MDing Old Cemetaries

[Dimeman]

Cemetarys are plots of privately owned land FOR the family of the deceased.

Most people consider cemetaries sacred ground, and would most likely, call in on someone detecting within the cemetary grounds.
Personally I would not detect inside or even detect outside the cemetary, just out of respect for the dead and visiters who go to their loved ones graves.

 

[lostcauses]

Have you read what it is to be on the federal register
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
Then go to your State Historic Preservation Officer site and see what state laws also go with this. Different systems in different states.
When entered it is for the protection from all people (owner induced) to preserve the historical, and archeological site.
If you insist on Md'ing such lands with permission, Make sure that permission is written.

Know the land owner will lose any incentives if receiving, and or eligibility for incentives for allowing you to do so if caught. (If not done under federal standards, archeology process).

Reason to have written permission is so they don't say "you had no permission" when they have to cover them selves. They may not realize what they can lose until it is to late, and then push it off on you.

Check with your state to see what laws will effect you and the owner before doing so. Have some courtesy for the owners here folks.

To be honest if you care at all for the owner, stay away from federal registered historical sites. Such is designed to keep folks form messing them places up and protect the sites.

"Ok, I'm sure this has been asked at some point but I'm going to throw it out there once again. In Rochester, NY, we have one of the oldest cemetaries in the region (Mt. Hope Cemetary). The tombstones are dated back to the early 1700's, maybe older. Anyway, I was getting the urge to MD the grounds surrounding this old site (not on the grave sites themselves). Thoughts?"


http://www.fomh.org/

http://www.mounthopecemetery.com/

myapa.planning.org/cpf/pdf/Rochester.pdf
"This 196-acre facility lies within a preservation district and is surrounded on two sides by property owned by the University of Rochester."

"In the 1970s, about two-thirds of Mount Hope Cemetery was added to the National Register of Historic Places because of its impressive and rare Victorian architecture and the list of notables buried here."

To put this clearly it is a dam good way to find yourself in jail.

Why on Earth do you keep bringing up the National Register of Historic Places? Just because a place is on the register means Nothing. You CAN hunt places on the National Register with permission! There have been several articles which have delved into this topic if you really need to see something in print rather than me just telling you repeatedly that it is OK to do so. I have done so with private properties on the Register before, and will continue to do so again. In the meantime, please stop spreading misinformation.



Now, in terms of cemeteries... I wouldn't do that. Negative public perception, possibility that there is a law on the books against it, and just plain respect--and I am SHOCKED that Tom in CA is advocating hunting cemeteries at night!There are many, MANY fine places to MD in the state of NY. I'm sure you can find a place where you will do much better than modern pocket change.


-Buck

 

[BuckleBoy]

Have you read what it is to be on the federal register
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
Then go to your State Historic Preservation Officer site and see what state laws also go with this. Different systems in different states.
When entered it is for the protection from all people (owner induced) to preserve the historical, and archeological site.
If you insist on Md'ing such lands with permission, Make sure that permission is written.

Know the land owner will lose any incentives if receiving, and or eligibility for incentives for allowing you to do so if caught. (If not done under federal standards, archeology process).

Reason to have written permission is so they don't say "you had no permission" when they have to cover them selves. They may not realize what they can lose until it is to late, and then push it off on you.

Check with your state to see what laws will effect you and the owner before doing so. Have some courtesy for the owners here folks.

To be honest if you care at all for the owner, stay away from federal registered historical sites. Such is designed to keep folks form messing them places up and protect the sites.

This is the first I have heard of any of this. Please post links to state pages and tell me exactly what they can "push on me." I read in a national metal detecting publication quite recently that it was fine to hunt on sites on the registry with permission. When did all this change? In the last year or so? Is metal detecting a property considered a "change to the property"? If so, I don't see that in print anywhere on the NRHP website. All I see is that "changes" are presented as renovation, addition, or other modification of the appearance of the property. In fact, to even qualify, the appearance of the property has to be the same as it was in the past. Is metal detecting considered a "undertaking a project on an historic property"? I would like some facts please--links to state laws and/or the national register of historic places website.

 

[lostcauses]

google is your friend.

Some links on this one are better. Note some states have there own historical register also.
http://www.nps.gov/history/NR/shpolist.htm

Gov sites are not responding.
Cut and past this one for a PDF about 65 pages of the act.
www.fs.fed.us/fire/retardant/references/US_Congress_1966.pdf

Have you read what it is to be on the federal register
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
Then go to your State Historic Preservation Officer site and see what state laws also go with this. Different systems in different states.
When entered it is for the protection from all people (owner induced) to preserve the historical, and archeological site.
If you insist on Md'ing such lands with permission, Make sure that permission is written.

Know the land owner will lose any incentives if receiving, and or eligibility for incentives for allowing you to do so if caught. (If not done under federal standards, archeology process).

Reason to have written permission is so they don't say "you had no permission" when they have to cover them selves. They may not realize what they can lose until it is to late, and then push it off on you.

Check with your state to see what laws will effect you and the owner before doing so. Have some courtesy for the owners here folks.

To be honest if you care at all for the owner, stay away from federal registered historical sites. Such is designed to keep folks form messing them places up and protect the sites.

This is the first I have heard of any of this. Please post links to state pages and tell me exactly what they can "push on me." I read in a national metal detecting publication quite recently that it was fine to hunt on sites on the registry with permission. When did all this change? In the last year or so? I would like some facts please--links to state laws and/or the national register of historic places website.

 

[BuckleBoy]

google is your friend.

Some links on this one are better. Note some states have there own historical register also.
http://www.nps.gov/history/NR/shpolist.htm

Gov sites are not responding.
Cut and past this one for a PDF about 65 pages of the act.
www.fs.fed.us/fire/retardant/references/US_Congress_1966.pdf

Show me an example of a state law that says that metal detecting is not allowed on NRHP sites. The places I have hunted were on the National register--not some state register. Do they send people out to ask these owners if the property has been detected, and withold funds if it has? Obviously they don't tell the owners Not to let someone detect the property.

 

[lostcauses]

Any federal law can be used with a property listed in the federal historical registry. Including ARPA and so on. Any state law concerning relics may also be used, depending on the state.

Such with permission would not be used on the person. They have permission, what will happen is the incentives (tax breaks loans and grants) can and will be removed by not following the federal guidelines.

Doing such is doing the owner. If you don't care about the intent of the law: to protect historical and archeological site form destruction such as MD, or any other form of relic hunting, and of course the owner; go ahead and do it.

With out permission, start with ARPA and work down though the state laws on archeological laws. Surface finds might be alright, yet do tend to go against the idea of protection. Break the gound... well
what state are you in??

 

[BuckleBoy]

Any federal law can be used with a property listed in the federal historical registry. Including ARPA and so on. Any state law concerning relics may also be used, depending on the state.

Such with permission would not be used on the person. They have permission, what will happen is the incentives (tax breaks loans and grants) can and will be removed by not following the federal guidelines.

Doing such is doing the owner. If you don't care about the intent of the law: to protect historical and archeological site form destruction such as MD, or any other form of relic hunting, and of course the owner; go ahead and do it.

With out permission, start with ARPA and work down though the state laws on archeological laws. Surface finds might be alright, yet do tend to go against the idea of protection. Break the gound... well
what state are you in??

Give me an example from any state where metal detecting constitutes a "change" in the property which can be penalized by witholding funding or tax incentives. Your choice. If what you say is true, then I can certainly no longer trust Western and Eastern Treasures Magazine.

 

[lostcauses]

Go read the federal law. The shpo is under it.
And that antiquities law in Kentucky is a bit nasty, covers state county and municipality.

I am going to get some sleep, will get you more tomorrow. Even my typing is reversing, LOL

 

[ivan salis]

in a word NO - it looks bad to be digging near a graveyard area -- makes lots of folks think (wrongly) that that we're grave robbing ghoul types --due to this "poor public image" factor which could lead to some person who has folks buried there -- going to the local "powers" that be and getting detecting banned from all "publicly" owned city parks and such --plus sounds "good" as a "wild" news story on a slow day ---folks digging near your grammys grave !!! film at 11

 

[allen]

the grounds itself, yes, with permission,
the actual gravesites, hell no.

 

[BuckleBoy]

Go read the federal law. The shpo is under it.
And that antiquities law in Kentucky is a bit nasty, covers state county and municipality.

I am going to get some sleep, will get you more tomorrow. Even my typing is reversing, LOL

We are not talking about the antiquities law here, we are talking about the National Register of Historic Places. I understand that there may be state laws that say otherwise--about sites that are listed under another historic designation (a state designation) in addition to or instead of the NR designation. My understanding is that a person cannot be prosecuted by the federal ARPA for metal detecting on Private property at NR sites--and also my understanding that the NR sites are 100% private property.

Look, Mark Schuessler wrote an article on this very topic in the September 2008 issue of Western and Eastern Treasures Magazine--less than a year ago. If you would like to discuss this with him, please contact him (and I will contact him as well). It would be helpful if he got an account on this forum and replied to this thread. His contact information is listed on the Federation of Metal Detector and Archaeological Clubs, Inc. website listed below. Please make all e-mail correspondence with him on this matter public and post it on this forum.

http://www.fmdac.org/contactus/nonboardcontacts.htm

I will believe a print source in a national metal detecting publication, by an author who writes regular columns on legal issues and is an officer of the FMDAC. I do not automatically believe an anonymous avatar posting on an online forum, and I hope you understand.


Regards,


Buckles

 

[~Audiz~]

the grounds itself, yes, with permission,
the actual gravesites, hell no.

This cemetary is not a park that people go to picnic or play ground, it does have a old section where some famous people are buried and a current section near the hospital. Tours are also done there, I drive by a lot it is a beautiful place to walk thru, but whoever would think about detecting this place or any cemetary needs help.

 

[coin finder]

How Would You Feel if some on stared Digging where you are at rest ! RIP

 

[Mark S.]

First of all you must realize that cemeteries are PRIVATE property. Not public. Threfore wandering into them without permission from the church, assocaition or whatever would be considered tresspassing.

Now to the discussion between lostcauses and buckleboy.

I am the guy that wrote the WET article. I do read this website but not everyday or every individual forum. You can always email me. I have just spent a bit more time going thru the links provided and rechecking my info from the article. Just to see if I missed something or that a law or regulation had changed. I found that nothing has changed.

As long as the site is on private property then the owner has say so over it. As the article and the info on the various Historic register sites states. The owner can even demolish a structure. They have no obligation to restore, maintain or grant access to anyone. It is simply a designation. They are free to do with their property as they please. There is no federal control over it. With the exception if they accepted grant money for restoration. Then they may be barred from demolition. They are "encouraged to "protect" resources but are in no way obligated to.

 

[Mark S.]

I apologize for double posting here but for some unknown reason I was blocked from typing any further in the previous post.

As to ARPA it does not apply as it is private property. There are those who may try to make you think that it applies but it does not.

Now bare this in mind. This is for National Register listings. If it has a state or local designation then there may be other laws involved.

If you have any info that is contrary to this then please let me know, but I need hard evidence in the form of laws or regulations. If it prooves contrary to what I have found then I will issue a correction to the WET article. I am not beyond making an error.

Mark S.

 

[lostcauses]

Mark S. you seem to be correct.
Yet I must say it at the owners gamble, to lose any tax breaks, grants, and guaranteed loans associated with it. They may even be able to force payback on what was given. (I have yet to hear of this, yet it has been talked about.)

The idea of the law is to get folks to preserve the site for history and archeology. Not to let some one go metal detecting or other relic hunting on the place.
Please include the fact of doing such with MD'ing; with permission carries risks for the owner. Any Md'er should be informed of such to make a good decision. Again an ethical problem.

Sorry I had not got back to this thread. Will look some more.

 

[BuckleBoy]

Thank you for replying to this thread, Mark. I surely do appreciate you taking the time to answer the questions here.

Mark S. you seem to be correct.
Yet I must say it at the owners gamble, to lose any tax breaks, grants, and guaranteed loans associated with it. They may even be able to force payback on what was given. (I have yet to hear of this, yet it has been talked about.)

The idea of the law is to get folks to preserve the site for history and archeology. Not to let some one go metal detecting or other relic hunting on the place.
Please include the fact of doing such with MD'ing; with permission carries risks for the owner. Any Md'er should be informed of such to make a good decision. Again an ethical problem.

Sorry I had not got back to this thread. Will look some more.

lostcauses, Who exactly was "talking about" forcing payback if an owner allows someone to metal detect the property? Do you have a link or an article, or is this some friend of a friend? The only person I have heard "talking about it" so far, is you. Has there EVER been a risk to the owner posed by a person metal detecting such a property? Do you have a copy of the article, or a link to the news story?

I have said before in replies to posts here, that I am a bit of a reluctant MDist... When you get down to the nuts and bolts of the hobby, I have long known that anything we dig could be an ethical problem. I know that many are oblivious to this, but I am not.

What I see is a lack of hard evidence of the government forcing damages on a private property owner, or finding some sort of fine print in the pages and pages that I have read about the National Register in the past week.

If such a risk were the case, then it would be in the pages posted at the NR site. Since private property owners would need to know what they were getting into (because listing a property is an ELECTIVE procedure!), any such Risk information should be posted with much clarity online.


-Buckles

 

[rginn]

I should clarify my post. I do not advocate digging on actual gravesites. In the south where I grew up, there was always big gatherings and picnics for Decoration Day at the cemetaries. I was thinking more along those lines, but apparently the same thing didn't take place all over the country. And if someone was digging into my grave, I hope I would not feel a thing. ...but you never know.

 

[Tnmountains]

Just stay away from graveyards. People do not know what you are doing and it causes grief.

We hunt at the bottom of Lookout mtn in Registered historic St.Elmo. So many rules on restoration of older homes,ugghh.

Anyways point being is the" property owners" give us permission to metal detect at their discretion on their property in a registered historical area without fear. They have a obligation to keep the structures historic.
I feel we are spreading fear and "The sky is falling" in these types of threads,,,again.

TnMtns

 

[Mark S.]

To add a bit....

Most all designations for the Historic Register are for structures. There are very few for "sites". The regulations even state this and that it must be really special (my words) to get a desigantion for something other then a structure. Therefore I would surmise that they would be hard pressed to make any claim on anything in the ground outside the structure. Of course this is strictly my opinion and I am neither a lawyer or a bureacrat with an agenda.

I do agree with lostcauses that there could be a fear of reprisal but I think that seeing what the regulations say they would be hard pressed to take any action against a landowner for allowing someone to detect the property. Again we are talking mainly about the structure. Any monies are aimed at the structure. Yes there may be exceptions.

I am very open to any further discussion on this. We all know that some of the elitist archaeologist monitor our sites so maybe they would like to chime in and proove me wrong.

Mark S.