Wisconsin beach hunting

[Larwar]

I was detecting on a state park beach on St Croix river in St Croix Co. And was approached by a lady park worker, and told me that a new memo from her higherup is no more metal detecting on beaches in St Croix co beaches. I did the only thing that I thought I should do, I left, I just got there and found a 1939 wheat penny. I say bullxxxx to what she said also there was nobody else on the beach so I know I wasn't bothering anyone .

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tom_in_CA]

Question: Prior to this, have you md'd WI state beaches before ? Or do you know of other md'rs who preceded you in your locale, who have hunted state beaches there ? If so, for how many years back have you heard of md'ing there ?

Because in the context of your post, two words glaringly stick out: "new" (for new memo), and "more" (for no more). Each indicates that this is something new. Or .... at least, something newly now enforced. As opposed to prior to this, when perhaps it wasn't an issue.

If so, then I'll bet $100 I know how this came about, as a:

"new and pressing issue that needed a B.O.L. department memo, to all rank and file rangers"


Anyone care to beat me to the punch, and guess what preceded/caused Larwar's encounter ? Ie.: what put it on that higher-up's radar as something that needed attention ? And no, it's not "holes" or "archies".

 

[ARC]

No... you are doing just fine... please continue :P

 

[CincinnatiKid]

Personally, Ida left too.
Then Ida scoured rules n regs of the aforementioned park system.
Sandy beaches in State parks, mding is normally allowed?
Do yur math, cause not knowing ain't worth losing yur equipment.
Check the States forum and/or rules n regs.
GL
Peace ✌

 

[Larwar]

I am not sure where you are going. But I still think she is full of bs.it is just so easy to flex your little muscle you have and tell people to go If it is a new law she would be compelled, at least I would to have a copy with me to explain, so people would not be mad at me. Just saying

 

[CincinnatiKid]

As with any law, "THEY" don't have to provide anything.
Ignorance of law condemns most.
Peace ✌

 

[Tom_in_CA]

according to the FMDAC state-by-state list, WI is one of the few states with a distinct "no" in their column. So if Larwar & other WI md'rs had, up-till-now, detected the beaches with no issues (as the context of the O.P. makes it sound like a new thing.), then perhaps this is just an ENFORCED thing. Ie.: perhaps prior to that, not an issue (despite some boiler plate wording that no one knew about). But now all of the sudden is "an issue".

I'm betting that the red-flag-radar, of the higher-up who issued that memo, is that the question no doubt crossed his desk. Eg.: someone asking "can I metal detect please?". So the desk-bound pencil pusher searches to and fro through his rule book, and decides he better "address this pressing issue".

 

[SusanMN]

my understanding is that due to legislation passed in Wisconsin a few years ago, water detecting may not be done at ANY Wisconsin lake unless you are looking for a specific lost items.

 

[Larwar]

If this so called higherup decides to put an end to metal detecting, isn't he or she breaking the law because he or she cannot make up there own rules, as they see or feel fit. As far as C Kid my god I was metal detecting not drinking and driving, little kids can dig holes, adults leave trash I could go on but .

 

[Tom_in_CA]

my understanding is that due to legislation passed in Wisconsin a few years ago, water detecting may not be done at ANY Wisconsin lake unless you are looking for a specific lost items.

Ok, sure. Perhaps. It has the distinct "no" in their FMDAC column afterall. But why do you suppose the sudden enforcement (If I understood the OP correctly) ? Ie.: the disseminating of a "B.O.L." to rangers, to alert them to this minutia ?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

If this so called higherup decides to put an end to metal detecting, isn't he or she breaking the law because he or she cannot make up there own rules,... .

Apparently it was already a rule. But perhaps not an issue prior-to-this.

Be that as it may, you can even go back further (although it won't change things), and ask yourself: What put it on some archie's radar there way-back-then ?

I say "archie" because if you click on the state name that listing: Scroll to the bottom. And it says that if you have any more questions, to contact the state archie there. Thus it is a cultural heritage issue. You might ..... gasp ...... find an old coin. NOT a "holes" issue, not a trash issue, etc.... Ok, sure. What put it on some archie's plate way-back-when, as a "pressing issue" that needed his sanction ? Do you think they were walking along the beach one day, saw an md'r, and thought "oh no, they might find an old coin" ?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

In CA, we have a "yes" in our column. And you can (for example), md the state of CA beaches till you're blue in the face. HOWEVER, I have heard of at least 1 scram from an irate archie, who just happened to bump into an md'r on the beach (at absolute fluke, d/t the archie was there from 2 hrs. in-land to give a lecture at a beach side museum). He saw an md'r on the beach, and detoured to "read him the riot act".

A few of us thought "this is silly" and "he's mistaken". But the more we looked into the boiler plate minutia verbage (there is , afterall, cultural heritage stuff there), the more we realized we better "leave this alone and not look for clarification". Because if we'd decided to fight this guy, seek clarification, etc..., then it could have blown up into an actual true specific "no md'ing" rule.

And as expected, the archie went back to Sacramento, and no one's been bothered again (to my knowledge). This is just an example of how rules get born though: Someone asks the wrong person (or the letter of inquiry lands on the wrong desk), and ......... presto, some archie decides "no". Moral of the story? Don't ask bored purist archie's silly questions.

And I can't help but think that's EXACTLY why some states got their "no's", way-back-when.

 

[ARC]

my understanding is that due to legislation passed in Wisconsin a few years ago, water detecting may not be done at ANY Wisconsin lake unless you are looking for a specific lost items.

Oh god...

Loophole city...

"yes your honor... I was specifically looking for these lost gold rings".

 

[SusanMN]

Oh god...

Loophole city...

"yes your honor... I was specifically looking for these lost gold rings".

Not so much. You need to apply for a permit for a specific lake or body of water and can't stray from the specified area. Now whether you can keep everything else you find while looking for your item is the big question.

 

[pepperj]

Oh god...

Loophole city...

"yes your honor... I was specifically looking for these lost gold rings".

And beg for forgiveness.

 

[watercolor]

This "No metal detecting on DNR-controlled land & water" law was enacted due to the amount of Wisconsin Copper Complex artifacts that were being recovered for profit by a greedy few.

As "SusanMN" mentioned, you may hunt for a specific, lost item(s) on State-controlled land with written permission.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

This "No metal detecting on DNR-controlled land & water" law was enacted due to the amount of Wisconsin Copper Complex artifacts that were being recovered....

If that's the actual evolutionary trail of the WI rule, then I'd be wrong about my theory that this is a typical case of "silly questions to the wrong persons". In the case of what you're saying, it's d/t indian stuff. Ie.: pre-contact pre-columbian un-refined metals. Sort of like the taboo of arrowheads, indian bones, etc... type thing. If so, then we all know that indian stuff is in a camp all its own. You can disturb all sorts of things white man did at his old colonial homesteads or picnic sites or whatever, and few folks care. But ....... heaven forbid that an indian thing should be collected, touched, dug, etc.....

Fortunately, there was very few geographic zones of the USA where indians made use of anything metal like that. Just those pre-contact naturally occurring crude copper places, where indians pounded it into various shapes. But for the most part, for the rest of the USA, it's simply impossible to find "indian things" with metal detectors. Since we can accurately say "they had no refined metals".

Hence when you think of it, then md'ing becomes the most POLITICALLY CORRECT thing to do. Because by definition, you CAN'T find "bones" and such. Thus when you go to dig a coin or bullet or whatever, your detector is "surgically accurate" to go *just* to that metal item, and NOT to their stuff. Contrast to an archie pit, or construction site heavy equipment, etc..., and ever last bone or arrowhead etc... , is touched moved disturbed, etc.....

 

[TheRingFinder]

This is what I know and have experienced:

The head of the Wisconsin DNR back in 1991 was an ARCHIE - He, by the stroke of a pen made all water detecting illegal. Most DNR / State employees had no idea about this law, as I searched many a lake in Wisconsin and was approached by officials asking what I was doing. They would all say "good luck" and leave. Scott Walker has since appointed another individual to head the DNR, so you may be able to make some calls and get that previous "law" struck from the books. Ohh, and YES ; they have to tell you what ordinance you are breaking when enforcing such an ordinance.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.....employees had no idea about this law, as I searched many a lake in Wisconsin and was approached by officials asking what I was doing. They would all say "good luck" and leave......

Interesting evolution. Question for you: At the time you say you were hunting those lakes, did you know that rule was on the books ? Ie.: gambling on the "no one really cares" approach? Or did you only find out about that rule later ?

 

[TheRingFinder]

Tom - A little of both, at first I had no idea as I was searching for a lost wedding ring. I was scuba diving off a point were many boats pull up to "party". A couple different times the DNR pulled up and asked what I was doing. I told them and they both said "good luck". No mention of it being illegal. A month or so later a Wisconsin native told me about the DNR head who made the "No detecting" ordinance years before. Well, my theory is this - If I'm out to recover someone's lost valuable, you will have a hard time stopping me. I have detected many Wisconsin lakes since that time and have not had a problem.

Also, here is Minnesota - A park policeman came up to me after a scuba detecting dive and said that I cannot scuba in that certain lake. I asked him what ordinance I was violating? He pulled out a rule book that said no scuba. I told him, you better make sure you are enforcing the latest ordinance book. His was old and outdated. I've seen many park police since that day and nothing but waves and smiles!!!