time. Please copy the comments below (or create your own) and follow the link above. It takes only a few clicks to show your support.

Thank You!

Robert Gecy


1. We are against any rules or regulations that would hinder Florida's responsible historical shipwreck salvors from their continued recovery of treasures and artifacts, such as the current proposed rules.
2. Under the Revised and Published Rule 1A-31.0092 (3) c, d, e it declares that permit areas shall have a "Buffer Zone" of 500 yards width from: navigation channels, exempted areas as defined in this chapter and excluded areas as defined in this chapter. These areas are defined in 1A-31.0042 and 1A-31.0045. This means no one will get a permit within 500 yards of a public recreation area (i.e. public beach) which translates to about one fourth of a mile from any Florida shoreline. The entire coastline of Florida is off limits for 1500 feet. This is not fair because history shows us that the majority of shipwrecks were blown toward or onto shore by hurricanes. The vast majority of shipwrecks on Florida's submerged lands are probably included within this area. It also means no one (without a grandfathered in Admiralty Claim) will get a permit within 500 yards of any inland waters, inlets, National Park systems, National Marine Sanctuaries such as the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary), State Parks, Local public recreation areas, resource conservation areas and resource management areas, areas conveyed to public or private entities............. etc.

3. We believe the Division of Historical Resources should do more to work with the private sector salvors of Florida and encourage salvors to come into a fair, even handed and just permit process. Rule 1A-31 does not seek to do this.

4. We believe Florida's private sector salvors have done an excellent job of recovering and preserving our maritime heritage, to the direct benefit of the public and at little cost to the taxpayers and should be allowed to continue with as little interference as possible. Rule 1A-31 does not do this.

5. We do not want our tax dollars used by state archaeologists to dive on shipwrecks. The private sector salvors have done a great job, using their own money, with Florida getting the benefits by receiving 20% of the conserved artifacts and treasures recovered. We do not support any changes to rule 1A-31 that would make it harder for the salvors to continue.

6. We feel the new rule is unfair because it treats commercial salvors as second class citizens due to the fact that it does not give the same standards to commercial salvors as Rule 1A-32 gives to universities and nonprofit organizations. For example, the turnover or response time to get permits for 1A-32 is two weeks while commercial groups have waited months and in some cases, years. Also 1A-32 uses students as excavators while commercial enterprises must use experts.

7. We think Rule 1A-31 is unfair because university and nonprofit 1A‐32 permit holders get a search & survey, recovery & salvage permit ALL in their first permit while 1A-31 requires commercial salvors to obtain only search & survey permits with rules that vary from salvor to salvor. NO recovery & salvage permits (unless already grandfathered in by Federal Admiralty Claims) have been issued to commercial groups in Florida for over 15 years.

8. We are opposed to the rule because individuals who have current contracts for exploration have not all been individually notified of the workshops and hearings. It is also unfair that when they are notified, the locations of such meetings repeatedly take place at locations remote to the majority of the private and commercial entities that it will affect. Therefore, if a few dozen commercial groups from the Keys want to attend, they need to drive either 9 hours to St. Augustine area or 12 hours to the Tallahassee area (and back.) This means they have to miss THREE days work to attend. Two days driving and one day at the meetings. Future meetings should be held in a central location of the state such as the Orlando area to accommodate the majority of thestakeholders. Additionally, these meetings should not be held between June 1 and Sept 30th of any year, as that is the 120 day window for good weather conditions on the majority of the archaeological sites worked by commercial salvors in Florida.

9. We are opposed to the rule because it insists that an archaeologist be on board each salvage vessel during each and every survey and excavation. This is unnecessary because most electronic surveys are non‐intrusive and the majority of actual excavation areas are empty or turn out to be modern intrusions such as lawn chairs, discarded shrimp or lobster traps, beer cans and in some cases, U.S. military bombs in old target practice areas. Of course when major conglomerates of shipwreck material or structure are found, it would then be appropriate for the archaeologist to be on board to supervise the proper mapping and recording of these areas The reality is that the majority of the archaeologist's time is spent working with a cartographer, mapping and analyzing data collected during remote sensing surveys and identifying patterns from other known sites in an effort to decide which anomalies to excavate first, and writing reports after poring through the reams of data provide by the artifact recovery process. His presence on the site is not necessary until significant cultural deposits or structures are encountered.

10. The new rule should address some sort of Annual Adjudication of Title from the State to the permit holder rather than "Transfer of objects" in exchange for recovery services. This way, the state can receive donations of artifacts, because it is usually impossible to put an actual dollar value on each and every artifact found and this would create much confusion in tax law since the transfer of object has an indeterminable value.

11. This rule creates more work and overhead for DHR to manage their resources. Permits should be issued for a minimum of three years, much like the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, thereby alleviating costs to the DHR by reducing paperwork.

12. We feel this rule is unfair because commercial salvors are constantly in the research and development stages of using new technology for survey, excavation and conservation much of which is proprietary information. This rule eliminates many future possibilities and opportunities for research, development and testing of these new technologies.

13. We feel this rule is unfair because it requires the permit holder to turn over thousands of dollars worth of proprietary surveyresults without any guarantee that they will be allowed to salvage a site once it is found. There is no incentive for the permit holder to obtain a survey & exploration permit. An alternative would be to use wording similar to that in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, which does not even require a "Survey & Exploration" permit at all and yet it seems to have been beneficial.

 

[rgecy]

I think this is a great discussion, but it needs it own topic! It would be much better servered and could alert other users to this need. Most people will read the first part and not read all the way down to your very important post!

I certainly ook forward to hearing more and will certainly support any cause to keep the Archies from taking away our rights.

Good Luck,

RGecy

 

[W6PEA]

I think this is a great discussion, but it needs it own topic! It would be much better servered and could alert other users to this need. Most people will read the first part and not read all the way down to your very important post!

I certainly ook forward to hearing more and will certainly support any cause to keep the Archies from taking away our rights.

Good Luck,

RGecy

Mexifornia is somewhat trying to do the same stuff with the anti dredging laws they are trying to pass.

 

[Wild Boulder Bill]

I found a nice vein in the sangre de christos sd I went to the sawatch forest blm. They said they withdrew all the claims in that national forest (no it wasn.t a widerness area) . I said thats not legal. They basically said they can and they did, but I could hunt rocs for two weeks with a fifteen dollar permit, so I went to the mineral club and they said yea they are doing a lot of that. The hunting club said to bad. Nobody even acted like they cared. Good Luck

 

[john09]

YOU GOT MY VOTE OUR RIGHT

 

[stanjam]

This whole topic kind of fascinates me, and not just because I am a detectorist (with delusions of finding that horde of gold!).

The whole issue strikes me as a balancing act, which is a shame, because governments as a whole do not balance well. There is a clear public interest in some respects. I mean I can see how we need to preserve some areas for the public, for either their enjoyment, or for historical interest (archaeological digs etc.). However the rights of treasure hunters also need to be considered. I have heard some real stupid arguments by governments and archs about their rights. I have heard that everything that is buried should be protected for the public interest, so that if the archies want to dig it will be preserved for the (public interest). That is complete crap. I have also heard less than reputable treasure hunters state that everything that is buried is also fair game. This is also bunk. Irresponsible treasure hunters have killed a LOT of history, things that will never be known to us because they have been destroyed by irresponsible hunters.

The thing that gets me is that the two interests are not mutually exclusive. There is no way that the archs can dig every site, only the most interesting, and many of these they never know about until someone discovers something. Governments should be able to claim certain treasures in the public interest so they can be enjoyed by all in museums, rather than in private collections, and yet the TH should be compensated for their discoveries, so they are not tempted to horde them, sell them bit by bit so they can profit rather than be jailed or fined.

There needs to be an effort by the government to create laws that encourage THs and archs/governments to work together. The laws should allow THs to find and keep smaller finds without penalty. They should encourage THs to report finds so that if a site of interest are found, they can be investigated by professionals, and the TH should be compensated for this by paying him and crediting them for the find. There should be penalties not for THing in particular, but for damaging historical areas and finds. It is one thing to go looking for treaures of historical/monetary value. It is quite another to be destroying such sited in search of bits of gold.

We here at this site are socially aware enough so that we do not destroy areas where we hunt, but there are others who could care less. Laws are needed to discourage such behavior, as it gives us all a bad name, and hurts us as a whole. Similarly, we need to make the government understand that even though the archies want all historic sites to themselves, they hurt themselves by by keeping us away. Many significant sites will only be found by seekers such as us, who try new areas, and find those places that may have disappeared from written records. Without us, many of these places would dissolve and be gone forever.

The thing that really gets me is that is would not be hard to create such laws. We would all benefit. Personally we would benefit by either being able to keep finds, or by being compensated/credited with a find. Say it is law that is the government decides it wants to preserve the treasure, the THer would be paid a percentage of the value of the find (say 80-90%) and be credited with the find (the site should be credited to them and they should be allowed to participate in the dig). If the government decides that it does not want to pay to preserve the find, or if a suitable agency (university etc.) does not want to pay the THer, then the treasure becomes the full property of the finder. This way important finds are preserved, but other finds become the property of the THer, and the archies can't just claim all finds, they will be forced to prioritize.

We should be responsible for wanton destruction of these areas as well. We should be held responsible for damages if we don't take reasonable care with our activities, and we should also have a way to report our finds easily in case we find something that is of interest (but we are unaware of its significance).

Am I mistaken in this? Why should we be penalized for making finds? Especially when untold numbers of finds are destroyed by activities of businesses or recreational activities?

So how do we accomplish this? I think the first step is to find places where the laws are reasonable. I believe I read of laws similar to the ones I am discussing, where THers report their finds to the government, and are compensated for finds they can not keep. If we can get reasonable laws enacted, then we won't have to fight as hard to preserve our rights, as everyone will be happy. I truly believe this can be done. The question is, how do we interest those who make the laws enough to make it happen?