Little help for first time MD hunting

[SunnyRo]

Hello all,

I live in Hudson County, New Jersey, and recently bought a Fisher Metal Detector for the first time.
Have 0 experience in hunting and excited to make a new hobby.
I wanted to go hunt on near state parks (cuz I have no idea where/how to contact good personal properties) and did some research on regulations and permits.
But it's not really clear how it works (some say both Essex and Hudson County totally banned MD).

I'm trying to see if I can go hunt on James J. Braddock North Hudson County Park or Laurel Hill Park.

It will so very muchly be appreciated if anyone can give some guidance for a beginner so that I don't end up paying fines.

Thanks!

P.S. I am also down to go hunt near Rutgers University (Piscataway), have anyone ever hunted there?
Also, please correct me if this is the wrong forum to wite this.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[vpnavy]

I noticed this was your very first post - so, Welcome Aboard SunnyRo! Take a look at Forum: New Jersey for information (i.e., clubs, etc.) directly related to your state. You will have more success posting your request of MD'ng in that forum.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.....But it's not really clear how it works (some say both Essex and Hudson County totally banned MD).....

I have no doubt that ..... if you did enough key-word-searches ....... you'd find "someone who says it's banned" on just about ANY speck of public land ... ANYWHERE. Why ? Because no doubt, someone way-back-when, went swatting hornet's nests waiting for pats-on-the-back express allowances/permissions. And found some bored pencil pusher to tell them "no".

You will not find express allowances for sites. Eg.: signs or laws that say "md'ing allowed here" type thing. Thus don't be looking for "allowances" or "yes's". Instead, be looking for actual laws/rules that truly said "no md'ing". Otherwise, if it's silent on the subject, then presto: It's not disallowed.

As for someone who fetched a "no" at some old post decades ago: Be sure to differentiate "commentary" from actual law. Ie.: there could be someone who told someone else "no" (or someone who fetched a "scram") that does not constitute gospel law. Sometimes that's just a single individual having a bad hair day, blah blah.

And, for example, you give county names and seem-to-have-found some past post that says "banned". But don't confuse something like "county parks" with other forms-of-land within that county. Ie.: whatever you may have found , may only apply to COUNTY owned land (eg.: county parks) within that county. And have no bearing on other forms of land within the county (eg.: city, state, fed, private, and even other-forms of county-land). Ie.: it's not "border-to-border within the physical county, that what-you-are reading refers to).

 

[cudamark]

Welcome to Tnet! If you can't research and find out the rules yourself, you may want to join a local detecting club to get the word on where you can detect in your area. They might also be able to give you tips on how to make a proper recovery without undue damage to turfed areas. Good Luck and have fun!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... you may want to join a local detecting club to get the word on where you can detect in your area.....

Couple of things:

1) brick & mortar clubs have pretty much gone by the way-side (R.I.P.) d/t the socializing substitute of the internet

2) Even then (or now) if/when you arrive at a club meeting, and ask this question, you will get the same self-fulfilling psychological vicious circle answers: Someone is sure to have taken the "pressing question" to a ranger kiosk or phone calls, and .......... presto: Someone has given it the "safe answer" (when in fact, no on really cared or gave it a moment's thought prior to that).

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

NJ is weird. There are different classifications when it comes to state owned property. Some state parks do allow detecting - but you have to get a permit (free). Other state owned property is off limits (WMA areas, etc..).

For example: Parvin's Park (state park) allows metal detecting in specified areas only (most of the park is off limits) and you have to get a free permit.

I would urge you to look up the laws yourself. WMA regulations state something along the lines of - no cutting, digging, etc.. but doesn't (or didn't when I last checked) mention metal detecting by name. Still, metal detecting isn't allowed and you can be arrested if caught metal detecting in a WMA area.

With the long history in Hudson county, I'd concentrate my efforts on private property. I'd also look into city/county parks (see what their laws say about metal detecting). If legal I'd be all over street/sidewalk tear-outs. It will take a bit of work (on your part) to find the applicable statutes, but I believe most NJ municipalities/counties will have that information online.

Good luck.

 

[A2coins]

Most parks you can get permits at least in MI

 

[A2coins]

Welcome to tnet Tommy

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... something along the lines of - no cutting, digging, etc.. but doesn't (or didn't when I last checked) mention metal detecting by name. Still, metal detecting isn't allowed and you can be arrested if caught metal detecting in a WMA area....

I'm not understanding this quote. On the one hand, you say that the rules are silent on the subject of md'ing. Right ? Ie.: metal detecting, per-se, is not mentioned. Right ? But then on the other hand, you go on to say that "metal detecting isn't allowed".

Ok, so which is it ?

Or are you referring to the boiler-plate verbiage about "alter, deface, dig, cut", etc... ? If those catch-all things automatically mean: No md'ing, then I got news for you: That type language exists in EVERY SINGLE PARK (and beach, and forest, and desert, etc...) in the entire USA. But as you can see, there is no shortage of people md'ing in parks, beaches, forests, etc.... Right ? And (gasp) every single one of them "cuts" or "alters" in the act of retrieving targets. Right ?

All such language applies to the END RESULT. So if you leave no trace, then presto: You have not alterED or defacED or cut anything, right ? And I doubt you can cite a single "arrest" for someone who was md'ing, via the "cutting" and "digging" language. If you can cite ANY "arrest" for md'ing, it will be for someone who was being obnoxious, couldn't take a warning, or was night-sneaking obvious historic sensitive monuments.

As for those particular places that you cite that either A) have a "permit" or B) "don't allow" it, I'll bet I know exactly how those things originated. And no ..... it wasn't because of holes.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Most parks you can get permits at least in MI

Aaaahhh, the sound of the word "permits", just rolls off the tongue. Right ? It conjurs up images of being able to detect nilly-willy, and whip it out if anyone gripes. Right ? And the mere mention of the word "permits" conjurs up images in skittish-person's minds, that they should inquire at every kiosk and city-hall desk they come to. Right ? To see if there is a "permit" offered. And/or send FAQ's to administering agency's "just to be sure", right ? After all, a "permit" is very nifty to have, right ? After all, you "can't be too safe", and it "doesn't hurt to ask", right ?

And then .... sure .... pretty soon someone's going to pass out a "no" to the pressing FAQ, and/or invent "permits". Meantime, all the old-timers are left scratching their heads saying "since when ?"

And it's the mere mention, on posts like this, that starts all the people scrambling. Which ends up becoming a self-fulfilling phenomenon. And then we all sit around lamenting our lack of freedoms in this hobby. When in fact we simply brought it on ourselves, by swatting hornet's nests all the time

 

[SunnyRo]

Wow thanks for all the tips.

I actually talked to Administrative Clerk of Office of Parks & Recreation on Middlesex County and below is what he said.
Pretty much look up for each county and parks, get the permit if required, and use common sense.


You are responsible for restoring any area you may disturb back to its original condition.
Anything you find is the property of Middlesex County. You can record, catalog, or photograph your findings, but the objects themselves should be turned in to the Parks Administration Office.
In addition, metal detectors are prohibited from the following areas:
All Athletic Fields
All Playgrounds
Picnic Groves when occupied by any group
Any cemetery or grave sites
All posted historic sites including, but not limited to East Jersey Old Town, Cornelius Low House and the Van Dyke Farm.
Johnson Park (area between River Road and Landing Lane.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....I actually talked to Administrative Clerk of Office of Parks & Recreation on Middlesex County and below is what he said.
......

sunny-Ro: I just looked up the Middlesex county park & rec. rules and regulations and potential permits :


http://www.middlesexcountynj.gov/Go...s and Recreation Park Rules in page order.pdf

Permits and Passes

As you can see: You can search far and wide, high and low, and find nothing there about metal detecting. Nor anything about any permits for metal detecting. So me thinks:

a) You have just become the latest victim of "No one cared till you asked" psychology routine.

b) What he told you (unless it can be accompanied by actual chapter and verse rule) is only "commentary". Not "rules".

c) I love how he says that anything you find .... technically belong to their parks admin. Hmmm, well gee .... So too could the same probably be said of ANY park (or forest, or beach, or desert, etc...) in the entire USA : If you walk in and say "Hi, can I take park features home for my own profit and enjoyment?". Well .... sure.... they'll say that falls afoul of verbiage about "take", and "remove" and "harvest" and "steal". Right ? But seriously now dude, did anyone really care ? Odds are, the fellow who answered your "pressing question" would never have given it a moment's thought.

So if it's technically true, for all public land, of any entity, everywhere, then you tell me: Do you think all the folks on the "today's find" section are rushing to hand in their coins, to whatever administering agency's land they were/are at ?

So the thing that happens next, in situations like this, is: Guess what that same administrator is going to think @ the next time he passes by the park and see another md'r ? He'll remember this earlier inquiry and think "Aha! there's one of *them*". And start booting others.

Next time: Stop swatting hornet's nests and look up rules for yourself. If you see nothing there about metal detectors (Ie.: silent on the subject), then presto: Not dis-allowed.

 

[cudamark]

Couple of things:

1) brick & mortar clubs have pretty much gone by the way-side (R.I.P.) d/t the socializing substitute of the internet

2) Even then (or now) if/when you arrive at a club meeting, and ask this question, you will get the same self-fulfilling psychological vicious circle answers: Someone is sure to have taken the "pressing question" to a ranger kiosk or phone calls, and .......... presto: Someone has given it the "safe answer" (when in fact, no on really cared or gave it a moment's thought prior to that).

That why I prefaced my answer with "If you can't research and find out the rules yourself". Better to ask fellow detectorists than bureaucrats. You might even get a good discussion going among them to clear up misinformation and rumor.

 

[DiamondDan]

Just go detecting. Simple as that. When it comes to public property, I operate under one philosophy: "It's easier to ask forgiveness than permission." I have not been bothered or questioned about detecting ANYWHERE by ANYONE. As a tax-paying citizen, go use the public facilities for your own forms of enjoyment. Just make sure you practice cutting and replacing plugs a bit first so you don't GIVE the nanny state a reason to care.

 

[Deep1]

sunny-Ro: I just looked up the Middlesex county park & rec. rules and regulations and potential permits :


http://www.middlesexcountynj.gov/Go...s and Recreation Park Rules in page order.pdf

Permits and Passes

As you can see: You can search far and wide, high and low, and find nothing there about metal detecting. Nor anything about any permits for metal detecting. So me thinks:

a) You have just become the latest victim of "No one cared till you asked" psychology routine.

b) What he told you (unless it can be accompanied by actual chapter and verse rule) is only "commentary". Not "rules".

c) I love how he says that anything you find .... technically belong to their parks admin. Hmmm, well gee .... So too could the same probably be said of ANY park (or forest, or beach, or desert, etc...) in the entire USA : If you walk in and say "Hi, can I take park features home for my own profit and enjoyment?". Well .... sure.... they'll say that falls afoul of verbiage about "take", and "remove" and "harvest" and "steal". Right ? But seriously now dude, did anyone really care ? Odds are, the fellow who answered your "pressing question" would never have given it a moment's thought.

So if it's technically true, for all public land, of any entity, everywhere, then you tell me: Do you think all the folks on the "today's find" section are rushing to hand in their coins, to whatever administering agency's land they were/are at ?

So the thing that happens next, in situations like this, is: Guess what that same administrator is going to think @ the next time he passes by the park and see another md'r ? He'll remember this earlier inquiry and think "Aha! there's one of *them*". And start booting others.

Next time: Stop swatting hornet's nests and look up rules for yourself. If you see nothing there about metal detectors (Ie.: silent on the subject), then presto: Not dis-allowed.

Tom,
Well said.
That was direct and to the the point. OP, don't take his post personally or mine, he was directing this to everybody that picks up the phone and "swats a hornets nest"(I love that) While I don't always agree with your views Tom, I'm 100% in agreement with your post.
The best quote of all from OP:
"Anything you find is the property of Middlesex County. You can record, catalog, or photograph your findings, but the objects themselves should be turned in to the Parks Administration Office."
I guess you turn it into the "official" you talked to on the phone.
Wonder who he sells it to?

On the local level, phone calls to "officials" will result in some sort of no or restriction, as you encountered.
99% of the time, the "official" has no idea what the laws are. You're going to get an opinion.
There are few towns that have express laws prohibiting detecting on town owned land.
Do your own research of the town laws.
Most towns post their code of laws on their town website.
If not, go to city hall and ask to see their town code of laws. You do not have to tell them why you want to see them, it's your right.
Every local,state and federal law is accessible to everybody. It is up to you to do your research.
If not, hire a lawyer to give his written opinion including specific codes pertaining to the metal detecting laws for your town, just be sure to tell him not to call town hall for the answer.
You swat hornets, you get stung.
Respectfully, Deep1

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... Most towns post their code of laws on their town website.....

Thanx for the concurrence deep-1. Yes: "laws & rules" are no secret. They are printed somewhere, for public viewing. Eg.: dogs on leash, no fireworks, etc..... Either @ the city's website, or in binder form at city-hall somewhere, etc.... And no, I do not necessarily construe grey-area catch-all things to automatically apply to us. Eg.: "alter", or "deface", for example. Since, of course, we will leave no trace. Or "harvest & remove" type verbiage. Since that was only/ever meant to keep people from commercially harvesting the sod, or taking home the park benches & BBQ pits, etc...

Might someone disagree with those semantics ? SURE ! Ok, go at lower traffic times and avoid that singular individual. You're simply never going to please every-last-person on the planet.

And as for the answer of "yes" or "no" that .... admittedly you could get by verbally asking: Some people interpret the mere fact of getting an answer, to be proof that it was a "good thing they asked". So for example if they are told "yes", they think: "See ? It was a good thing I asked. Because now I know that I can detect". If they get a "no", they think: " See ? It was a good thing I asked. Otherwise I wouldn't have known that I couldn't, and thus risked arrest, blah blah".

I disagree with that logic. Because did you *really* think they might answer like this: "Gee, that's a silly question. Why are you asking me ? You don't need my authority or opinion, any-more-so than you'd need my approval to whistle dixie". No. Authority figures never work like that. Instead, they bestow on you their princely "yes" or "no". After all, you're standing there asking them. That simply implies that you need their approval . Lest why else would you be asking them ?

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

I'm not understanding this quote. On the one hand, you say that the rules are silent on the subject of md'ing. Right ? Ie.: metal detecting, per-se, is not mentioned. Right ? But then on the other hand, you go on to say that "metal detecting isn't allowed".

Ok, so which is it ?

Or are you referring to the boiler-plate verbiage about "alter, deface, dig, cut", etc... ? If those catch-all things automatically mean: No md'ing, then I got news for you: That type language exists in EVERY SINGLE PARK (and beach, and forest, and desert, etc...) in the entire USA. But as you can see, there is no shortage of people md'ing in parks, beaches, forests, etc.... Right ? And (gasp) every single one of them "cuts" or "alters" in the act of retrieving targets. Right ?

All such language applies to the END RESULT. So if you leave no trace, then presto: You have not alterED or defacED or cut anything, right ? And I doubt you can cite a single "arrest" for someone who was md'ing, via the "cutting" and "digging" language. If you can cite ANY "arrest" for md'ing, it will be for someone who was being obnoxious, couldn't take a warning, or was night-sneaking obvious historic sensitive monuments.

As for those particular places that you cite that either A) have a "permit" or B) "don't allow" it, I'll bet I know exactly how those things originated. And no ..... it wasn't because of holes.

I’m not sure how my comment could be confusing. I merely gave a brief synopsis (per my recollection) of the wording used (by the state of NJ) to convey the rules/regulations regarding actions conducted on WMA property.

I did not state that the rules are “silent” regarding the use of metal detectors on state property (in this case WMA land). I did say, per my recollection, that the rules did not specifically mention metal detecting (turns out I was wrong in that regard — the rules specifically prohibit metal detecting on WMA properties).

“The following are prohibited: camping, swimming, picnicking, dumping, cutting or damaging vegetation, removing timber or firewood, alcoholic beverages, metal detecting, geocaching, paddleboards (except for fishing; no use allowed at Split Rock Reservoir) and fires.” https://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/wmaregs.htm


The rules do mention specific actions that are forbidden (on WMA properties) — cutting vegetation, damaging vegetation, digging, etc..

(BTW — while digging is not listed in the provided list of prohibited activities, it is specifically listed on the various signs posted at the WMA properties in my vicinity — therefore I must assume that digging is specifically prohibited).

Such prohibitions provide ample ammunition for a zealous prosecutor to make a successful case against someone caught metal detecting on WMA property; as the mere act of recovering a target typically requires digging (to some degree) as well as some cutting of vegetation.

The rules are written with enough vagueness to allow for a broad interpretation. In this case the vegetation doesn’t have to be damaged; merely cutting vegetation is enough to be on the wrong side of the law.

I’m not saying I like the fact that the stated rules/laws can be interpreted pretty much however a prosecutor decides. I’m just noting the reality of the situation — a detectorist would be hard pressed to convince a judge that the act of target recovery didn’t violate the stated prohibitions. And that’s assuming metal detecting wasn’t specifically prohibited — which it is (on WMA properties).

The End Result isn’t a matter of whether the vegetation was damaged, or not. The End Result is that the person caught metal detecting (on WMA property) can be prosecuted — even if the rules didn’t specifically prohibit metal detecting. Just digging and/or cutting vegetation is a violation; damaging the vegetation is just one more charge that could be tacked on.

I know of two individuals who were ticketed for metal detecting on local state property (not WMA property). Both were caught metal detecting on “preserved land” - land that the state purchased or took over, for the purpose of preservation (essentially land that is allowed to return to a natural state — or as I call it — a non-revenue generating mess of weeds and trash).

I received the information by way of a NJ State Trooper (I know him personally) — he told me that two individuals had been ticketed (for metal detecting on preserve land). I do not know the individuals, nor do I know the sentence/fine received.

I get the message you’re sending: calling attention (needlessly) to activities that a reasonable person would deem perfectly legal is detrimental to the activity (metal detecting). For the most part I happen to agree with you (hence the reason I suggested that the OP look up the actual laws himself/herself).

I have no doubt that asking for permission (from some government employee) to metal detect will often lead to answers based on ignorance and bias.

However…

I likewise believe that blindly metal detecting wherever one wishes is far more harmful (to the sport) than asking some government employee for their blessing. Holes or not.

It only takes one misguided government employee, with a bloated sense of empowerment, seeing someone engaging in an activity that they (the govt employee) don’t condone, to push for legislation that restricts (or prohibits) rights.

NJ is somewhat infamous for that very thing.

I don’t have to like it (and I don’t) — but I do have to recognize it and abide by the rules (whether I like them or not (and I often don’t like them). Not knowing the law — or how it can be used against me — won’t save me from being prosecuted if I violate said law.

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

NJ State Parks

https://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/rules/njac7_2.pdf

7:2-2.16 Metal detectors

A person shall not use metal detectors or similar devices without a permit issued by
Superintendent or designee. The permit may limit the location, hours, and days of use.
A permit will not be issued for use in areas of significant historical or other value,
or where such use would be incompatible with protection of the resource and/or interfere
with public use of the facility.

I'm not agreeing with the law. I'm just posting it for others to see.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

tahts-a-dats-ago:

I have/did not, for sake of this post, try to differentiate "WMA" (wildlife management area) versus NJ state parks. But for purposes of post # 17, it seems that ... up to that point, you were not relying on any specific prohibition. So .... just to address #17, I see that you consider verbiage about "alter", "deface" and "cut" to apply to us. Right ?

.... The rules do mention specific actions that are forbidden (on WMA properties) — cutting vegetation, damaging vegetation, digging, etc....

And I'll be the first to agree that ... yes .... someone *could* come along and say that we are violating that. Heck, they could say our actions violate prohibitions of "annoyances". D/t they could say md'ing "annoys" them. They could say you violate "harvest and remove" language, since you "remove" those pennies. Eh ? It's never ending.

But if we are to assume that "cutting" OF NECESSITY forbids us, then .... how do you make sense of the fact that the "finds" forum is FILLED with persons who "cut", in the process of retrieving, at public land spots all over the USA ? And I guarantee you, that there is similar language at every speck of public land. At all city, county, state, and federal land, of any level-or-entity. Aka : "Alter", "deface", "destroy", "damange", "cut", etc.... Are we to assume all of them are lawless miscreants ?

Me thinks it's going to be a case of "No one cared or gave the matter a moment's thought, till someone asked" routine.

As for NJ state parks (#18), I don't know whether that's separate from WMA. But ... sure ... if there's an express specific dis-allowance (that's not just "commentary"), then sure: By all means: Abide. And I can bet I know how that became an express specific dis-allowance in the past.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... I know of two individuals who were ticketed for metal detecting on local state property (not WMA property). .... .

Ok, and now I see you ... yourself, ... make a distinction between WMA and state-property. Right ? Ie.: not all state land is "WMA". Not all NJ state parks is WMA. Yes: There are varying types of state land, in all states (eg.: Road right of way, parks, eminent domain, etc....). Same for city, and county and federal: Varying levels within each entity.

Ok, so with that cleared up: If there is not a specific dis-allowance, then no, I do not construe catch-all "cut" language to necessarily forbid md'ing. Since we leave no trace of our presence. Ie.: stomp and fluff up, etc.... And that is the purpose of such language, after all.

As for "horror stories of someone who got roughed up " (for seemingly innocuous areas, thus we should all grovel from here- on- out), no, I do not see that as a moral-of-the-story take-a-away lesson. Because so too can I show you newspaper clippings and "dire-sounding articles" of someone who got hit by a mack-truck when crossing the street. Or someone who got a ticket , jailed, and arrested, for a tail-light out . Heck, I even have a clipping here of someone who got a ticket for eating a hamburger while driving (cop called it "distracted driving").

You can ALWAYS find flukes in life, by over-zealous cops. And ... sure .... don't throw caution to the wind and tromp on obvious sensitive spots at high noon in front of bored archies. Sure. But to go from that , to thinking we need to grovel, and interpret all grey-area verbiage as necessarily forbidding us: No, I disagree there.