Metal Detecting Law ?

[Tom_in_CA]

hogman, first off, if you say "someone was arrested", then something tells me the whole story isn't here. Because there's no way in h*ck you get arrested for something that's not prohibeted. Something tells me there's more to this story. He had to be ignoring signs, or a warning, or something.

As for: "he had told me I would be arrested and my equipment seized. ". Well gee, is that because you asked him "can I metal detect?

I can give you multiple instances where, yes a person might get an answer like that, yet .... no one had ever had a problem detecting.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Hogman]

I'll give it a try tomorrow and find out.

 

[thrillathahunt]

Here in Texas, the National Parks, Forests, etc. are ALL considered Archaeological/ historic areas by the Rangers! That is how THEY interrpret the law.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

"I'll give it a try tomorrow and find out. " Give what a try? Detecting now? You may already be too late. Because you already went and solicited yourself a "no". Then guess what? You think you can turn around now and just go?

I've seen this happen before, where there's a place where no one's ever been bothered. Then someone stops at the kiosk and starts asking lots of questions, seeking sanctions, and even to the point of putting contracts in front of rangers to sign (gee, can't be too careful can you? ) They end up getting a "no", and then presto, others start getting booted, who never had a problem before.

Thus, you may have already killed your site. Let this be a case lesson for others, when they get a "yes" (see it written that it's actually allowed for pete's sake), or simply see nothing prohibiting it, to leave it at that!

 

[Hogman]

I live between three National Forest, I will not go to the one I called.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I hunt a lot of city and county parks, if there is not a sign saying "no detecting" I detect and I do not ask anyone's permission since there are no signs forbidding it.....

I will print a copy of the 36 CFR 228.4(a) and carry it with me and detect national forests now the same way....

 

[Hogman]

I printed a copy to carry with me also. Thanks for the ideas.

 

[Twisted One]

So during this discussion, and I am not even quite new to the hobby since I have yet to buy my detector, but what I read here in this thread, and what I have heard in the rumor mill.

One of our local "Fedral parks" is Whiskeytown Lake" from what I understand underneath the lake is a historical mining town, called Whiskeytown. I also have heard stories of people being arrested for metal detecting in the park, as well as even more people claiming they had their detectors confiscated by authorities there.

Most of these stories claim that Fedral land will not give up mineral rights, therefore will not allow you to metal detect, gold pan, etc....

Then I though hard about it, and remember going in the visitor center here at one point to get a day use parking permit, and remember the visitor center actually sold gold panning kits. This would seem odd. Since then I have read several things that would make all of these incidents unlikely.

And most likely exagerations, I have the feeling most of those that got in trouble were more likely in obvious historical sites, and pulling relics.


But who knows, we are talking about the US goverment here...

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Twisted one, welcome to the forum, and welcome to a fellow california-ite Keep in mind, that whenever you read, on a forum, to not ask dumb questions for public places, with no signs or prohibitions, etc..... None of this "just go" admonition applies to obvious historic monuments. I mean, that's a "given" that you don't snoop around sensitive sites, or wear day-glow yellow with a detector and shovel right in front of 5 archaeologists circling around an archaeologist's pit, etc... You know, sometimes it takes a little discretion in this hobby

As for whiskeytown lake, my hunch is that any foundations underwater, that are in the deeper sections, are probably covered with silt. Man made reservoirs tend to silt in over the decades, at least at the lower/deeper sections. And if the foundations of the old buildings are in the shallower fingers, more protected from silt, then my hunch is that parts of the lake like that, have merely been accessible multiple times, in past drought seasons. For example, Folsom lake has the same thing, and trust me: the foundations and ruins have long since been hunted hard, when long dry seasons exposed those fingers of the lake bed (saw some seateds, IH's, cache coins, and a bust quarter, etc....)

At the Shasta ruins (the ruins that can be seen right off the road by you), a buddy of mine got a large cent, right by those ruins, several years ago.

 

[Twisted One]

Yeah, I figured well documented, and posted historical sites would be a no-no. My curiosity was more towards the shore areas, and some of the streams and creeks that feed the lake. Most of them it has always been suggested that it was not okay to look anywhere in there.

But from what I have read on this thread it seems to me that unless it is posted, or unless it is an obvious historical site, it should be okay, especially since the sell gold panning equipment at the visitor center, maybe they just sell permits there too for gold panning? I wonder if they sell one that applies to metal detecting. Something I will have to look into I think.

I am sure once I get into contact with the local club, and meet some local detectorist, I can get some better insight.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Yeah, I figured well documented, and posted historical sites would be a no-no. My curiosity was more towards the shore areas, and some of the streams and creeks that feed the lake. Most of them it has always been suggested that it was not okay to look anywhere in there.

But from what I have read on this thread it seems to me that unless it is posted, or unless it is an obvious historical site, it should be okay, especially since the sell gold panning equipment at the visitor center, maybe they just sell permits there too for gold panning? I wonder if they sell one that applies to metal detecting. Something I will have to look into I think.

I am sure once I get into contact with the local club, and meet some local detectorist, I can get some better insight.

Remember there is a big difference between a state park and a national forest, most state parks and all National Parks are off limits... Any historical areas in a national forest would also be off limits wether 50 years old or 10,000 years old.....

 

[Twisted One]

Yeah, I figured well documented, and posted historical sites would be a no-no. My curiosity was more towards the shore areas, and some of the streams and creeks that feed the lake. Most of them it has always been suggested that it was not okay to look anywhere in there.

But from what I have read on this thread it seems to me that unless it is posted, or unless it is an obvious historical site, it should be okay, especially since the sell gold panning equipment at the visitor center, maybe they just sell permits there too for gold panning? I wonder if they sell one that applies to metal detecting. Something I will have to look into I think.

I am sure once I get into contact with the local club, and meet some local detectorist, I can get some better insight.

Remember there is a big difference between a state park and a national forest, most state parks and all National Parks are off limits... Any historical areas in a national forest would also be off limits wether 50 years old or 10,000 years old.....

Doesn't that contradict your previous post about national parks though?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Yeah, I figured well documented, and posted historical sites would be a no-no. My curiosity was more towards the shore areas, and some of the streams and creeks that feed the lake. Most of them it has always been suggested that it was not okay to look anywhere in there.

But from what I have read on this thread it seems to me that unless it is posted, or unless it is an obvious historical site, it should be okay, especially since the sell gold panning equipment at the visitor center, maybe they just sell permits there too for gold panning? I wonder if they sell one that applies to metal detecting. Something I will have to look into I think.

I am sure once I get into contact with the local club, and meet some local detectorist, I can get some better insight.

Remember there is a big difference between a state park and a national forest, most state parks and all National Parks are off limits... Any historical areas in a national forest would also be off limits wether 50 years old or 10,000 years old.....

Doesn't that contradict your previous post about national parks though?

Nope, go back and reread post it was about national forests, not National Parks..... National Parks are a major NO-NO!!

 

[Twisted One]

Yeah, I figured well documented, and posted historical sites would be a no-no. My curiosity was more towards the shore areas, and some of the streams and creeks that feed the lake. Most of them it has always been suggested that it was not okay to look anywhere in there.

But from what I have read on this thread it seems to me that unless it is posted, or unless it is an obvious historical site, it should be okay, especially since the sell gold panning equipment at the visitor center, maybe they just sell permits there too for gold panning? I wonder if they sell one that applies to metal detecting. Something I will have to look into I think.

I am sure once I get into contact with the local club, and meet some local detectorist, I can get some better insight.

Remember there is a big difference between a state park and a national forest, most state parks and all National Parks are off limits... Any historical areas in a national forest would also be off limits wether 50 years old or 10,000 years old.....

Doesn't that contradict your previous post about national parks though?

Nope, go back and reread post it was about national forests, not National Parks..... National Parks are a major NO-NO!!

Okay, that clears it up, thank you!

 

[Twisted One]

In my area Lassen is the only listed national park, the rest of the forrested area around me is national forrest,or BLM land.

 

[Hogman]

Here in Texas, the National Parks, Forests, etc. are ALL considered Archaeological/ historic areas by the Rangers! That is how THEY interrpret the law.

You are right. The National Forest here are considered Archeological Sites and they do not have to post signs. That knocks out about 1,000,000 acres.

I do not know if a Magistrate judge would uphold the charges or not. I would gladly video anyone wanting to try it though.

 

[Nugget Hunter Smith]

The U.S. National Forest can claim that sites are historical or archaeological but Federal Law states that they have to be posted. If they are not posted then they can not be protected by law. In order for them to be desiginated a historical or archaeological site they must have found something of significant value. Not the same ol things that are in hundreds of museums and private collections.

I have had a Forest Service Ranger claim that they have thousands of sites but by their "FS rules" they can not post them for fear they will be vandilized and robbed. Rules do not override law! Know the law and you will be ok. Carry a copy of the "law" with you and you will be ok. Challenge them with the "law" and they will backdown, at least from my experiences with them. All of them so far have said have a nice day and driven away.

They will BS you if you allow them!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

hogman and nugget-hunter, I have no doubt that EVEN if any of us md'rs finds specific wording ALLOWING detecting, that someone else will have an experience (or something they heard second hand, blah blah blah) that contradicts this. I mean, it stands to reason: if you ask enough people ANYWHERE in this world "can I do something?" you will eventually find someone to tell you "no".

A buddy of mine, for instance, just the other day, helped himself to an old-town street demolition job here in CA, where some seateds had been found recently. It is not fenced or posted, but there is a few orange cones and ribbon around it though. The contractor/construction people themselves, had shrugged their shoulders and didn't care if he detected (just told him to come back after hours after they knocked off for the day). Well one night, when my friend was there plying his luck, a state worker came out of one of the offices along this street, and started telling my friend he had to go, "because of terrorist threat" (I guess she didn't know what his detector machine was?). And when my friend refused, saying it was a harmless metal detector, then she changed her tune and told him "this is private property". And again, my friend tried to tell her "no, this is a public street". And on and on the debate went (she was a nut-case, and her rationale was illogical).

Now why do I give this as an example? Because as you can see, NO MATTER HOW INNCOUOUS, there will sometimes be a kill-joy ranger, bureaucrat, busy-body, etc... to try to say you can do it. And all too often, what happens on these forums, is someone has one of those odd-encounters, posts it (going so far as to do what hogman has done, and say "you can't hunt in such & such place".) And then everyone else shudders in fear after reading this, and simply believes it. When all too often, it's really just isolated incidents, and odds are, no one really cares (barring if you were a nuisance in some other way, or ran into a rare barney-fife-type).

So for pete's sake, if the occasional busy body bothers you (if you're skittish) then by all means, stick to sandboxes with glaring neon signs that say "metal detecting allowed here". Because otherwise, you've chosen the wrong hobby. Unfortunately, we're in an odd hobby that draws the stares of the curious (ie.: "oooh, what's the man with the geiger-counter thingy doing over there?" etc...). And there's no way you're going to please everyone, and have everyone sign off on your fun. So why can't we all just practice a little discretion, and simply avoid the few busy bodies that exist out there?

Even if it were true, in texas, that they make a law more strict than it really is, I have to ask myself: did any of you plan on parading around in front of archie's houses, kiosks, wearing neon yellow? Because odds are, the rank and file could care less, so long as you're not snooping around obvious historic landmarks, and don't look out of place, etc...