Michigan laws?

[Tom_in_CA]

So there is NO public beaches @ Lake Michigan ?

Or are you saying that there *are* public beaches, yet they *all* have a "no md'ing" rule/law ?

In other words "what/where" is "heavily regulated & patrolled" ? Because I've seen md'rs proudly post beach finds from Lake MI. Hence .... somehow, someway, it apparently wasn't an issue for them.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[releventchair]

https://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-350-79133_79205_83819-97922--,00.html

 

[ConceptualizedNetherlandr]

I'll put out there that lake MI is bordered by more states than just MI

 

[A#1]

So there is NO public beaches @ Lake Michigan ?

Or are you saying that there *are* public beaches, yet they *all* have a "no md'ing" rule/law ?

In other words "what/where" is "heavily regulated & patrolled" ? Because I've seen md'rs proudly post beach finds from Lake MI. Hence .... somehow, someway, it apparently wasn't an issue for them.

Neither of us have said either of those things.

There are quite a few public beaches along the lake, and I know for fact they are patrolled by some form of government employee. This is a world of yuppie tourism, and local government is pretty hard core in taking care of things. This is an area that cares a LOT about it's parks, beaches , waters and land. I don't think a good defense for violating their rules will be "because some dude named Tom in CALIFORNIA seen it on youtube"

I already mentioned one beach that can be detected, I know of several that aren't. I've found a few more that are questionable, and another couple that are probably detectable. I'm going to see what more I can find out, and I will share those with the OP, and those that ask nicely but they won't me mentioned in this thread.

 

[releventchair]

So there is NO public beaches @ Lake Michigan ?

Or are you saying that there *are* public beaches, yet they *all* have a "no md'ing" rule/law ?

In other words "what/where" is "heavily regulated & patrolled" ? Because I've seen md'rs proudly post beach finds from Lake MI. Hence .... somehow, someway, it apparently wasn't an issue for them.

Let me try to explain.
Treat each beach as a seperate entity.
Depending on who owns it ,and what has been found there determines if detecting is allowed.

It's not like a scenic lonely road runs along the beach and you can just park ,hop out and start swinging.

Yes there are public beaches. You pays your money and get your plate recorded and wave at the camera's and plunge right in.

The issue we're concerned with is water /beach beyond public areas.
Not only some landowners not applauding tourists , but the Coast Guard around piers, (where public beaches tend to be) and ports ,and the national boundry to the North.
No one is invisible on the lake shore. Feel free to argue that or ignore it.
But you will get caught if you are not where you are supposed to be ,or doing something you shouldn't probably be doing.
Test , bury a backpack...

Detecting on a public beach would be best when the beach is not being popular. Obviously. But each beach is again unique. In the narrow window of prime beach time they get quite crowded.
That comes after it is hot inland , so you go to the lakeshore and your teeth chatter it is so cold before you reach the beach.

Many (most I've been to) are state owned. That does not mean they all have the same rules.
Some , (near a pier or lighthouse for example) have buried cables they would not have dug up or stabbed with a Lesche.
Others as mentioned have history.

Folks have been buried on the beach.
Shipwrecks (especially those in the water) are jealously guarded.

The West side of the state (East shore of Lake Mi. ) has less traffic historically than the East part of the state by Lake Huron.
Native cultures existed but a study does not show immense villages along the coast. Still , some left riverine inland areas in summer and went toward the big lake.
Winter was tolerated better inland.

With the fur era some activity was along the area the O.P. is looking at but paled compared to farther North and East.
The logging area probably left more evidence where logs were floated downstream and corralled near transfer points.
Shipping. Boat building and later activities left evidence too.
A beach near such sites will not have a relic rich area fenced off for detectorists to dig in.
They may have a public area to frolic ,oblivious to the past.

Here's some examples of what's public. Lots for the O.P. to research.
The area is flirting with heavier historic areas though , so restrictions are expected more than elsewhere.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pub...7;tbs:lrf:!2m1!1e2!2m1!1e3!3sIAE,lf:1,lf_ui:1

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...Depending on who owns it ,and what has been found there determines if detecting is allowed.....

thanx guys for all your answers. So it appears there is a myriad of entities (state, fed, county, city) that owns/administers the various beaches there. Depending on which particular "park" a person happens to be at. That is no different than CA coast, where some beaches are city, some are state, some are county, and-so-forth. Right ? And in your case, some are even private. Which can be all-the-way to the water-line (so heaven-forbid someone walks along the beach there). Ok.

And so, the next issue , for all the various public entity/administered beaches, is to knock ourselves silly to see if they have a rule that forbids. or "allows" (as in releventchair's link) Right ?

No problem so far. The only problem I see, is that the origin of the "allows/forbids" dilemma is often : The EXACT SAME DISCUSSION we are having right now. In other words, the ONLY REASON such lists exist, of allows-or-forbids, is .... drumroll .... past md'rs who turned over heaven and earth to inquire to the powers-that-be of whether-or-not it was allowed. I have no doubt that that's why any such lists, even exist, in the first place.

And the dudes who ever posted stuff they "found at a beach on Lake MI", perhaps simply didn't ask enough questions, and swat enough hornet's nests (never mind that no one ever cared less). Shame on them. Eh ?

 

[Toecutter]

I havent hit the Great lake much, but when i do its at a public beach, Im on the sun rise side ( lake Huron ) and haven't seen a single sign for MDing, Mind you Im not looking hard for signs and Im not a perfect detectorist, I will hit old school houses and abandon houses with no permission of course things are a little different out in these parts....I will be detecting some of Lake Charlivox but we have family property on the lake...

 

[A#1]

I'm sure there have been hundred of people here that has overasked the question and added to some places being not allowed.

Others I'm sure were idiot tourists trashing the grounds.

Still others that I specifically know, are because of a gold bearing stream and a ghost town on the park property.

No matter the reason it may be against the rules to detect.....that was never the point of this discussion.

The rules are what they are. It doesn't matter what you want to think.

Those people in the videos may have completely ignored the law, or were just on a beach in SOUTHwest Michigan.....This is the north. Like it or not, this is a different world. You have to mind the law here. People will report you, and Big Brother is watching.

 

[releventchair]

thanx guys for all your answers. So it appears there is a myriad of entities (state, fed, county, city) that owns/administers the various beaches there. Depending on which particular "park" a person happens to be at. That is no different than CA coast, where some beaches are city, some are state, some are county, and-so-forth. Right ? And in your case, some are even private. Which can be all-the-way to the water-line (so heaven-forbid someone walks along the beach there). Ok.

And so, the next issue , for all the various public entity/administered beaches, is to knock ourselves silly to see if they have a rule that forbids. or "allows" (as in releventchair's link) Right ?

No problem so far. The only problem I see, is that the origin of the "allows/forbids" dilemma is often : The EXACT SAME DISCUSSION we are having right now. In other words, the ONLY REASON such lists exist, of allows-or-forbids, is .... drumroll .... past md'rs who turned over heaven and earth to inquire to the powers-that-be of whether-or-not it was allowed. I have no doubt that that's why any such lists, even exist, in the first place.

And the dudes who ever posted stuff they "found at a beach on Lake MI", perhaps simply didn't ask enough questions, and swat enough hornet's nests (never mind that no one ever cared less). Shame on them. Eh ?

Try it here if you disagree with knowing if detecting is allowed or not , by your jumping in and swinging to find out.
Enjoy your visit.

Here's a site to try.https://www.wzzm13.com/article/news...waste-sits-on-great-lakes-shores/69-606371485

 

[A#1]

Just remembered this post from a while back, It has the lagalities of hunting state land discussed a bit.

I'f nothing else, just be aware.

http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/metal-detecting/574309-probe-retreival-tool-meet-legal-requirements.html

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Just remembered this post from a while back, It has the lagalities of hunting state land discussed a bit.

I'f nothing else, just be aware.

http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/m...e-retreival-tool-meet-legal-requirements.html

I remember that post Question for you: In ALL your years of detecting in Michigan, have you EVER had anyone come up to you, armed with a ruler, to measure the length & width of your digger ? Or have you ever heard of this happening to anyone else ?

 

[A#1]

Nope, never, not once.

Does this somehow make it acceptable to violate a clearly stated set of rules applying to what I am doing?

Just because there ain't nobody watchin?

That just seems rather less than honorable to me, and fairly risky to be honest.

Don't the folks around here try to abide by a code of ethics?

Or is that only while someones lookin?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Does this somehow make it acceptable to violate a clearly stated set of rules applying to what I am doing?

...

Thanx for the honest answer. And so-too is the running joke here in CA of :

a) some locations that .... if you looked long enough and hard enough, that you could find cultural heritage verbiage. And then if you looked long enough and hard enough, you could find definitions that would define "non-allowed" objects as "50 yrs. or older". Yet md'ing not specifically disallowed. Just the '50 yr. rule'. Yet, like as-in-your-answer: No one has EVER been carded. (ie.: no one armed with calculators doing the math on the ages of coins you find). So it basically boils down to "just avoid obvious historic monuments and archie conventions".

b) Some cities dreamed up a permit decades ago. Yet .... like in your case, no one can ever think of an incident where anyone was ever "carded".

In each case, does it technically "make it right ?". No . Of course not. But on the other hand .... you almost have to ask yourself the question: "Does anyone really care ?

 

[A#1]

Overall, in MOST of this state I dont think anyone really cares, the places I personally go to

But, between the nature preserves, land conservencies, and indian land..... the area the OP was asking about is kinda special, and anyone would be wise to be educated on what they're doing and where. At least know what laws they're potentially violating.

 

[Peyton Manning]

Yeah I don’t want to end up imprisoned in michigan

 

[A#1]

Yeah I don’t want to end up imprisoned in michigan

I hear it ain't too bad, I'm considering it is as a retirement option.