Little help for first time MD hunting

[SunnyRo]

Hello all,

I live in Hudson County, New Jersey, and recently bought a Fisher Metal Detector for the first time.
Have 0 experience in hunting and excited to make a new hobby.
I wanted to go hunt on near state parks (cuz I have no idea where/how to contact good personal properties) and did some research on regulations and permits.
But it's not really clear how it works (some say both Essex and Hudson County totally banned MD).

I'm trying to see if I can go hunt on James J. Braddock North Hudson County Park or Laurel Hill Park.

It will so very muchly be appreciated if anyone can give some guidance for a beginner so that I don't end up paying fines.

Thanks!

P.S. I am also down to go hunt near Rutgers University (Piscataway), have anyone ever hunted there?
Also, please correct me if this is the wrong forum to wite this.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

tahts-a-dats-ago:

I have/did not, for sake of this post, try to differentiate "WMA" (wildlife management area) versus NJ state parks. But for purposes of post # 17, it seems that ... up to that point, you were not relying on any specific prohibition. So .... just to address #17, I see that you consider verbiage about "alter", "deface" and "cut" to apply to us. Right ?



And I'll be the first to agree that ... yes .... someone *could* come along and say that we are violating that. Heck, they could say our actions violate prohibitions of "annoyances". D/t they could say md'ing "annoys" them. They could say you violate "harvest and remove" language, since you "remove" those pennies. Eh ? It's never ending.

But if we are to assume that "cutting" OF NECESSITY forbids us, then .... how do you make sense of the fact that the "finds" forum is FILLED with persons who "cut", in the process of retrieving, at public land spots all over the USA ? And I guarantee you, that there is similar language at every speck of public land. At all city, county, state, and federal land, of any level-or-entity. Aka : "Alter", "deface", "destroy", "damange", "cut", etc.... Are we to assume all of them are lawless miscreants ?

Me thinks it's going to be a case of "No one cared or gave the matter a moment's thought, till someone asked" routine.

As for NJ state parks (#18), I don't know whether that's separate from WMA. But ... sure ... if there's an express specific dis-allowance (that's not just "commentary"), then sure: By all means: Abide. And I can bet I know how that became an express specific dis-allowance in the past.

Actually I don’t believe the prohibitions (no cutting, digging, etc..) should apply to us (metal detectorists). My point is that a zealous prosecutor can make them apply — therefore we metal detectorists must be aware of that possibility.

I think that is the point where your warnings come into play — needlessly calling attention to ourselves (by way of begging for permission to hunt public property) could well be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

I am not disagreeing with that (or you).

I am merely extending the warning a bit further — and noting the fact that it is possible that some over zealous prosecutor could easily twist the words (used in a prohibitive actions clause) so as to make them applicable to actions common to the activity of metal detecting.

My comments are really directed to NJ, although they could be applied elsewhere too. NJ is very much a nanny-state — with a population that, in general, seems to be convinced that freedom is derived from the good will of power-hungry politicians and life-long government employees.

Here it is not uncommon for some self-important government employee to overstep their legal authority — sometimes by a considerable amount.

I don’t like it and I do recognize it for the abuse [of power] that it is. But it is something that exists, and I would be foolish if I pretended things were otherwise.

As to all those finds [public lands] with statutes containing language that is similar to the language used in NJ…

I do not consider the finders to be miscreants. Unfortunately it isn’t up to me — and there are people (in a position of some power) who would label those finders as miscreants.

As you’ve noted — in some circumstances it is best to engage in lawful activity without calling undue attention to oneself.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tom_in_CA]

It sounds like we are on the same page.

..... the prohibitions (no cutting, digging, etc..) should apply to us (metal detectorists). My point is that a zealous prosecutor can make them apply — therefore we metal detectorists must be aware of that possibility....

Yes. As I said before: This verbiage, and others *could* be said to apply to our activities. No doubt. We are in an odd-ball hobby that has connotations. Sure.

And this is exactly why I choose low-traffic times, and avoid such lookie-lous. For nicely manicured turf, for instance, there was some parks here in CA that I only do at night. So peaceful. So serene.

Think of it like nose-picking: Not necessarily "illegal", but .... don't we all sort of use "discreet timing", so as not to offend the squeemish ? Same with md'ing. Some people might consider this "sneaking around". Ok, fine: Then sneak around. We are not going to please every last person on earth Nor is it my job to "convert" any particular gripers who might gripe (lest their gripe become "gospel law", unless I convert them).

None of this has anything to do with A) true existing specific rules (ok, fine, follow them). It's only dealing with catch-all grey-area verbiage. B) Obvious historic sensitive monuments that .... ok, common sense tells you/us not to go begging for attention.

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

It sounds like we are on the same page.

Yes, we are on the same page.

To give an idea of just how close-minded the state officials often are…

Some years back I contacted the state (NJ) regarding a possible program for youth.

My concept was to start a program that got kids involved in metal detecting and history. My local area has a good amount of state lands (various classifications) with history dating back to the mid 1600’s. I wanted to get kids involved (on a first hand basis) with the history of their state.

My time would’ve been volunteered and I was prepared to provide a few machines for the kids. I was fairly certain that the various manufacturers would donate entry level machines for the kids use and I had spoken to the local metal detector dealer (he was onboard). The cost — to kids — would’ve been zero.

My proposal was that the kids would metal detect known sites (state land) and that all finds be donated to a local museum — with a note included that had the finder’s name for display of the found items. I made it clear that state archaeologists (or archaeology students) would be welcomed to participate (and help identify finds) so the history of the site would be officially recorded.

I was (and am) certain that the kids would love finding old artifacts and having their name attached to the items on display in a local museum.

Naturally the state shot the idea down. They had zero interest in getting kids involved with history, and zero interest in saving history for future generations to see.

I haven’t reached a conclusion as to why the state had zero interest in the idea. Maybe it was because there wasn’t a huge cost to the taxpayers? Maybe it was because there wasn’t any money to be made by the politicians/government employees? Maybe the thought of kids actually doing something worthwhile frightened them?

 

[ArfieBoy]

Welcome to the forum SunnyRo! Great questions. I really appreciate the excellent information from all the other contributors to this thread, especially Tom and Deep1... also all you others, too! If you do decide to "swat the hornets nest" and ask a government official, ask to see the rules in writing to make sure the individual knows what they are talking about. Like the other guys say, the person might not know the rules!

 

[against the wind]

SunnyRo,, welcome to the forum from Port Allegheny, Pennsylvania. Always approach the hobby of Metal Detecting on a legal manner. Ask for permission. Also, try not to take advice from Tom_in _Ca. The man is a little off.

 

[cudamark]

“The following are prohibited: camping, swimming, picnicking, dumping, cutting or damaging vegetation, removing timber or firewood, alcoholic beverages, metal detecting, geocaching, paddleboards (except for fishing; no use allowed at Split Rock Reservoir) and fires.” https://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/wmaregs.htm


Makes me wonder what you can actually do on this property. No humans allowed? Just walking on vegetation will damage it. Do they ticket the wildlife for eating plants? Glad I don't have to detect there. I'd probably end up in jail.

 

[Silvermonkey]

Riddle me this SunnyRo....If a man goes metal detecting in the woods, and no one is there to see him, does his Fisher F-22 still make a sound ( when the coil passes over beautiful old silver coins)? Good luck and welcome to T- Net.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... I haven’t reached a conclusion as to why the state had zero interest in the idea. ....

Here's why: Because the moment any topic touches on "history" and "metal detectors", it must go past the desk of a govt.-payroll archie, for their consideration/approval. And .... the moment any purist archie sees the word "metal detector", they recoil in disgust. You might as well have been asking them : "Can I sleep with your wife? "

.... Always approach the hobby of Metal Detecting on a legal manner. Ask for permission....

What is not "legal" about looking things up for oneself ? That seems to me to be about as LEGAL as a person can get ! If there's nothing that says "no md'ing" in the laws/rules, then there's nothing to "get permission" for, .... in-the-first place.

.... try not to take advice from Tom_in _Ca....

and as you can tell: Against-the-wind and I have been round-&-round on this before.

 

[mh9162013]

“The following are prohibited: camping, swimming, picnicking, dumping, cutting or damaging vegetation, removing timber or firewood, alcoholic beverages, metal detecting, geocaching, paddleboards (except for fishing; no use allowed at Split Rock Reservoir) and fires.” https://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/wmaregs.htm


Makes me wonder what you can actually do on this property. No humans allowed? Just walking on vegetation will damage it. Do they ticket the wildlife for eating plants? Glad I don't have to detect there. I'd probably end up in jail.

You're not even allowed to pump your own gas in NJ.

 

[cudamark]

SunnyRo,, welcome to the forum from Port Allegheny, Pennsylvania. Always approach the hobby of Metal Detecting on a legal manner. Ask for permission. Also, try not to take advice from Tom_in _Ca. The man is a little off.

Who are you going to ask for permission? A lawyer? Surely you wouldn't take legal advice from a bureaucrat, would you? I've found that most government employees like to take the easy route in just about everything they do. No is much easier, and less threatening to their cushy job. Most of the ones you'd ask at a counter or booth don't know the fine points of the law anyway. I strongly recommend looking up the rules yourself.

 

[DiamondDan]

I cannot believe people are advising the op to ask some clueless paper-pusher in a city office for permission to detect public areas. We all pay taxes. Just go detecting. It's pretty simple. I'm not saying jump the White House fence and start wildly swinging a detector, but for the love of God... If you cannot find anything in your own research prohibiting metal detecting in a public park, don't sweat it. Let sleeping dogs lie. *facepalm*

 

[Deep1]

SunnyRo,, welcome to the forum from Port Allegheny, Pennsylvania. Always approach the hobby of Metal Detecting on a legal manner. Ask for permission. Also, try not to take advice from Tom_in _Ca. The man is a little off.

So I take it every time you walk your dog in a public park or drive your car on a public road, you call your local officials and ask permission?
If it is public land and there is no express laws prohibiting metal detecting , you call and ask permission?
How's that work out for you?
There's someone off in this conversation but ,it's not Tom.

 

[mh9162013]

So I take it every time you walk your dog in a public park or drive your car on a public road, you call your local officials and ask permission?
If it is public land and there is no express laws prohibiting metal detecting , you call and ask permission?
How's that work out for you?
There's someone off in this conversation but ,it's not Tom.

In defense of against the wind, this hobby places a great deal of emphasis on asking permission before detecting on private property. I don't think it's much of a stretch to extrapolate that guideline/rule to areas that have historically resulted in at least a few instances of "get off my lawn" or similar encounters.

For the record, I'm on the side of "unless there is a local ordinance or rule specifically prohibiting metal detecting, go ahead and do it; it's easier to apologize than ask for permission."

 

[Tom_in_CA]

In defense of against the wind, this hobby places a great deal of emphasis on asking permission before detecting on private property. ...

Ok. But as you see, this was not about private property. It was about a public area with no express rule forbidding md'ing.

 

[mh9162013]

Ok. But as you see, this was not about private property. It was about a public area with no express rule forbidding md'ing.

I know. As I said in my previous post, I didn't think it was a stretch to extrapolate the always-ask-for-permission mentality for private property to public parks.

Figuring out rules, regulations, what's allowed or what's prohibited ain't easy. That's why (or at least one reason why) there are so many lawyers and so much frustration with the legal system and government.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I know. As I said in my previous post, I didn't think it was a stretch to extrapolate the always-ask-for-permission mentality for private property to public parks.....

Well then this is where we're going to have to disagree. Because the moment we go down that road, is the moment you risk the: "No one cared until you asked" phenomenon.

I also don't agree that it's not easy to find out what's allowed and prohibited. If someone can't find the list of park rules (dogs on leash, no fireworks, etc...) on-line, and if they *really* feel the need to talk to a live person, here's a compromise: Go ahead and contact the pencil-jockey, and ask: "Where can I find the listings of any rules or permits that are applicable to the park ?" They should be able to direct you to where it exists as a web-link, or in binder form at city hall, etc.... If they try to say "what is it that you wanted to know?", you stick to your guns and say "To know where the public can avail itself of rules or laws that apply to the park's usage".

If there is nothing there that says "no md'ing", then so-be-it.

Personally I don't fret myself to that degree. But for someone who's skittish, that's an alternative.

 

[Deep1]

I know. As I said in my previous post, I didn't think it was a stretch to extrapolate the always-ask-for-permission mentality for private property to public parks.

Figuring out rules, regulations, what's allowed or what's prohibited ain't easy. That's why (or at least one reason why) there are so many lawyers and so much frustration with the legal system and government.

Maybe it's different in Ky.
Here in Beaufort, S.C., it's simply a matter of googling Beaufort, S.C. code of ordinances, Beaufort County code of ordinances or South Carolina code of laws.
By doing so, I can research every S.C. municipal, county and state law.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist or even a lawyer, you can actually do this yourself if you have a computer.
If you don't own a computer you can wonder down to you local city hall or county admin and request to see their code of laws.
It's all in public domain, They are clearly written, so it really doesn't take a lawyer to decipher, just a little common sense.
It is your responsibility to know the law whether it is traffic law or metal detecting law.
As far as asking permission to public property, I covered that in an earlier post.
Research is vital to being a good detectorist.
I probably do 5 hours of research to every 1 hour of metal detecting.
Part of that resarch is property ownership.
When I find a piece of property I want to detect, I will research history, ownership(private or public) which is complicated here, we have city, county, open land trust, heritage trust, historic land trust, WMA land, ACE basin land, state land, federal land and the laws related to each particular piece of land.
I have been confronted by local, state and federal officials and all they could do was walk away because I was within my rights to be metal detecting on the property.
I was once given a warning ticket by a possum popo. After I spoke district commander and explained to him the same thing I told the young man who wrote me the warning, that I had permission. I told the commander, that we had talked to the owner and he said I had permission, but yet he still wrote me a warning ticket.
He assured me this will not happen again. Yeah right.
I know my rights and where I can and can't go.
I don't do that by picking up the phone and calling some official.
I do my research.

I'm going to close with this funny thought that hit me while was writing this:
i wonder when we're going to see a thread where someone says they called an official about metal detecting a piece of public property and gets someone who doesn't GAS
and says yeah go ahead, no problem, only to get ticketed because it is illegal.
Respectfully,Deep1

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... i wonder when we're going to see a thread where someone says they called an official about metal detecting a piece of public property and gets someone who doesn't GAS
and says yeah go ahead, no problem, only to get ticketed because it is illegal.....

There's already been posts like this. Well, not "ticketed" (as I believe that's extreme fluke exceptions anyhow). But "severely reprimanded" and "scrammed". EVEN IN SPITE OF SOMEONE'S "YES".

One story that comes to mind, is the fellow who gets a "yes" from the front desk at the city hall park's dept. office. Later, some park dude came out yelling at him. The md'r proudly whips out his "permission" to show the griper. When the griper sees whose name is on there, he merely gets on his cell-phone, calls to that person's desk and says that the md'r is "tearing the place up" (which isn't true, of course). Whereupon the desk-person tells the field person that the md'r never mentioned that he'd be "digging".

The griper then severely reprimands the md'r for getting permission under false pretenses. Mincing words, deception, etc... The poor md'r was sent away with his tail between his legs.

Gee, I guess the way we need to phrase it is: "Hi, can I dig and destroy the park, and take park features for my own profit please ?" Lest you be "mincing words" and "failing to give your true intentions".

 

[mh9162013]

Well then this is where we're going to have to disagree. Because the moment we go down that road, is the moment you risk the: "No one cared until you asked" phenomenon.

I also don't agree that it's not easy to find out what's allowed and prohibited. If someone can't find the list of park rules (dogs on leash, no fireworks, etc...) on-line, and if they *really* feel the need to talk to a live person, here's a compromise: Go ahead and contact the pencil-jockey, and ask: "Where can I find the listings of any rules or permits that are applicable to the park ?" They should be able to direct you to where it exists as a web-link, or in binder form at city hall, etc.... If they try to say "what is it that you wanted to know?", you stick to your guns and say "To know where the public can avail itself of rules or laws that apply to the park's usage".

If there is nothing there that says "no md'ing", then so-be-it.

Personally I don't fret myself to that degree. But for someone who's skittish, that's an alternative.

Fair enough and point taken.

I have thought about doing your compromise suggestion myself, if I can't find anything online.

 

[cudamark]

There's already been posts like this. Well, not "ticketed" (as I believe that's extreme fluke exceptions anyhow). But "severely reprimanded" and "scrammed". EVEN IN SPITE OF SOMEONE'S "YES".

One story that comes to mind, is the fellow who gets a "yes" from the front desk at the city hall park's dept. office. Later, some park dude came out yelling at him. The md'r proudly whips out his "permission" to show the griper. When the griper sees whose name is on there, he merely gets on his cell-phone, calls to that person's desk and says that the md'r is "tearing the place up" (which isn't true, of course). Whereupon the desk-person tells the field person that the md'r never mentioned that he'd be "digging".

The griper then severely reprimands the md'r for getting permission under false pretenses. Mincing words, deception, etc... The poor md'r was sent away with his tail between his legs.

Gee, I guess the way we need to phrase it is: "Hi, can I dig and destroy the park, and take park features for my own profit please ?" Lest you be "mincing words" and "failing to give your true intentions".

Yup, if verbal permission can be easily given, it can just as easily be taken away. If it's written law, it's a lot harder to rescind.