Comunity School Property...Can I Dig?

[TheElementOfSand]

I recently have started to get my maps together and have found a great spot to hunt, its an empty lot in witch I believe was purchased for parking lot that has just not been paved yet. Its owned by the local Community Schools. Can I dig there or do I still have to get permission and from who?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[spartacus53]

IS this vacant lot near a school , or are your schools in the real estate business

Either way, you still have to identify and talk to the landowner

 

[TheElementOfSand]

Yes it is near a school and it is vacant its on the otherside of a major road from the schools parking lots. Its owned by the Fort Wayne Community Schools so who would I look for for permission?

 

[spartacus53]

Honestly, since this is your second post of this nature, I would google the laws governing your state in regards to metal detecting and be on the safe side

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Hey Spartacus, why would he google the laws of the "state"? Those laws he would find doing that would presumably be for state-owned lands, not city lands. So why would state level laws have any bearing on his question?

Ok Element: my opinion on your question is that you do not need to seek out permission for public owned lands, unless there is something on the books saying you can't. In other words, since you say your site is city owned, then all you need to do is check the city's muni. codes and laws (which is probably on their website). And if you see nothing addressing metal detecting (ie.: no prohibitions), then presto, it must not be prohibited.

You can certainly go asking desk-bound bureaucrats if you want to, but just be prepared, you might get a "no", when no such rule saying such a thing exists, and quite frankly, no one may ever have cared or noticed.

My grandmother's home (built in the teens) was right next to an elementary school. It was bought up by a school district in southern CA, by eminent domain, to eventually be used for more parking or buildings or something. However after the school bought it up, and removed the house, the land just sat there vacant, for another year or two. During that time, I simply helped myself (was able to detect under where her elevated slat porch had been, and found silver coins there ) No one said anything to me, and I never asked anyone. But sure, I suppose if I'd gone high enough up through the ranks of various city officials (who perhaps really don't care, nor would ever have given the matter thought before), I'd have eventually found someone to tell me "no".

So do you want the technical answer, or the realistic one?

 

[spartacus53]

Hey Spartacus, why would he google the laws of the "state"? Those laws he would find doing that would presumably be for state-owned lands, not city lands. So why would state level laws have any bearing on his question?

Well, last time I looked cities were located in states, and no city, or municipalities can regulate by ordinance any law unless it is in harmony with state law Therefore if the state decided you cannot detect in any park, or particular parcel of land, no city can override it

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Well, last time I looked cities were located in states, and no city, or municipalities can regulate by ordinance any law unless it is in harmony with state law Therefore if the state decided you cannot detect in any park, or particular parcel of land, no city can override it

Spartacus, I too have heard this line of reasoning (and wondered if you would render it here as your answer). The rationale goes something like this:

Just as murder laws, and other such crimes, laws, codes, etc.... can not be negated on city level (eg.: a city can not "legalize murder", for instance, because it is forbidden at state and federal level). That so too do all laws subrogate down through the ranks (to county & cities).

But no, I don't think this applies to things like metal detecting. Maybe a lawyer could chime in here on this. But think of it Spartacus: There are several (lots in fact) of states of that FMDAC list of state-by-state laws, that have outright "no's". Yet as we all know, detecting goes on in those states all the time, since those laws are, AND HAVE ALWAYS, been deemed to apply to state owned parks. Not city or county or private lands and parks.

Also, think of this: park rules vary ALL THE TIME, from park to park. So just because, for example, that perhaps state parks might not allow fire-works, or off-roading with 4-wheel drives, or dogs-on-leash only, etc.... doesn't mean that other parks might not allow dogs off leash, off-road 4-wheeling, overnight camping, etc... I mean, park rules (hours of operation, and other such things) vary ALL THE TIME from park to park, at all different levels, depending on what entity runs the park. It simply doesn't follow logically that state level laws, automatically subrogate down to city and county owned parks.

Again, perhaps a lawyer can chime in about this.

And think of this: if your premise is correct, that simply because cities and counties are a sub-set of states, that state rules apply to city parks, then you have to go one step further:
The states are merely sub-sets of the federal, right? So why then, aren't we all subject to the federal ARPA then, if your premise is correct?

 

[spartacus53]

I hate to break it to you, but Federal Law is the supreme law of the land and attorney will tell you that.

Hint, hint

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I hate to break it to you, but Federal Law is the supreme law of the land and attorney will tell you that.

Hint, hint

Then why do state's all differ on their individual state park's rules? A simple look at the FMDAC state-by-state list reveals this:

Federation of Metal Detector & Archaeological Clubs Inc.

If they are merely a sub-set of the federal, then why do some say "go for it", while other state's say "no", when it comes to their state parks? Why aren't all of them simply subject to ARPA, if what you're saying is true?

I think something's amiss with the logic here. Why did the FMDAC even need to ever come out with their state-by-state list, to begin with, if as you're saying, they're all subject the federal standards?

I agree when it comes to laws like murder, drugs (heroin can not be "legalized" in any city or county or state, since it's forbidden at the federal level). But when it comes to things like the time a park closes at night, or dogs on or off leash, or whether or not you can detect, no: those things can vary. And the states (or the federal) rules can be different for their land, vs the city, county or private lands.

 

[Sandman]

I will back Tom of CA up in this....He is right.

 

[New Orleans Relic]

Both opinions have merit, but I also lean considerably with tom. One "no", wrong or right could be precedence. There are those who think its arragant when I say, "sometimes its easier to ask for forgiveness than permission". I'm not saying "when its gray, look for Ray". And often miss the "sometimes" part! The sometimes part is very important! So now I've evolved to "When I'm wrong, I'm Humble".
Sort of a character thing. Mine is in place!! My ethic guidelines fell together before I laid a lesche!
Alot of the "do gooders, written permission a must, fluff the grass blades, cards printed hunters have heavier socks when leaving a hunt they've agreed to turn over finds. Get it? Most mean well and that is admirable-but EXPECTED.
HH Ray

 

[New Orleans Relic]

Both opinions have merit, but I also lean considerably with tom. One "no", wrong or right could be precedence. There are those who think its arragant when I say, "sometimes its easier to ask for forgiveness than permission". I'm not saying "when its gray, look for Ray". And often miss the "sometimes" part! The sometimes part is very important! So now I've evolved to "When I'm wrong, I'm Humble".
Sort of a character thing. Mine is in place!! My ethic guidelines fell together before I laid a lesche!
Alot of the "do gooders, written permission a must, fluff the grass blades, cards printed hunters have heavier socks when leaving a hunt they've agreed to turn over finds. Get it? Most mean well and that is admirable-but EXPECTED.
HH Ray

Wow! that was tooo heavy!
....and I'm not dwinking. LOL

 

[spartacus53]

Well, last time I looked cities were located in states, and no city, or municipalities can regulate by ordinance any law unless it is in harmony with state law Therefore if the state decided you cannot detect in any park, or particular parcel of land, no city can override it

In my haste I wrote in harmony with state law, that should be corrected to Federal law... That's the bottom line

Bottom line, you must follow Federal law, as it is the law of the land..

P.S. All judges act in that fashion accordingly, unless they are looking for trouble .

 

[TheElementOfSand]

All is well and good with that thought spartacus, but seems to me there is a bit of confusion even between our federal and state regulations. Off topic but on the topic of federal taking precedence over state laws. Marijuana is illegal for any use as per federal law witch is the supreme law of the land, but yet its legal in California for medical use as well in Michigan and in several other states. So even if federal laws mandate that you are not allowed or it isn't right or its illegal the state can still uphold their own views and support their own laws. Now this isn't to say that California and Michigan laws are above federal laws because they are not. The feds can step in at anytime anywhere to uphold federal law over the states laws and they do so quite frequently. The feds step into California quite frequently to shut down grow-ops and medical marijuana dispensarys even though they are legally ran by state law they are in violation of federal law. Now back to the question at hand I just am looking for more info on whether or not a public school is really public. I can hunt the local public parks without issue. Even though its considered as "PUBLIC" school property is it still considered "PRIVATE" land?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

All is well and good with that thought spartacus, but seems to me there is a bit of confusion even between our federal and state regulations. Off topic but on the topic of federal taking precedence over state laws. Marijuana is illegal for any use as per federal law witch is the supreme law of the land, but yet its legal in California for medical use as well in Michigan and in several other states. So even if federal laws mandate that you are not allowed or it isn't right or its illegal the state can still uphold their own views and support their own laws. Now this isn't to say that California and Michigan laws are above federal laws because they are not. The feds can step in at anytime anywhere to uphold federal law over the states laws and they do so quite frequently. The feds step into California quite frequently to shut down grow-ops and medical marijuana dispensarys even though they are legally ran by state law they are in violation of federal law. Now back to the question at hand I just am looking for more info on whether or not a public school is really public. I can hunt the local public parks without issue. Even though its considered as "PUBLIC" school property is it still considered "PRIVATE" land?

Hi Element. For some reason, things like drug laws, murder, etc... seem on a different level than whether or not someone can metal detect. There's got to be some sort of differing levels or types of laws, legally speaking. Things like murder, drugs, etc... then ........ sure, it's true that the fed. can come to the state and force the state's hand to police those supreme laws. But for things like metal detecting? Nah, there's got to be a different guiding rule as to which laws subrogate down, vs which ones don't. Otherwise, you've got a host of people who are in "deep doo-doo", because they live in states, that ...... if the FMDAC list is to be believed, have out-right "no's" on all their state level land. Are we to assume this automatically subrogates down to county and city level (despite perhaps that the city and county parks there could care less)?

As for whether public school land is public property, yes, it is public property. But remember, there's lots of types of "public property" that is subject to usage rules. You know, like .... libraries are public. Yet they have hours of usage, and you can't set up a pup-tent and camp out in the middle of the library, etc.... Thus a school might be "public", yet restrict the school grounds to student use only (to keep perverts from trying to meet grade school kids, etc...). I hunt school yards all the time, so long as I see others who likewise use the school after hours (to jog the track, use the basketball hoops, etc...)

Spartacus: I will check with a lawyer contact friend of mine within the next few days, and find out the answer to this interesting question.

 

[TheElementOfSand]

As for whether public school land is public property, yes, it is public property. But remember, there's lots of types of "public property" that is subject to usage rules. You know, like .... libraries are public. Yet they have hours of usage, and you can't set up a pup-tent and camp out in the middle of the library, etc.... Thus a school might be "public", yet restrict the school grounds to student use only (to keep perverts from trying to meet grade school kids, etc...). I hunt school yards all the time, so long as I see others who likewise use the school after hours (to jog the track, use the basketball hoops, etc...)

Spartacus: I will check with a lawyer contact friend of mine within the next few days, and find out the answer to this interesting question.

Very good analogy. Helps to put into perspective why public may not mean "free for all". I knew there was more to it than just do it or dont. I am curious to what your lawyer has to add to the subject as well.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Ok guys, I started a new thread with the legal answer.