liberty state park new jersey
- Thread starter iamfree
- Start date
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2007
- Messages
- 13,803
- Reaction score
- 10,339
- Golden Thread
- 2
- Location
- Salinas, CA
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
re.: "inquire"
Regarding the type verbage that some state park's dept's have that will say something to the effect of "inquire at each kiosk", or "with permission from attendant on duty", or something to that effect:
The reason for such nebulous verbage is simple: Decades ago, when state park's dept. headquarters received inquiries asking "Is metal detecting allowed in state parks there?", you have to put yourself in the mind of the person fielding such a question. Because admittedly, there are no doubt inoccuous places where no one cares less! Beaches, non-historically themed non-sensitive parks, etc... Then of course there are probably a few in each state that ARE historic monument sensitive type preserved spots, right? So honestly, put yourself in the position of having to give a "yes or no" type answer to such an inquiry. It's impossible! You can't go into lengthy detail like "yes on these 29 parks, but no on these 3 others, and yes everywhere at this campground, but stay away from the historic cabin monument on the NW side of the park" and so forth. So guess what the easy answer is? Either "no", or "inquire at each one you come to". Mind you, at nearly every one of these dire-sounding states, detecting had simply gone on at state parks, and perhaps no one had ever cared less (so long as you weren't being a nuisance raiding historically sensitive monements/sites). It's the old "no one cares, till you ask" psychology, eh?
CA, for example, has that same "inquire at each" type verbage. And I can tell you for a fact that there are some state parks here that routinely get detected, and no one cares (yup, right in front of rangers, etc....). And no, no one "asks". But I bet if we were to ask enough questions, high enough up the chain of command, SURE, we could probably find someone to morph something to apply to our "pressing question" and tell us "no". Do you get the moral of the story?
If I was you, I'd just do it, presuming you're not digging around obvious historically sensitive sites, and presuming of course, you're not waving your machine around purist archies. If someone has an issue, let them know you looked it up, and saw no specific prohibitions (that is your due diligence, afterall). If they have an issue, they're welcome to tell you, and no harm done. Afterall, you're just looking for that boyscout ring your dad lost there when he was a kid, RIGHT?? I mean, c'mon, why do we all go look for assassin's under rocks all the time?
Regarding the type verbage that some state park's dept's have that will say something to the effect of "inquire at each kiosk", or "with permission from attendant on duty", or something to that effect:
The reason for such nebulous verbage is simple: Decades ago, when state park's dept. headquarters received inquiries asking "Is metal detecting allowed in state parks there?", you have to put yourself in the mind of the person fielding such a question. Because admittedly, there are no doubt inoccuous places where no one cares less! Beaches, non-historically themed non-sensitive parks, etc... Then of course there are probably a few in each state that ARE historic monument sensitive type preserved spots, right? So honestly, put yourself in the position of having to give a "yes or no" type answer to such an inquiry. It's impossible! You can't go into lengthy detail like "yes on these 29 parks, but no on these 3 others, and yes everywhere at this campground, but stay away from the historic cabin monument on the NW side of the park" and so forth. So guess what the easy answer is? Either "no", or "inquire at each one you come to". Mind you, at nearly every one of these dire-sounding states, detecting had simply gone on at state parks, and perhaps no one had ever cared less (so long as you weren't being a nuisance raiding historically sensitive monements/sites). It's the old "no one cares, till you ask" psychology, eh?
CA, for example, has that same "inquire at each" type verbage. And I can tell you for a fact that there are some state parks here that routinely get detected, and no one cares (yup, right in front of rangers, etc....). And no, no one "asks". But I bet if we were to ask enough questions, high enough up the chain of command, SURE, we could probably find someone to morph something to apply to our "pressing question" and tell us "no". Do you get the moral of the story?
If I was you, I'd just do it, presuming you're not digging around obvious historically sensitive sites, and presuming of course, you're not waving your machine around purist archies. If someone has an issue, let them know you looked it up, and saw no specific prohibitions (that is your due diligence, afterall). If they have an issue, they're welcome to tell you, and no harm done. Afterall, you're just looking for that boyscout ring your dad lost there when he was a kid, RIGHT?? I mean, c'mon, why do we all go look for assassin's under rocks all the time?
maipenrai
Bronze Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2010
- Messages
- 1,145
- Reaction score
- 242
- Golden Thread
- 0
- Location
- Thailand/Europe/California
- Detector(s) used
- Excalibur 2 1000
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
"Ground contamination"?, Did he mean the ground is so contaminated or that you will contaminate the ground? Was it a chemical dump you wanted to detect at? I guess thats what happens when you ask, they have ran out of logical answers, so now they are digging to the bottom of the barrel, to come of with new ones.
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2007
- Messages
- 13,803
- Reaction score
- 10,339
- Golden Thread
- 2
- Location
- Salinas, CA
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
Right. And the sad part is, that odds are, that ranger would probably have never given the matter a second thought, or noticed, until iamfree went in there with his "pressing question". Now he's simply precluded himself from a good hunting site.
I hope no one does that in my area, lest rules also "get invented" (or morphed, or policies in place, etc...) to meet these type questions. Sheesk, sometimes we can be our own worst enemies, eh?
iamfree
Full Member
- #11
Thread Owner
well the reason i asked is that NNJAL85 implied that you have to talk to a ranger or superintenent before detecting. now , i dont know how it is in california, but here in new jersey i know of a guy who went by the delaware water gap (which i so wish i could detect) and had his machine taken. he was almost arrested, but was let go because he was from brooklyn and played stupid. it cost $375 to get hos machine back. now i just dropped alot of cash on the minelab safari, and i do not want it confiscated. nj rangers/state troopers/county sherriffs are nuts here. i think they drug those guys. so yeah, id rather ask
iamfree
Full Member
- #12
Thread Owner
you also have to remember, here in nj things changed after 9/11... you cant even fish under the bridges anymore, for fear of "terrorists" planting bombs. you will be run up on by the coast guard and searched. so im sure they would be afraid pf the "terrorist" posing as a metal detectorist planting IED's. it may sound really corny to you, but this is the atmosphere here by the nj/nyc borders.... i mean really.. you actually cant anchor under a bridge and fish it, you must drift through it. i work for NJ transit as a locomotive mechanic. i took my detector to work and was trying in the back of the train yard in hoboken, as hoboken is a very historical place. well even as an employee, the nj transit police surrounded me and forbid me from ever detecting again, of course for safety reasons. we were recently briefed and trained on catching subtle signs of suicide bomber and such. according to them, in osama bin ladens files after he was killed, were plans to attack US railroad infrastructure...liberty state park is smack in the middle of it all, so...NJ/NY law enforcement and the port authority see thing a whole lot different than on the west coast. i totally do not agree with losing some of my freedom to "try" and prevent further attacks, but the call the shots. and by the way... tom in ca, im moving this year to san diego, for good. i cant stand the east coast winters anymore..
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2007
- Messages
- 13,803
- Reaction score
- 10,339
- Golden Thread
- 2
- Location
- Salinas, CA
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
When you get to CA, you can chime in on the "kinzli" forum. That is the CA specific forum where anything CA / MD related has a specific forum for. There's several San Diego area guys that chime in there. I'm in Central CA (south of San Jose). To get to the main page you need to sign up. But it's easy: just pick a name and a password.
As for the admonition to "ask" wherever you go (inquire of powers-that-be, etc...) oh SURE, of COURSE that will be the advice that commonly gets floated. Afterall..... you "can't be too safe", eh?
Here's a thread I wrote on that subject of the alternative of "asking", that gets floated for the very reasons you cite (confiscations, jail, fines, etc...):
http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/g...why-not-ask-innocuous-public-places-long.html
As for the Jail, fines, and confiscations, you will often find this bandied around as reasons to go asking permission. Yet when you press people for examples, very few are ever forthcoming. When you do hear of such things, it's usually always someone who was night-sneaking obvious historic monument spots, someone who couldn't take a warning, or a place where he simply had all the necessary tools to have looked it up. Now is there EVER a case of someone hunting an inoccuous un-posted city park sandbox and getting thrown in jail, fined, and confiscated? PROBABLY! I'm sure if you/we looked hard enough, so too would you probably find examples of persons getting roughed up by over-zealous cops for nothing but a tail-light out! But does that stop you from driving? No, of course not. Because we all recognize those things are RARE exceptions, not the norm.
And actually, re: the example of your friend and the Deleware Water gap: There must have been an actual rule that either forbade persons from being where he was (ie.: a simple issue of trespassing because he was in an area where NO ONE is allowed to go) or an issue of an actual rule "No Metal Detecting" Because in either of those two cases, my admonition of "find out for yourself" would not apply. Because in either of those cases, he could have looked up the rules for himself, and seen.
See? Still no reason or need to "grovel". If you look up in the park rules and laws for yourself, and see nothing that says "no metal detecting" then presto, it must not be prohibited.
What I'm talking about here is not "actual rules", but about st*pid things you can get morphed to you (that I do not consider "rules" against md'ing), like catch-all things like forbiddance of "annoyances", "vandalism" "bothering earthworms", or whatever they dream up to answer your "pressing question". But on the other hand, if there's a real rule saying no metal detecting, or no one can be at such & such place, then those are outside the scope of this topic.
Rules and laws are available on-line at park's dept. websites (at seemingly every city, county, state and fed. level stuff). So it's not hard to find out for yourself.
As for the admonition to "ask" wherever you go (inquire of powers-that-be, etc...) oh SURE, of COURSE that will be the advice that commonly gets floated. Afterall..... you "can't be too safe", eh?
Here's a thread I wrote on that subject of the alternative of "asking", that gets floated for the very reasons you cite (confiscations, jail, fines, etc...):
http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/g...why-not-ask-innocuous-public-places-long.html
As for the Jail, fines, and confiscations, you will often find this bandied around as reasons to go asking permission. Yet when you press people for examples, very few are ever forthcoming. When you do hear of such things, it's usually always someone who was night-sneaking obvious historic monument spots, someone who couldn't take a warning, or a place where he simply had all the necessary tools to have looked it up. Now is there EVER a case of someone hunting an inoccuous un-posted city park sandbox and getting thrown in jail, fined, and confiscated? PROBABLY! I'm sure if you/we looked hard enough, so too would you probably find examples of persons getting roughed up by over-zealous cops for nothing but a tail-light out! But does that stop you from driving? No, of course not. Because we all recognize those things are RARE exceptions, not the norm.
And actually, re: the example of your friend and the Deleware Water gap: There must have been an actual rule that either forbade persons from being where he was (ie.: a simple issue of trespassing because he was in an area where NO ONE is allowed to go) or an issue of an actual rule "No Metal Detecting" Because in either of those two cases, my admonition of "find out for yourself" would not apply. Because in either of those cases, he could have looked up the rules for himself, and seen.
See? Still no reason or need to "grovel". If you look up in the park rules and laws for yourself, and see nothing that says "no metal detecting" then presto, it must not be prohibited.
What I'm talking about here is not "actual rules", but about st*pid things you can get morphed to you (that I do not consider "rules" against md'ing), like catch-all things like forbiddance of "annoyances", "vandalism" "bothering earthworms", or whatever they dream up to answer your "pressing question". But on the other hand, if there's a real rule saying no metal detecting, or no one can be at such & such place, then those are outside the scope of this topic.
Rules and laws are available on-line at park's dept. websites (at seemingly every city, county, state and fed. level stuff). So it's not hard to find out for yourself.
Last edited:
Top Member Reactions
-
2418 -
1779 -
1434 -
1216 -
1155 -
1105 -
982 -
815 -
806 -
657 -
592 -
581 -
538 -
518 -
518
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
“Mass Casualty” as Mexican Navy Ship SLAMS into Brooklyn Bridge!- Latest: Tesorodeoro
-
