tickets and fines for detecting

[Tom_in_CA]

Treasure-hunter: Good job ! I'd forgotten about that one. You're right: That's an example of a ticket for a metal detector. That one didn't happen to be a national park. It was a state park. And he wasn't driving through in a vehicle on roads with the device in his trunk. He was actually using it. Even if not actually "on" at the moment (ie.: perhaps he was just walking down a path with it or something), yet the connection was inescapable: There was exposed foundations from the drought, that many people were hunting at the same exact time. So for all practical purposes, this was a case of use, not mere transporting.

But I'll take the example anyhow, as a bonafide example of someone "getting the book thrown at him" for detecting at a seemingly innocuous place (innocuous in this case meaning .... he'd seen multiple others, so he went home and got his own, etc....). I'll address this in my next post.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Tom_in_CA]

Ok, regarding that very circulated/linked/posted Folsom, CA link:

Folsom lake was routinely detected, in years past, prior to the lake getting extremely low water levels. Ie.: the typical fumble fingers swimmers losses (it's a popular boating and swimming lake). Also in the upper fingers of the lake (which don't need that "drought" to get exposed), there are also some foundations, that were exposed years before this. They got routinely detected, and no one ever heard so much as "boo". I heard of a bust quarter, some IH's, some seateds, etc.... coming from those old gold rush tent city zones.

Suffice it to say, it had never been an issue before. Ok, then why all of the sudden this ticket ? Here's why: There's one particular more colorful ghost town in the deeper reaches of the depth that had .. previously ...... not been exposed: Mormon Bar. And even when the drought got to the zenith low water levels, truth is, the town still was under water (as it was closer to the front/dam). However, a few of the periphery foundations/walls (that had been the "outskirts" of Mormon Bar), did come into view.

So all the media came out to take pictures, shoot news pieces, etc..... You can bet that this merely brought out lookie-lous by the scores. And .... yup ........ some brought their metal detectors. Can you imagine the angst of the rangers having to perpetually shoo people away? And remind them that md'ing isn't allowed ? Mind you these same rangers who perhaps, in the past, would never have paid a moment's notice to anyone md'ing, are NOW in a news-item story, and ...... had to "make an example".

Thus yes, an "example was made". And thus, yes, you've found a link to satisfy my challenge. My hats off to you.

The only thing I can offer in my defense is to say:

a) that when you're dealing with "obvious sensitive historic monuments", well .... sure, examples will exist. It can be debated as to whether this was "obvious" or "sensitive", etc.... But I will say this: that ANYONE who's metal detected for ANY length of time, and/or read forums, would have known to have stayed clear of that, and not be detecting in front of rangers. So in a way, it's almost like the guy had it coming to him. I mean, that was like trying to md in the middle of an archie convention, for petes' sake.

b) you'll notice that others (the ticketed person alludes to) were detecting ad-naseum with no repurcussions. At the time that link got posted originally on a CA detecting forum, someone from that area even came on board posting that he too had detected those exposed areas. We all joked with him that his goose was cooked, because, .... most certainly .... FBI archie-commandos monitor forums waiting to pounce, haha.

c) md'rs were captured on a youtube link. And a TV news clip covering the exposed-foundations story, you can actually see an md'r or two in the back ground waltzing about. And a part of me wondered: "Gee, if this is such an all-fired big offense, then why doesn't someone just freeze-frame the shots of those passing md'rs faces, and put out a "Wanted" ad? Shouldn't be to hard to identify someone in a video. Certainly someone would recognize the picture, if it were played on a wanted crime show segment.

d) I realize all of that doesn't answer to the fact that yes: stories of persons roughed up for detecting a seemingly innoccous place, that they sincerely didn't know any better DO exist. So for those fluke cases, I can only offer that ...... yes ......... and so too will there be an occasional true story of a fellow ticketed for eating a hamburger while driving.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Treasure-hunter: Good job ! I'd forgotten about that one. You're right: That's an example of a ticket for a metal detector. That one didn't happen to be a national park. It was a state park. And he wasn't driving through in a vehicle on roads with the device in his trunk. He was actually using it. Even if not actually "on" at the moment (ie.: perhaps he was just walking down a path with it or something), yet the connection was inescapable: There was exposed foundations from the drought, that many people were hunting at the same exact time. So for all practical purposes, this was a case of use, not mere transporting.

But I'll take the example anyhow, as a bonafide example of someone "getting the book thrown at him" for detecting at a seemingly innocuous place (innocuous in this case meaning .... he'd seen multiple others, so he went home and got his own, etc....). I'll address this in my next post.

Tom the article I posted was inside of Yellowstone Park, I grabbed the link address to article below one I quoted by mistake which is for a state park and they were also ticketed.


Posted From My $50 Tablet....

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Here is the thing what people personally do is there business as long as they do not use TN as a podium to advocate breaking the law. You asked what does it matter if hunter doesn't breakdown a detector or remove batteries. It matters because it breaks the law or rules for the park. Each national park I entered I was up front with rangers, I advised them I was on vacation traveling and had a metal detector with me, what was the procedure. I was told to remove batteries, dismantle detector as much as reasonably possible and leave it in the vehicle while in the park which is what I did.

We know for a fact TN is monitored...

Posted From My $50 Tablet....

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Two Men Are Fined and Have Property Impounded for Relic Hunting in a National Park - Herbert Hoover National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

Two Men Are Fined and Have Property Impounded for Relic Hunting in a National Park

WEST BRANCH, IOWA— A park ranger at Herbert Hoover National Historic Site issued a citation to two relic hunters on Tuesday, November 9, 2010. The two local area Iowa men were using metal detectors and digging in the park that commemorates the life of the 31st President of the United States. Both men received tickets for possessing and using metal detectors on federal land, a violation of federal law. After issuing the citation, park ranger Pappas impounded their metal detectors and other equipment awaiting payment of the fines and a background check to determine if either individual had a previous history of such violations. The men will recover their property upon payment of fines and adjudication of the investigation. The men did not remove any artifacts from the park.

The National Park Service, which administers Herbert Hoover National Historic Site, enforces the Archeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and other federal laws protecting historic and archeological resources in national parks. Possession and use of metal detectors are prohibited on federal lands to help protect against the plunder of archeological sites and removal of historical resources vital to the preservation of American’s cultural heritage.
Penalties for violating archeological protection laws in national parks can be significant. In a recent case in Washington State, a man pled guilty to unauthorized removal of artifacts from Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area after a warrant to search his residence over 3,000 artifacts seized as evidence. A federal judge sentenced him to three years’ probation and ordered him to pay a $2,000 fine plus an additional $2,000 in restitution. The judge also ordered him to serve 30 days in home detention and banned him from the recreation area for three years.

“The National Park Service has the responsibility to protect natural and historic resources for the enjoyment of future generations of the American public”, said John Slaughter, acting superintendent of Herbert Hoover National Historic Site. “When relics and archeological items are removed by recreational detectorists, the item and the value associated with its context in telling the story of the site are lost.” Just as with hunting for game or birds, relic hunters should know who owns the land they are hunting on, obtain permission from the land owners, and make sure they comply with applicable rules and regulations.

As of the issuance of this press release, a third person, not affiliated with the first group, received a citation on Nov. 13, 2010 for metal detecting at Herbert Hoover National Historic Site.

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Here is the thing what people personally do is there business as long as they do not use TN as a podium to advocate breaking the law. You asked what does it matter if hunter doesn't breakdown a detector or remove batteries. It matters because it breaks the law or rules for the park. Each national park I entered I was up front with rangers, I advised them I was on vacation traveling and had a metal detector with me, what was the procedure. I was told to remove batteries, dismantle detector as much as reasonably possible and leave it in the vehicle while in the park which is what I did.

We know for a fact TN is monitored...

Posted From My $50 Tablet....

One simply cannot allow the law to prevent a good hunt...

But for those who do here it is...

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2014-title36-vol1/pdf/CFR-2014-title36-vol1-sec2-1.pdf

§2.1 Preservation of natural, cultural and archeological resources.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the following is prohibited:

(1) Possessing, destroying, injuring, defacing, removing, digging, or disturbing from its natural state:
(i) Living or dead wildlife or fish, or the parts or products thereof, such as antlers or nests.
(ii) Plants or the parts or products thereof.
(iii) Nonfossilized and fossilized pale ontological specimens, cultural or archeological resources, or the parts thereof.
(iv) A mineral resource or cave formation or the parts thereof.

(2) Introducing wildlife, fish or plants, including their reproductive bodies, into a park area ecosystem.

(3) Tossing, throwing or rolling rocks or other items inside caves or caverns, into valleys, canyons, or caverns, down hillsides or mountainsides, or into thermal features.

(4) Using or possessing wood gathered from within the park area: Provided, however, That the superintendent may designate areas where dead wood on the ground may be collected for use as fuel for campfires within the park area.

(5) Walking on, climbing, entering, ascending, descending, or traversing an archeological or cultural resource, monument, or statue, except in designated areas and under conditions established by the superintendent.

(6) Possessing, destroying, injuring, defacing, removing, digging, or disturbing a structure or its furnishing or fixtures, or other cultural or archeological resources.

(7) Possessing or using a mineral or metal detector, magnetometer, side scan sonar, other metal detecting device, or subbottom profiler. This paragraph does not apply to:
(i) A device broken down and stored or packed to prevent its use while in park areas.
(ii) Electronic equipment used primarily for the navigation and safe operation of boats and aircraft.
(iii) Mineral or metal detectors, magnetometers, or subbottom profilers used for authorized scientific, mining, or administrative activities.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Blackstone you can't just post an intro in the middle of a thread like this. We have intro forum you can post it in.

Go to our Treasurenet.com Forum, then New Member Introductions.

Posted From My $50 Tablet....

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Tom here's your Loophole!

Instead of defining and critiquing what constitutes digging, you should have been researching the Mining Laws instead.


http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-201...ol1-sec2-1.pdf
§2.1 Preservation of natural, cultural and archeological resources.
(7) Possessing or using a mineral or metal detector, magnetometer, side scan sonar, other metal detecting device, or subbottom profiler. This paragraph does not apply to: (iii) Mineral or metal detectors, magnetometers, or subbottom profilers used for authorized scientific, mining, or administrative activities.


eCFR ? Code of Federal Regulations
§228.2 Scope.
These regulations apply to operations hereafter conducted under the United States mining laws of May 10, 1872, as amended (30 U.S.C. 22 et seq.), as they affect surface resources on all National Forest System lands under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture to which such laws are applicable: Provided, however, That any area of National Forest lands covered by a special Act of Congress (16 U.S.C. 482a-482q) is subject to the provisions of this part and the provisions of the special act, and in the case of conflict the provisions of the special act shall apply.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=eaae50626e03163110beb137ce5ed444&node=se36.2.228_14&rgn=div8
§228.4 Plan of operations—notice of intent—requirements.
(ii) Prospecting and sampling which will not cause significant surface resource disturbance and will not involve removal of more than a reasonable amount of mineral deposit for analysis and study which generally might include searching for and occasionally removing small mineral samples or specimens, gold panning, metal detecting, non-motorized hand sluicing, using battery operated dry washers, and collecting of mineral specimens using hand tools;

 

[cudamark]

I am wonderi8ng, if these items are so historically significant, why aren't the archeologists out there finding them?

That's been my continuing question for decades now.....If an area is so historically important, with such incredible significance to scientific study, why aren't these relics dug up by the "professionals" and put into a museum? The fact of the matter is that the museums are full of the same type of artifacts, history is not likely be changed in any significant way by the findings, and nobody cares (except scholars) if it is. I mean, does it really matter that 3500 bullets were fired from X hill over to Y valley instead of 2800 bullets? Is it a surprise that soldiers in their off time would carve bullets into chess pieces or alter coins as trench art? We already know who won the battle, what clothes they wore, what their buttons looked like, and what kitchen utensils were used, etc. Just what are they protecting other than their future possible grants and professional relevance?

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Arrested for Metal Detecting

Treasure Hunter Arrested for Trespassing and False ID | Upper Saucon, PA Patch

Treasure Hunter Arrested for Trespassing and False ID

Donald Krenitsky III is charged with impersonation after stealing three pennies, two quarters, four dimes and an old coin from a back yard on Station Avenue.
A Quakertown man was charged with false reports to law enforcement, giving false identification to law enforcement, theft and disorderly conduct after allegedly trespassing into yards with a metal detector to find coins, police say.
His find? Three old pennies, two quarters, four dimes and an old coin.

Donald Krenitsky III, 22, was found by with trowel and metal detector in hand at a Station Avenue residence when officers were dispatched to the location on April 27, according to the criminal complaint.
Krenitsky, digging for coins in the yard, was informed by officers that he was trespassing and stealing. He denied having identification, telling officers his name was John Kreilar, according to court records.
Officers found no record of that name, informing Krenitsky that he was under investigation and that they believed he had lied about his identity. He provided them another false name before officers asked him to drop his trowel and metal detector for a pat down, court records say.
Officers discovered Krenitsky’s wallet with his actual identity. The tenants and landlord of the residence told police that he was trespassing on the property. He allegedly had stolen three old pennies, two quarters, four dimes and an old coin, police say.

 

[Nugs Bunny]

From Another Forum

Got arrested today.

Well, I didnt but Don/Ninja did.

We were scanning a credit union front lot about 8:30 this morning when a cruiser pulled up. Lights and siren go off and next thing he is on the hood of the squad car and Im about 20 yards from him wondering what the heck!
Don is stripped of his tector, Lesche and utility belt being searched. Im standing there in awe and not moving a muscle, except dropping my Lesche to the ground for the officer. The cop doesnt deal with me cause I wasnt digging when he showed up.
Dude cuffs Don and I take some pics with my phone whilst this is happening.
I take Dons stuff and off he goes to whoknowswhere.

What a day!

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

credit union property is still private property ....

Posted From My $50 Tablet....

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Looks like another good one for anti-detecting magazine there Nugs. I wonder if they looked up to see who the property's owner was. Probably not and probably didn't have permission. Looks like at this point they weren't trespassing but the issue is one of digging. You can't do that if it is private property. Keep us updated as it would be interesting to see the final outcome even if the guy gets off with a warning and no charges are pressed. His attitude and actions might be a factor too.

That is from another metal detecting forum... I just copied the post. And I was just giving Tom the examples he asked for.

When the risk/legalities of md'ing particular spots comes up, there is often the fear of tickets, fines, etc... being tossed out there. As the reason to not go, or ask permission, etc... And sometimes I have challenged those persons to cite such an example, if they have one, for if it's a seemingly innocuous place currently being discussed.

And far as Anti Detecting Quarterly magazine goes... posts like YOURS are the ones used against us!

Regional Archeology Program - Metal Detecting;

Indeed, some relic hunters argue on blogs, "They've had 100+ years to recover Civil War relics. If they haven't dug them up by now then they're fair game."

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.....And far as Anti Detecting Quarterly magazine goes... posts like YOURS are the ones used against us! .....

Nugs, I don't doubt that. ANY statement made by md'rs, that isn't riddled with affirmations that we all must obtain permission from every land sandbox, will be construed by those folks as "ones used against us".

To be honest with you, you really don't even need to say anything to them. The mere sight of a detector will launch them into reasons to "be against us" (whether you "had permission" or not). Because their premise, from the git-go, is that md'ing harms the cultural heritage, etc...

So as much as I would love to please them, and "give them no more reasons to dislike us", that will require my ceasing to exist, ceasing to detect, etc...

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Nugs, Let me give you an example of how purist (and hence deck stacked) against us they can be. True story:

There was a fellow detecting a certain east coast beach. I forget if it was state or federal. As he was detecting, a lady archie happened upon him, and read him the riot act! Trying to tell him he shouldn't or can't be doing this, etc... The md'r was caught off gaurd, since this was/is a beach routinely detected by those in that area. As he listened to the lady's rant, he began to catch that her concern and laws she was citing, was about cultural heritage, antiquities, etc...

The moment the md'r heard that, he breathed a sigh of relief! Because he immediately knew that she was concerned about old stuff. So he gleefully opened his apron and showed her the modern coins he was finding (he was finding no old coins, and was strictly out trolling for modern jewelry in the dry sand). When she realized her rant wasn't applicable to his finds, she was taken back. She paused, thought long and hard, and then started un-leashing on him again anyhow: She claimed the following: "Well, maybe their not antiquties NOW, but the fact that you are removing them now, means that FUTURE generations will be deprived of knowing about THEIR past".

True story ! Ok, so you tell me nugs: Is it our obligation to please these type folks? If so, then I would highly suggest you either get another hobby, or stick strictly to private property.

 

[srcdco]

I know I've told this story in another forum here, but here goes. Back in 2013, one of the guys I know was arrested in a Monroe County, NY park for digging in the park. He was detecting a little ways from a parked Sheriff's car and as soon as he put his trowel in the ground and started to dig, the Sheriff got out and told him he was breaking the law by destroying public property. He put him in handcuffs and wrote a ticket. Most of us, including him, have a letter from the Monroe County Parks Department giving us permission to metal detect in all county parks, with the exception of golf courses. He appeared in court, with the letter, to which the judge replied that the letter gives us permission to metal detect, but says nothing about digging. He was fined $50 and the judge told the Sheriff that this was a stupid case and he didn't want to see it again.
Ever since, everyone is afraid to hunt in Monroe County parks, or when they do, they go into the woods or are always looking over their shoulder for that one Sheriff (the rest don't care). One of the members of the local club is also a Monroe County Sheriff and he talked to this other guys superior and asked him to have the guy leave us alone. Apparently, even after being talked to by his superior, he refuses to leave detectorists alone, stating that when we dig we are breaking the law and there can't be any leniency. Back in the fall of 2014, he was reassigned to the County Airport and hopefully that's where he will stay.

Scott

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Nugs, Let me give you an example of how purist (and hence deck stacked) against us they can be. True story:

There was a fellow detecting a certain east coast beach. I forget if it was state or federal. As he was detecting, a lady archie happened upon him, and read him the riot act! Trying to tell him he shouldn't or can't be doing this, etc... The md'r was caught off gaurd, since this was/is a beach routinely detected by those in that area. As he listened to the lady's rant, he began to catch that her concern and laws she was citing, was about cultural heritage, antiquities, etc...

The moment the md'r heard that, he breathed a sigh of relief! Because he immediately knew that she was concerned about old stuff. So he gleefully opened his apron and showed her the modern coins he was finding (he was finding no old coins, and was strictly out trolling for modern jewelry in the dry sand). When she realized her rant wasn't applicable to his finds, she was taken back. She paused, thought long and hard, and then started un-leashing on him again anyhow: She claimed the following: "Well, maybe their not antiquties NOW, but the fact that you are removing them now, means that FUTURE generations will be deprived of knowing about THEIR past".

True story ! Ok, so you tell me nugs: Is it our obligation to please these type folks? If so, then I would highly suggest you either get another hobby, or stick strictly to private property.

Good story but can you provide a source... if you have one?

Where have I gave the impression one should appease some random archie at the beach?

What I believe I stated is... the nonsense posted online is used against us, the posts that try to justify trespassing...

Ok, so you tell me Tom... How are they going to use a post against us if it's pro permission? How are they going to villainize that?

Here are the facts... at the NPS NCR Regional Archeology Program this is what is posted... "Indeed, some relic hunters argue on blogs, "They've had 100+ years to recover Civil War relics. If they haven't dug them up by now then they're fair game"

They are talking about Protected Parks... not public land open to detecting...

You are offering assumption, opinion, and speculation that ANYTHING we post will be used against us... I however have given you an actual real world example... straight from the horse's mouth.

You can read it for yourself right here Regional Archeology Program - Metal Detecting;

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Good story but can you provide a source... if you have one?...

Nugs, the person this happened to, posted about the encounter years ago, on an md'ing forum. I am just recounting it here, as I recall his telling of the story. No, I don't have the link to that fellow's post.

.... How are they going to use a post against us if it's pro permission? How are they going to villainize that?......

Naturally if archies (who hate us) read posts where we grovel for other's say-so, before we detect anywhere, will of course like us more. HOWEVER, the devil is in the details: Because if we endeavour to "walk on pins and needles so that if/when archies read about us, they'll give us their nod of approval", then here's the side-consequence to that:

Newbies read the "must ask permission everywhere" admonitions. Afterall, we wouldn't want archies to read that we help our selves to a beach, park, or sandbox, without asking, RIGHT ? So all the md'rs do EXACTLY THAT. They show up at ranger kiosks, city halls, park's dept's, school district's offices, etc... asking permission. Now, you tell me Nugs: what happens next in that series of events ?

If you've followed my posts on this subject for any length of time, you'll know what happens next. If not, here it is: There becomes a risk of "no" answers, at places which don't actually have any specific prohibition or law saying that. It becomes a case of the psychology of "no one cared .... UNTIL you asked". Ie.: places that had, up till then, just been routinely always detected have been known to get "no's". So you tell me: Is that a good thing for our hobby ? Or a bad thing for our hobby ? In my book, that's a bad thing for our hobby, to get more places off-limits.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Back in the fall of 2014, he was reassigned to the County Airport and hopefully that's where he will stay.....

Scott, thanx for posting. Interesting story. All I can say to this, is that flukes exist. Just like my post about the guy who "got a ticket" for eating a hamburger while driving: Flukes exist. There's ALWAYS going to be stories that will circulate, about people getting "roughed up" for silly things, by over-zealous cops. But I see them as just that: "Flukes". It will not change my behavior (as if I fear that a "ticket" or "arrest" is imminent now), any-more-so than seeing the clipping about the guy ticketed for the hamburger will cause me to stop eating while I drive. Sure I'll be a little more careful to stay within the lines while I drive with my knee ..... but no, I'm not going to stop eating as I drive.

In the same way, an occasional fluke story like yours, does not equate to "imminent threat of danger of tickets for md'ing".

And now that the over-zealous cop in your story works somewhere else, I'd return to "business as normal", if I were in that area. I do not see such flukes as constituting a "new rule". To me, they're just flukes, and nothing more.

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Nugs, the person this happened to, posted about the encounter years ago, on an md'ing forum. I am just recounting it here, as I recall his telling of the story. No, I don't have the link to that fellow's post.



Naturally if archies (who hate us) read posts where we grovel for other's say-so, before we detect anywhere, will of course like us more. HOWEVER, the devil is in the details: Because if we endeavour to "walk on pins and needles so that if/when archies read about us, they'll give us their nod of approval", then here's the side-consequence to that:

Newbies read the "must ask permission everywhere" admonitions. Afterall, we wouldn't want archies to read that we help our selves to a beach, park, or sandbox, without asking, RIGHT ? So all the md'rs do EXACTLY THAT. They show up at ranger kiosks, city halls, park's dept's, school district's offices, etc... asking permission. Now, you tell me Nugs: what happens next in that series of events ?

If you've followed my posts on this subject for any length of time, you'll know what happens next. If not, here it is: There becomes a risk of "no" answers, at places which don't actually have any specific prohibition or law saying that. It becomes a case of the psychology of "no one cared .... UNTIL you asked". Ie.: places that had, up till then, just been routinely always detected have been known to get "no's". So you tell me: Is that a good thing for our hobby ? Or a bad thing for our hobby ? In my book, that's a bad thing for our hobby, to get more places off-limits.

So people who trespass or leave a mess behind have nothing to do with it?

If a place is off limits it was due to an archaeologist?

Can you cite ONE example of where asking permission has led to stronger regulations? Because I can cite several where careless digging and failure to ask permission has been a problem.

This is the kind of stuff they use... not posts where people have asked permission to hunt property where it's required.

Regional Archeology Program - Metal Detecting;
Indeed, some relic hunters argue on blogs, "They've had 100+ years to recover Civil War relics. If they haven't dug them up by now then they're fair game."