ALERT!!! Kentucky Bill Resurfaced!!!

[Mark S.]

Here we go again. The Kentucky bill has been resubmitted. It has the same sponsor (Meeks). The number this year is HB 295. I have only skimmed it quick as I just found it. Its late and I need to get to bed so will go thru it closer tomorrow and get back with the details. The end result appears to be much the same althought it seems to have been reworded.

I will post a link also. Just wanted to give everyone a heads up.


Mark S.
FMDAC Alliance Liaison

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Mark S.]

Here is the link to the bill

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/08RS/HB295.htm

If you click on the "HB 295" at the left just above the text it will bring up the full version in a Word document.

Mark S.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Thanx for the link. But if I understand the text correctly, this would only apply to "human remains and burial objects" within an archaeological site? So ........... if any of us digs a barber, seated, bust, IH, etc.... that is not in the context of human burial, then I guess we're/you're off the hook? So what is the fear for md'rs here? (unless you're detecting graveyards or something?)

 

[paddy.mick]

Agreed, this is a specific bill protecting all burial sites, instead of just Native American burials (already covered in the federal laws). I feel this is a standard of decency and something for which support can only aid the MDing community.
A good amount of my family burials are outside of traditional plots, not all of which are still on our land, but I expect them to be honored as a final resting place. Tis sad it takes laws to enforce common decency.

Then again, give it a thousand years and I'll want a famous archeologist to dig them up and make them famous: the bog people of Tipperary! Perhaps.

Paddy

 

[Mark S.]

Read the full text version. Section two has almost nothing to do with burials and deals with what they term as an "archaeological" site on private property.

If you read the first two lines of the short version carefully you will see that it states that a permit is required for digging on private property and it does not refer to burials until after that statement is made. Although burials are included it is directly aimed at any site.

This is an ongoing attempt by the Kentucky Heritage Council to take control of all sites on private property. Last year they began disguising it as protecting burials. Hoping to get it slid thru without anyone paying attention. They were hoping that people would read and interpret it just as you have.

Georgia has a law on the books that not only must you have written permission from property owners but until recently you had to notify them in writing 5 days prior. It was recently changed to an immediate phone call or email notification. Although that was several months ago and the hotline is still not set up.

Did you see the newspaper article a short time ago about the bottle digger in Oregon. It was posted all over the forums. A law was slipped in sometime that you must get a permit from the state to dig a site on private property. This is any site that has 10 or more items over 75 years old in a concentrated geographic area. And you must hire an archaeologist to observe you. That is not a joke. That is a law in Oregon.

This is exactly what the KHC would like to see in KY. Don't be fooled by them.

I have no problem with most of the bill dealing with burials. If it were just that I would have little objection. That being it needs a defintion of a 'burial object". It is defined as "any item". Thats a little vague.

Mark S.

Mark S.

 

[Mark S.]

I just located this. This is a link to newspaper story in the Cincinnati Enquirer. Pay special attention to the name and organization in the third paragraph and you will see why the name of this bill is a ruse. You will get the idea of the true intentions of the KHC. This was in response to an earlier article on a couple of bottle diggers.


http://www.archaeologynews.org/story.asp?ID=258912&Title=Privy digging has its detractors


Mark S.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Mark S, I must, respectfully, take issue with your interpretation of your first link, a bit more.

But first, I must interject a comment on your last news link: That one, as we all know, is bogus wishful thinking on the part of purist archies, to begin with. I mean, c'mon, 1979 ARPA being applied to private property when you've had the owner's permission? We all know ARPA 1979 is only applied to Federal lands (and probably ONLY at historic monument type stuff at that). Does that mean some purist won't conjecture that "you may be in violation even on private land" blah blah? Of course they would say such a line, but it's not the meaning of ARPA, so this doesn't affect or scare me one bit. It's a clear misinterpretation of ARPA, by overzealous archies. And the fact that they would skew the true literal meaning (the lands and items it applies to), does not mean we should run out and fight it. I mean, why fight a misinterpretation? They'd LOVE that, as it would give them more grounds to "address this pressing issue".

Example: If the speed limit is 55, and some cop says "you can get a ticket for going 54", what good does it do to go out and "fight for my right to go 54", when there was nothing illegal, to begin with, in going 54? I hope this makes sense.

But back to your first link: Notice carefully, when it defines terms, like "archaeological site", the following disclaimer:

"As used in Sections 1 to 6, 7, and 8 of this Act, unless the context requires otherwise:"

Now, concentrate on that "unless the context requires otherwise". What is the "context" they are talking about? Go back to the first page that was talking about the "archaeological site": It is clearly talking about sites of burials, cemetaries, etc... because of the un-ending gramatical flow into phrases like "...... relatives of those buried within". So the CONTEXT requires that the specific TYPE of archaeological site they're aiming for, is burials etc....

We all have no problems with that (I have no interest in digging human remains), so presto, no problem.

 

[mrs.oroblanco]

Ok, I must be reading the wrong bill.

I read this as pertaining even to private land, makes a private landowner the legal caretaker of a grave, and makes it illegal for the private landowner to stop anyone from crossing his private property to view the grave.

Here is how I came to this conclusion:

establish a process by which the landowner shall provide reasonable access to the cemeteries to the descendants and relatives of those buried within; (separate sentence)

place responsibility on the land owner to maintain the cemetery's integrity; Another separate sentence.

make denial of access to the cemetery a violation Another separate sentence.

I know there is a whole lot more, like making it a felony to NOT let someone move it or whatever, and charging money for a permit to leave it on their private property - but, IMO, this is the government taking - or trying to take - one giant leap forward from what is on public land and private land.

I understand "repatriation", but, besides the fact they are specifically talking about private land, I really have a problem with the government digging up every old grave around. We aren't really talking about desecration, to find a grave on your property, but I believe it is desecration to unearth and remove humans from their final resting place.

Frankly, digging up 6000 mummies and putting them in museums, IMO, is an atrocity, too.

B

 

[cavers5]

Folks,

One of the things that this has to do with is using GPR to determine cemetery boundaries and the locations of actual graves. Now, you think, this doesn't sound like too bad of a thing.

Scenario:

Perhaps it's the 5th great grandchild of an ancestor buried in the cemetery that just shows up out of the blue and wants to see if 5th great grandma or pa's grave is actually there. The owners, who may be elderly and even be just second generation from the same ancestor own the property. They don't want this newfangled contraption going over the graves of their ancestors because they were raised to believe that it was a sin just to step on the graves. It's hard enough to weedeat the cemetery without disturbing the graves. They've taken care of these graves their whole lives and it's on their property. They don't want GPR, hence the 5th great grandchild's and in-tow archaeologists' request is denied.

Now the archaeologists get p?ssed and decide that they can change that because they have influence with their reps and senators. That's why they go to the trouble (oh, yes, they do call it trouble behind their reps' and senators' backs) to maintain these relations. So, they tell the 5th great grandchild who is going to pay them for this trouble that they'll fix it legally with an introduced bill and before long...wahlah!...they have access to the property....against the wishes of the private landowners...which, by the way, the archaeologists make sure are threatened with lawsuits, court action, jail, etc. Now, the elderly couple, who are on fixed incomes are so mad and sad...but what can be done? No one has taken their feelings into consideration and they don't know who to turn to for help. They can't afford the hassle of a lawyer and courts, so they have to stand back and watch the bullsh?t.

Who knows? It might worry them so bad, that one of them may end up having a coronary!

Is this what the field of archaeology has come to? I mean, anthropology is understanding culture. The culture of these elderly people was entirely ignored. Also, when we start trampling on the rights of private property because of a few nasty archaeologists, where is that going to lead?

Yes, the above scenario is currently fictitious. However, it could happen if this bill is passed!

Cavers5

 

[Tom_in_CA]

cavers, you say: "They want legislation controlling any kind of digging for artifacts on private property." Yes, I agree, this is their mind-set. I wasn't saying that wasn't their thinking, their hope, their financial gain, etc... What I WAS saying is that, in the wording of this particular bill (the link/topic of this thread), they are not attaining that level of control in this case. It won't stop them from eventually, perhaps, working their way up to that level (the camel with its nose in the door, eh?), and it won't stop them from laying down veiled threats to skittish newbies who read their interpretations (like Mark's 2nd linked article). But as it is, it would not stand up legally, in the reading of the initial link, to stop someone from hunting a farmer's field, abandoned house, etc...

There was a person I heard of, that got in hot water (he might have been on federal land) for ARPA violation. He had, in his possesion, a few old coins, bullets, etc... He fought his citatation in front of a judge. He argued that he was not in violation of ARPA, d/t a coin or a bullet is not "archaeologically significant", unless in the context of a known site/study. Ie.: even a 1909s VDB penny had nearly a half million made! What does it tell you about a person who lost it, other than that they had pennies! Doh. True, if it was in a coat pocket in a dead person's grave, or in the privy of an actual "scheduled" site (as they say in England), there would be info from it. But let's say, to find it at a park, or school, or beach, is not "archaeologically signficant" nor are they "archaeological sites", per se. In fact, I believe that ARPA specifically exempts things like coins and bullets, unless in context of a site, right? Anyhow, the guy's ticket got thrown out. Would this make purist archies stop from dishing out this nonsense? Of course not! They'll always try.

Another true story: A friend of mine was detecting at Seacliff State Beach, south of Santa Cruz, in CA. It just so happened, that on the day he was there, a visiting state archaeologist just happened to be passing by, as he was doing a lecture/interpretation guided tour thing, at the museum there that day. He had an absolute COW when he saw my friend down on the beach, and came down to talk to him. He kept trying insinuate that my friend was in some sort of violation of State of CA laws for the beaches (Ie.: not just THAT state beach, but ALL the state's beaches, were off-limits, according to this guy). My friend debated him for a bit, and I forget the outcome of that (whether he left or ignored him, etc...). The incident got posted on a CA detecting forum, and a few person's said "let's fight this". Now this gets deep, because, admittedly, if you dig into the minutia enough, there is rules about "resources" and stuff, that could, if push came to shove, be morphed to apply to md'ing. Also, there's nonsense stuff that's never enforced, about "turn in all jewelry to lost and found" and "if you find an old coin, mark the spot with a little flag, and alert a state archaeologist", blah blah.

It occured to me: Sheesk, maybe we better let this pass as an isolated incident, and let the busy-body just forget the incident. Afterall, most of our beaches in CA are state owned, and have never had a problem. Why fight something, and have bureaucrats have to address it or invent new interpretations? As it turned out, someone who read about the incident on the forum, had "friends in high places" in the parks dept, and wrote a letter saying that the archie was wrong, and that there are no prohibitions about "casual" md'ing on state beaches. Now I suppose that could've gone the other way too, right? I mean, another bureaucrat could've had a different image in his mind: Geeks with shovels stealing the historic artifacts that belong to the public, violating ARPA, etc...". So we got lucky on this one, and the incident was forgotten.

 

[cavers5]

Thank you for the reply, Tom in Ca.

I wish it was simple and we could let this pass on by.

However, please take a look at this url:
http://www.state.ky.us/agencies/khc/teachers.htm

I noticed you mentioned schools in your post. Near the bottom of the webpage listed above, it states that there is no excavating on school grounds. Does that mean no metal detecting/digging on school grounds? I do not know for sure yet if that is the case, but if it is, then all of us on Tnet really need to let our voices be heard to our state reps and senators.

Now, there are decent archaeologists in the state of KY that have common sense. However, in my opinion, the person with the webpage listed above is not one of them. Not letting little kids dig and have fun? That is just going too far! Kids are not going to dig several feet into school grounds, esp. without teachers noticing it or supervising it (although I guess they can't supervise if it is illegal!) I don't think the person with this webpage has children of her own, let alone truly understand how kids learn.

Tom, this is just a taste of what we are dealing with here in KY. We can't afford anymore to let anything pass that could be used against us...or be used for future decisions. We have to stop these people and these bills NOW! Remember, this can happen in other states!

If all the metal detectorists on Tnet helped, we could make a difference with this bill. Please use the following url: http://www.lrc.ky.gov/whoswho/county.htm

Just contacting one or two people on this list would make a difference.

Thanks,
Cavers5

 

[wildrider]

Frankly, digging up 6000 mummies and putting them in museums, IMO, is an atrocity, too.
B

Ya know...I said the exact same thing about a month ago when I heard something on the news about King Tut.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Cavers, the "teacher's notice" in your link, was written by an archaeological organization. First of all, that text is not the recitation of a law. In other words, its not wording coming out of the text of state law, right? Just some archie telling teachers to "watch out", etc... My opinion of their little sermon, is that they are misinterpretting their own codes. To go back to my earlier analogy, it would be like if the sign said "55 mph", and you had some yahoo out there telling you that you can get a ticket for going 54. The yahoo can tell you that all you want, but it won't be enforceable. I bet there is nothing in Kentucky law saying you can't take a spade (especially a teacher who works there for crying out loud!) to the school yard. Does that mean a yahoo archie won't try to make you believe there is such a law? (or interpretation of a law)? Sure they will. But I bet it won't stand up, if challenged.

So please link me to something that actually says this applies to private property, school yards, etc..... Not some after-market commentary by overzealous yahoos.

If I lived there, I'd find out where this particular author (who wrote your link) lives, and purposefully go out and detect some public beach or yard or something near him, JUST to be seen. I'd love for him to try to get me cited, so I can show him that, in fact, the wording applies to "historic or prehistoric sites", as their own laws say.

Now, I must admit this: In some parks (Houstan's parks for example), some pencil-pushing bureaucrats, realizing that things like ARPA or Texas state level laws, don't just blanketly apply to all public and private land (but instead, apply to "historic and prehistoric sites" or as they say in England "scheduled" sites) have come up with this verbage: "Since we don't know where a historic site might lay, we can't take the risk that you might discover a sensitive site", etc... Do you see the catch? The violation is not that you are metal detecting, or that you found an old coin or something, it's only if you found it in context of an archaeological site, grave, etc... And since those type sites, could admittedly be in any park (afterall, how do you know there wasn't a CW graveyard there BEFORE the modern park was built there?), they can, I guess, make a blanket rule to say no metal detecting for that reason. Now THAT is a rule I would fight. If the archie in your last link had some logic like that, it might fly, assuming they got the amended verbage that said just that (ie.: no digging ever, anywhere). But the way I see all your KY links, it is not to that point. Just archies trying to imply that what it all means.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Cavers, I see that the yahoo put their contact info on your link. I'm seriously thinking of sending him a polite comment. I'll let y'all know if I get any response.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Here is a cut & paste of an email I just sent to the "Henderson" person in the link above. We'll see what they say:

"A. Gwynn Henderson,

I ran across a memo on the internet, from the Kentucky Heritage Counsel, directed at teachers, titled: "Teachers Please Don't Touch That Trowel".

Specifically, I have a question about the following sentence: "Teachers, you should also be aware that it is unlawful in Kentucky to excavate on school grounds or other public lands without an antiquities permit from the Office of State Archaeology at the Department of Anthropology .... "

Can you please tell me where this law is written? I have read the laws relating to this subject, for KY, and do not see this interpretation. The laws that I think you are aluding to, are for "archaeological sites", not just blanketly "all public land".

If I am mistaken, please let me know, by linking me, or citing me, the law that forbids anyone from so much as digging in a sandbox, spading to plant flowers, or a teacher doing a mock illistration in the soil behind her school.

Thank you, Tom Tanner, Salinas, CA"

 

[cavers5]

Bless your heart, Tom in CA! Thank you!

"Curtsey"

[Southern drawl] Why sir...we eagerly await the answer!

Cavers5

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I got a reply! Here is the short reply:

hi again tom;

attached is the handout i promised to send. the kentucky antiquities act is the one i was refering to.

let me know if you have any other questions.

-g

I don't know why he/she used the word "again", as this was the only reply I received from them. I don't know how to link the particular type of file attachement that this Henderson fellow sent me, so I've just cut-&-pasted the entire text here:

Kentucky State Laws Pertaining to Archaeological Sites

Unlike some states, Kentucky does not have any laws that mirror federal laws dealing with the protection and preservation of archaeological sites. However, the Kentucky Antiquities Act does provide some protection for sites on public lands; statutes applying to grave robbing can be used to protect prehistoric grave sites; and the act that created the Kentucky Heritage Council goes on record for preserving archaeological sites. Here are brief summaries of the Kentucky state laws that pertain to archaeological sites. You may find the complete text of these laws at this web address: http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/krs/titles.htm. Search first on the chapter number (the first three numbers) and then by section (the numbers after the “.”).

KRS 164.705 - KRS 164.735; KRS 164.990
This is known as the Kentucky Antiquities Act, which was created in 1962. It makes it public policy to preserve archaeological sites and objects of antiquity and to limit archaeological work (exploration, excavation, and collection) to qualified persons and institutions. It prohibits the willful damage or destruction of archaeological sites on lands owned or leased by the state, state agencies, counties, or municipalities, and requires a permit from the University of Kentucky’s Department of Anthropology to explore or excavate archaeological sites on these lands. It requires anyone who discovers a site to report it to the Department. It is a felony to violate the sections of the Kentucky Antiquities Act prohibiting the willful destruction of archaeological sites and requiring permits to excavate.

KRS 171.3801 - KRS 171.395
These statutes formally created the Kentucky Heritage Council, the state agency whose purpose it is to preserve and protect all meaningful vestiges of Kentucky’s heritage, including archaeological sites. The Council maintains an inventory of all archaeological sites recorded in the state, and maintains lists of sites with state or national significance. The director is the State Historic Preservation Officer, a role created by the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act. Thus, the Council administrates the activities related to this act, most importantly for archaeological sites, the National Register of Historic Places and the review and oversight responsibilities that ensure compliance with federal cultural resource management laws and regulations.

KRS 433.870 - 433.885
The Kentucky Cave Protection Act makes it illegal, among other things, to disturb or damage cave surfaces or materials found inside caves, including archaeological remains. Archaeological investigations inside caves cannot be conducted without a permit from the State Archaeologist, and must be carried out under the supervision of the State Archaeologist and the Kentucky Heritage Council. It is a misdemeanor to violate sections of this Act.

Various KRS Statutes (e.g., KRS 525.110; KRS 525.120; KRS 213.110; KRS 72.020)
A variety of statutes related to grave robbing provide a measure of protection for Native American burials because they do not make a distinction on the basis of grave age or presence of a marker. Some statutes make it a felony or a misdemeanor to commit criminal mischief and theft by unlawful taking; to desecrate venerated objects (intentionally disturb human remains or the objects buried with the remains); or to abuse a corpse. If human remains are encountered, removal and transit permits must be obtained, and a coroner must be notified before the remains are removed.

And here is my reply back to him/her:

A. Gwynn Henderson,

The link to the "complete text" (http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/krs/titles.htm), is not a working link. Can you please clarify?

As for the rest of the text you sent in your file attachment, it all pertains to "archaeological sites". Nothing in there supports your organization's memo to teachers (""Teachers Please Don't Touch That Trowel".). Where do you come up with the assertion that a teacher can not so much as use a trowel, in a mock illistration, to a school yard? Unless that school yard were an archaeological site (or "scheduled" site, as they say in England), I am not understanding your memo to school teachers.
Please send me the citation in KY law that supports this memo's statement: "Teachers, you should also be aware that it is unlawful in Kentucky to excavate on school grounds or other public lands without an antiquities permit from the Office of State Archaeology at the Department of Anthropology .... "

Thank you in advance,

Tom Tanner, Salinas, CA

We'll see if "Henderson" replies.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Ok, "Henderson" replied. Here is the cut and paste of their email to me:

hi tom;

i clicked on the address you included in your email and it worked fine for me. not sure what's up with that. maybe backing up or googling the exact krs number would work. the krs you are looking for is the kentucky antiquities act: krs 164.705 - krs 164.735; krs 164.990

i guess we will just have to agree to disagree, tom. and i am sorry if i leave you with confusion.

i am of the opinion that teachers should not do archaeological excavation on school property unless they are guided, mentored, or advised by an archaeologist (and in kentucky, archaeological work on municipal, county, or state property is illegal. i have to get a permit to do so, and so do teachers). the chances of disturbing cultural resources and giving students the wrong message are just too great.

you may call dr. david pollack, the director of the kentucky archaeological survey, if you'd like, at the number below. he has had extensive experience in archaeological legal contexts. perhaps he can explain things better than i can.

have a good one!

-g

A. Gwynn Henderson
Archaeologist/Education Coordinator
Kentucky Archaeological Survey
1020A Export Street
Lexington, KY 40506-9854
Phone: 859/257-1944
Fax: 859/323-1968
Website: www.kyheritage.org/kas.htm<http://www.kyheritage.org/kas.htm>


So I mailed back this reply to them:




A. Gwynn,

I got the website to work. Thankyou.

My suspicion is confirmed. Your organization is grossly misinterpretted the text. To tell a teacher that they can't so much as take a garden spade to a school ground is flat wrong. It would only be wrong to do so at an "archaeological site" not "any public land". You would have to say that the entire state of KY is an "archaeolgical site", to support your assertion. Look closely at krs 164.725 and krs 164.730. They show that, in fact, there are "archaeological sites" WITHIN the state, but not ALL the state is an archaeological site. See for yourself by looking up those code subsections.

When looking at those subsections, ask yourself how can a person "mark a location" (of an archaeological site), if the WHOLE state were an archaeological site, to begin with? And for a person to "report the discovery of a site" presupposes that some sites are not archaeological sites, and others ARE.

Do you get it? This is not a matter of "opinion", this is a matter of clear text. Yes, you may think it is a good idea (your "opinion", as you say) for persons not to take a garden spade to a school yard, but it is not the law.

Thus the Kentucky Heritage Counsel has sent out false information in their "Teachers Don't Touch That Trowel" newsletter. This line is inexcusable and false:

"Teachers, you should also be aware that it is unlawful in Kentucky to excavate on school grounds or other public lands without an antiquities permit "

I would like to request that this misinformation is corrected in subsequent issues, for teachers who may have been misled.

thankyou, Tom Tanner, Salinas, CA


Ok, what do you guys think of this so far? Am I doing an OK job? If they refuse to publish a correction to their misinformation, I am SERIOUSLY thinking of sending out a mailer to every school (and CC'ing the Kentucy Heritage group into it), correctlying the previous false information that was sent out. I am also going to call a lawyer on Monday (a service I subscribe to where you can ask an attorney questions) to see if there's any wrong committed by a group like this, to tell persons that the law says such & such, when in fact, it doesn't. Any opinions so far? We'll see how the Henderson responds.

 

[Mark S.]

Tom

You are doing a fine job. I look forward to your further communications. Just don't expect any cooperation from her or the KHC. They do not like having their judgement questioned or being called on to defend their (wrong) position.

Mark S.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Thanx Mark S.

Ok gang, not only did I send the afore-mentioned email to "A. Gwynn", but I also directed the same information to the fellow he/she aluded to: "David Pollack".

I got a reply from David Pollack today. Here it is, cut and pasted. I will follow that, with my reply to him. First, his email to me:


Tom

Thank you for your email and concerns. Unfortunately, I think you misunderstand the message on the Kentucky Archaeological survey website. If a teacher plans the excavation of an archeological site on state or municipal lands then they need a permit from the University of Kentucky Department of Anthropology. Since most school grounds have not been surveyed by professional archaeologists, then it would not be advisable to undertake excavations without first conducting an archaeological survey.

If the teacher adversely impacts an archaeological site, not only have they committed a felony, but what message are they sending their students. You should also consider that archaeology is not just about excavation. It is also about the context of recovery and making inferences about the past. Looting of archaeological sites is a national problem. In addition, archaeological resources are a nonrenewable resource; once a site is destroyed it is gone forever. I do not think you are interested in training students to loot sites. Nor am I. That is why we encourage teachers to take project archaeology workshops and to work with professional archaeologists when designing an archaeology program.

Finally, I must say I am somewhat taken aback by your concerns about what we do in Kentucky, and what Kentucky law does or does not speak to. How does this affect what you do in Salinas, California? Are you planning to excavate an archaeological site with your class, without the involvement of a professional archaeologist?

David Pollack
Site Protection Program Manager,
Kentucky Heritage Council, and
Director, Kentucky Archaeological Survey
502.564.7005, ext 123