Digging - need major help

[Ladybuggy]

So, I'm new to the hobby and need major help with my digging. The main locations are in the woods and house lawns. I currently use a medium sized metal shovel, a smaller tool (garden size) that has sharp edges. I generally use the med. shovel and make a circle, pop the plug out and place it on a towel. The towel's purpose is to help keep the lawn clean and also helpful in finding the target. So my holes look ridiculous when I'm done, is this just because the dirt is so dry or is it me?

So what kind of tools should I be using & how should I dig? Suggestions? I really don' want to break or scratch anything exciting.

 

[deepskyal]

Well...I'd probably ditch the shovel if you're doing a lawn. That's a mighty big hole for a coin or piece of jewelry. I'd also avoid lawns if the ground is overly dry. Yes, your holes probably look silly if the ground is very dry because it just won't compact back down good without moisture. If someone comes by with a mower it will just pull your plug out, chew it up and toss it everywhere. There's also a likely change you will damage the lawn if it's dry and you disturb too many roots to the air. It'll just brown out and die in a few days.

Your garden trowel sounds like the better choice for lawn areas. If you practice, you can cut a horseshoe shaped hole which leaves some grass and ground still in tact, then flip it over to expose your hole. But again, if the ground is overly dry, find a deep shade area to detect. Somewhere where the ground isn't baked all day by the sun. There is a world of different tools designed for digging holes. I personally use an old army knife I purchased back in the early 80's. Still got a great edge.

Most of us that detect avoid manicured areas during dry spells, simply to keep a good name and not a lot of brown spots in someones lawn.

Your shovel is better suited to the woods. Just fill your hole in and stomp it...then move to the next signal. I love hunting woods.

Stomp your lawn plugs to. You dont have to do jumping jacks on it, but some firm foot pounding on those stubborn ones may be in order.
After, I lightly brush the area with my hand to blend it back in. But that's me...

Work on your pinpointing. Once you got your target centered best as possible, go out 2 or 3 inches from center around for your horseshoe cut, flip it over. Try to estimate your depth and dig an inch or so deeper on your first cut. If your pinpointing is off, it's better to tunnel under the grass than cut more grass out. Maybe get a probe to use to help locate the object in the hole. I never used one in 20 some years til last year. I love that thing now.

Al

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Best time to do turf, so the plug/divots don't die, is when the ground is moist (during winter, or spring, or whatever). If the ground is dry, and the dirt crumbles as you're trying to make a divot, then yeah, the divot will die, and it won't look good.

Some more tips:

1) In addition to only hunting turf when it's moist, also try to keep the maximum amount of dirt root-ball intact, below the grass plug. Because if you just shave off a grass plug top, with no depth, that will also be subject to dying. So cut deep, so that the max dirt stays intact with the plug top.

2) when you re-fill your hole and repack all the contents, be sure to stomp on the plug when you're done, to get it to set down back flat, and make good contact with the surrounding dirt. I see too many people cut nice clean plugs, and follow all the rules, yet the forget, or don't, stomp the plug. So essentially, the plug sits like a little crown, sticking up a hair. That makes it subject to getting sucked back out by power lawn mowers (as they have a little sucking-up vacuum action, as you know). Or subject to be kicked back out of place by the next person walking by, etc....

3) you can certainly try to ditch the plug/divot method, and go strictly with a long flat beefy screwdriver method of probing, prying, making a "slit", etc.... But the problem is, that this will only work for shallower newer coins (top 4" or so?), and you also risk scratching coins (if you're angling for older coins you didn't want to scratch up).

4) Some people advocate making only a 3-sided plug, to form a "flap", where the 4th side stays intact. That will keep the roots (on that one side anyhow) intact, to alleviate the possibility of the grass dying. The problem with this is, it's difficult to dig, when you've got the plug in the way. Especially if you want to re-scan the hole with the detector, you no longer have flat ground to scan over.

5) Be sure you have the in-line pinpointer probe, which will keep your holes smaller, because .... if you have to drift the hole over one way or another, you will have concise pinpoint precision on which way to pull more dirt out of a hole, rather than enlargening the whole hole.

 

[Dan Hughes]

Watch this video. Hunt when the ground is wet, and get a pinpointer:



---Dan, http://treasuremanual.com

 

[Ladybuggy]

Thanks guys for the help. I guess I have the majority of the basics down. The dirt is just so dry it's making my holes look disastrous. I've watched videos, tried the horseshoe with one side still attached, I've been using a towel to help with the dirt all over the place & easier to find the target.

My next purchase will have to be a hand pin pointer, that will help with smaller holes, and less re-centering a target. I keep hearing to ditch the shovel, unless in the woods. Any suggestions on a good tool or knife I should switch to for lawns? I'm very worried about scratching something good.

Also, any advice on how to approach/convince someone to let us detect their property would be helpful. I know to get permission from the town for any parks, etc., and lately have gotten the guts up to stop at random houses and farm stands - but I've only been getting the run around, no yeses.

Thanks for you help!

 

[Dan Hughes]

Any suggestions on a good tool or knife I should switch to for lawns? I'm very worried about scratching something good.

Did you watch the video (above)? It shows you several knives you can use. And you avoid scratching coins by digging your hole large enough that your knife is nowhere near the coin. It's in the video!

Also, any advice on how to approach/convince someone to let us detect their property would be helpful. I know to get permission from the town for any parks, etc., and lately have gotten the guts up to stop at random houses and farm stands - but I've only been getting the run around, no yeses.

Start with relatives and friends. Be sure you're leaving NO TRACE of your digging before you ask strangers. Listen to show #046 here for tips on getting permission to hunt private property:

http://thetreasurecorner.com

Also, show #002 covers getting permission to hunt public property, like parks and schoolyards. You'll have to scroll all the way to the bottom for that one. (You'll see several other shows there you'll want to hear, too).

---Dan Hughes, http://treasuremanual.com

 

[Montauk3]

What ever happened to the probe? Find it with the probe and narrow the target area.


less mess, less hole.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Lady-buggy, you say: "I know to get permission from the town for any parks ........."

This is not true. You do not need to get permission to md at parks, anymore so than you need permission to fly a frisbee, or use the swing sets there. If it's not specifically disallowed, then don't go about it thinking you "need permission". To know if md'ing is disallowed for some reason (if you're skittish), check the rules listed at your city's website (laws and regulations are usually on-line nowadays for all cities), or is available for public viewing on the front desk in binder form at city hall. You can also usually find the rules listed on the wooden sign at the park entrance. If it is silent on the issue of md'ing, then so be it. If you're not being a nuisance in some other way (leaving a mess, etc....), then md'ing doesn't need permission, anymore-so than any other activity. Now of course, let's face it: we're in an odd hobby that draws the stares of the curious, so go at low traffic times, don't stick out like a sore thumb waiting for busy-bodies to make some sort of assumptions, etc....

 

[Dan Hughes]

Correcting a mistake:

I erred in note 5 above. I've corrected the error there; I originally referenced the wrong permission podcast. Here's what I was trying to say:

#002 is about getting permission to hunt public property.

#046 is about getting permission to hunt private property.

They are both at http://thetreasurecorner.com.

Enjoy!

---Dan Hughes, http://treasuremanual.com

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Dan just listened to your #2. With all due respect, I think this leaves the listener with the idea that he must "get permission" from public places, where there may be no rules prohibiting detecting. To quote directly from you, showing such inferences to beginners:

"... showing a note from the local police dept. is the best way to answer the complainer ...."

" ... you have to ask locally ...."

".... talk to the principal ....." and "try to get a note ....."

etc....

Why not make a podcast that tells people to ......... if they are skittish ...... they can see if there's any prohibitions on detecting (looking it up for themselves, not "asking permission") wherever they're at. If rulebooks for their park's dept's, in their towns, are silent on the issue, then what's to ask about?

And with all due respect, asking principles and cops to put something in writing, is the FASTEST way to get a "no" that I've ever heard of. In fact, this is the way to get places put off limits, as you merely get rules created, to address your pressing issue. I mean, the mere fact a person thinks they have to get permission to do something (much less, telling them to sign a contract for a total stranger) simply implies that something is inherently wrong, or damanging, or dangerous, thus you/we need contracts.

If I recall, you did do a written postscript sort of correcting this mis-conception. But I didn't know it was still, un-corrected, in this podcast.

Postscript: Are you aware that you talk about the dangers of "being shot", in a podcast that talks about "how to detect public areas"? I'm sure you meant that being shot is a danger to trespassing on private land. But I can't help but think, that putting fears like that, on a podcast about "getting permission to hunt public land", is an odd fear, and merely re-enforces that we are somehow evil, and need sanction ..... "lest we be shot".

 

[Dan Hughes]

...with all due respect, asking principles and cops to put something in writing, is the FASTEST way to get a "no" that I've ever heard of.

It worked for me in the one instance I tried it (Park District Superintendent). But you get the OK orally, before you ask for the note.

Now, please understand that I feel I have to be more careful than the typical treasure hunter. As a recognized "authority", I'd be pretty embarrassed to be thrown out of a park by a Barney-Fife type cop (as has happened to some folks who post on the treasure boards).

And I've never been much of a believer in the shoot-from-the-hip "It is easier to get forgiveness than permission" philosophy.

I mean, the mere fact a person thinks they have to get permission to do something (much less, telling them to sign a contract for a total stranger) simply implies that something is inherently wrong, or damaging, or dangerous, thus you/we need contracts.

Contracts? Where did that come from? I don't recommend contracts at all. Listen to show #042.

If I recall, you did do a written postscript sort of correcting this mis-conception. But I didn't know it was still, un-corrected, in this podcast.

Actually, the correction is podcast #039. I don't know if I'd call it a correction, as much as another point of view. I think we have a fundamental difference of opinion here. You think I'm too cautious; I think you're too reckless. And agreeing to disagree is fine. That's what makes the world go round, right?

Are you aware that you talk about the dangers of "being shot", in a podcast that talks about "how to detect public areas"?

Oops! You're right - I need to fix that. What happened was this: Show #002 was originally about getting permission on both public and private lands. I split it into two programs, and the line about getting shot should have moved to the private land part. I'll re-record that when I get the chance. Thanks for the heads-up.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

"It worked for me in the one instance I tried it (Park District Superintendent) ...."

This simply means the person you asked, did not have the right mental images, full picture, etc..... How much you wanna make a bet, that I can just as quickly get your "yes" revoked? All I'd need to do is go to that same official, and ask why Dan was allowed "dig" in the park, and keep "city valuables" for his own mantle-place? And what if he found an indian artifact and the city got sued over it? And so on, and so forth.

There are bound to be cases of people getting yes's (like yours). And what that tends to subconsciously do for people, is simply reinforce that they needed to ask. Ie.: the "yes" or the "no" they got, to them, simply means that this is proof that permission was needed. Because otherwise, the person they were asking, would have said something like "That's silly. why are you asking me?", etc... right? But this does not logically follow. Most bureaucrats, cops, etc... will be happy to grant you their authority, or deny you, when you grovel with questions. Afterall, you asked didn't you? Thus they too must be thinking "I guess this is a question that needs sanction". So I do not look at "yes's" or "no's" as reasons why others should assume that permission for places where it's not disallowed, is therefore necessary.

And for every example someone can give of a "yes" they got, I can give examples of people who got "no's", at places where no one was ever bothered before (and where it never occured to old-timers that there was a problem, as no one ever had a problem). But lo and behold, someone takes it upon themselves to walk into city hall, and they get a "no"? What's up with that?? This happened in my town. All we could figure was this newbie got a deskbound bureaucrat, who morphed something odd to apply to his question? And odds are, even whomever he talked to, would probably have never given the matter a moment's thought, until this "pressing question" crosses their desk. Much too risky. I can give example after example of this type thing happening.

Even on a state-wide basis it has happened: The state of Utah, who apparently used to have nothing on the subject in their state park rules (unless you tried hard to morph something about cultural heritage, or disturbing the vegetation, etc...) one day issued a addendum or clarification to address the issue of detecting. They go on and on with dire sounding things (not unlike other state's state-level parks have). But the interesting thing was the introductory paragraph leading into this dept. memo. clarification: It said something to the effect of "... Due to numerous inquiries the state park's dept. receives each year, this will serve to clarify .... blah blah blah" You see Dan? Apparently up till then, it was a grey area (as long as you weren't a nuisance of some sort?) But given enough "inquiries", what do you THINK the safe answer will be? Sheesk, this is a perfect example of the self-fulfilling cycle we put our own selves in.

As for "contracts", I used the word loosely for having someone sign something. I suppose that's an innacurate use of the word