Met a jerk today

[BuckleBoy]

Tom,

For a person who is always blathering on about "not rocking the boat" and "being unobtrusive" your stance on this has me really confused. Here you are PROMOTING people do this, and put themselves in situations where they are likely to stir up trouble! It goes against everything that you have said in other threads on this forum!

Or perhaps your stance on this is because you know that if you tell them to "hunt when you're less likely to be seen" (what does this mean, hunt at night? In the wee hours of the morning?)--you know that if you tell them this like you've done on other threads, then it will look even more suspicious. Is this the case?

I really don't understand NOT asking permission, since I am sure that the "lucrative" easements are in front of old houses anyhow. Why not get permission on one yard out of three, and that easement too?! That's my permission rate when I go door to door in the city.

This is NOT a hobby for people who are shy or have something against asking permission. Period. Those folks can save themselves the cost of the black clothing, the looking over their shoulder, and the jail time by following the law and ABOVE ALL being considerate to other people.

think of it: if you walk into ANY city hall, ANYWHERE, and asked "Can I dig holes in the eavesements (or parks, or schools or whatever) and alter the surface"? What do you THINK their answer will be? Doh!

Oh contraire! I get permission all the time to do just that. I try to be as up-front and honest about what I will be doing on a property as I can, and it pays off every hunt for me!

The problem is when you ask permission like you said in the quote above ("Hi, can I dig up your yard?"). This tells me that you're either warping things out of proportion just to try and make a point, or you've never successfully asked permission from a person that you didn't know. If you ask like that, you're sure to get a "NO!" from just about anyone.


I see it as my Responsibility to the owner, to the quality of my experience there, and to my hobby, to be as Clear as I can be.


This issue is not as cut and dried as your ideas about public land, because whether you like it or not, there Are and Will Be property owners involved. Whether they can legally be involved or not, or even legally have an opnion about an easement it is open to debate--but it will happen either way, Tom.

At worst, it is illegal in some areas from the city's standpoint--and at best you may have just lost the potential for permission on a whole street of historic yards behind those easements if an incident occurs.

For a guy who tries to lay low and be off the radar, telling folks to create a high possibility of confrontation by doing this just doesn't make any sense. You speak with two mouths.





-Buck

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[mrs.oroblanco]

The biggest thing is to NOT assume anything, in regards to easements where you live.

To those who think that all places need tickets - you are incorrect. All places do not need permission or tickets. Just like all places allow you to do what you want.

Again, the key is to know the laws about where you live or are md-ing - not where I dig, or your buddy digs, or anything else. Know the laws of where YOU yourself plan on digging. That saves you alot of grief.

B

 

[nova treasure]

It is something reading threads that make Detecting sound like a part of the Constitution or Something.
We do this as a hobby and the only rights We have , is the rights We get permission for.
I know of many abandoned houses that would possibly yield banner finds, but until I get permission, I will not step foot on this property.
Walking into a neighborhood and thinking you can claim rights to detect easements through someones road frontage is just trying to bend around the law of actually detecting there property,If you want to detect in a neighborhood on easements than ask the people in the neighborhood if it's ok. It's there privacy that your entering, just like if you was walking on a farmers field.

Using the word "dig", is it going to keep us from detecting? No, not explaining the way you retrieve and item and your techniques and what your detecting for is what makes one skeptical.

Hunting parks and other public places,people think they have the right to detect them because we pay taxes and have the same right as a Frisbee thrower as i read in another thread.
I would not cut our hobby to that level as someone just walking a dog or throwing a Frisbee. Our hobby gives back to the Community in many different ways and it needs to be expressed that away instead of leaving it that we pay taxes, so it should be our right.

We don't have rights, We have Responsibilities.

Nova Treasure

 

[jb7487]

Tom,

For a person who is always blathering on about "not rocking the boat" and "being unobtrusive" your stance on this has me really confused. Here you are PROMOTING people do this, and put themselves in situations where they are likely to stir up trouble! It goes against everything that you have said in other threads on this forum!

Amen! That has really been bothering me too. I think it is clear where Tom REALLY stands. He wants to hunt wherever he damn well wants to hunt and doesn't want anyone to tell him what to do. His "asking permission" speeches and rhetoric are nothing more than a smoke screen. He is talking out of both sides of his mouth...

 

[deepbeep]

Ya know.....BLACKSHEEP....at first I was going to stay out of this, but a guess I just have no self control. I can't help but notice that the one guy who "is glad he doesn't have a metal detector" has more opinions and more posts on this topic than anybody who knows what they are talking about.

You have never experienced what we have, because you are not even in the hobby. Coming onto a message board and reading does not make you a metal detector.

When you have gotten your first metal detector, and been "run out" of perfectly leagal spots by someone who has no authority to do so, and been wrongly accused of "defacing property", trespassing, and being a general nuisance for no good reason, then come back and express your opinion. Until then.........

Tim

 

[blurr]

It's all about respect. Respecting the wishes of those who live in the area, respecting the laws and ordinances of the city you are detecting. I hate jerks as much as anyone reading this, that works both ways though. Example; I ask you to leave the front of my lawn because I am uneasy having you troll the perimeter of my property. You tell me to pound sand. You have just become the jerk. Just because you are right, doesn't make you a righteous person. Stay safe, and happy hunting.

John

 

[jb7487]

Amen John!

 

[Blacksheep]

Ya know.....BLACKSHEEP....at first I was going to stay out of this, but a guess I just have no self control. I can't help but notice that the one guy who "is glad he doesn't have a metal detector" has more opinions and more posts on this topic than anybody who knows what they are talking about.

You have never experienced what we have, because you are not even in the hobby. Coming onto a message board and reading does not make you a metal detector.

When you have gotten your first metal detector, and been "run out" of perfectly leagal spots by someone who has no authority to do so, and been wrongly accused of "defacing property", trespassing, and being a general nuisance for no good reason, then come back and express your opinion. Until then.........

Tim

Tim,
Since when is having a detector prerequisite to treasure hunting or even using this site? Are you saying I should keep my mouth shut because I do not have one ? Are you and everyone else owning a detector "all knowing" and those of us without should be grateful to be in your presence?

Pay attention Tim, I have pulled hundreds, if not thousands of "treasures" out of the ground, from underneath porches, old buildings, dumpsters and many other places, all without a detector and all of it with a courteous conversation prior to getting permission, whether it was needed or not.

I am also a property owner, a property in a city that requires me to be financially responsible for the vast majority of the maintenance on the R.O.W. that fronts my property, do you think that I or anyone else who owns property wants somebody DIGGING there and leaving us stuck with paying the damage?

Here`s another clue for you Tim , as a property owner, I could be sued by somebody if they get hurt on that R.O.W., chances are they will not win BUT my insurance company would most likely pay it off to keep it out of court then jack my rates up or worse, drop my coverage, this I verified with two people, how is that fair to me? (just added an umbrella policy to my home owners DIRECTLY due to this thread, your "rights" just cost me $144 extra per year, "thanks" )

Tim, happy hunting.




EDIT: For clarification.

I am an advocate for asking permission even if it may not be needed, I know that the vast majority of treasure hunters are both courteous and use common sense, I tip my hat to all those who help keep OUR hobby great.

 

[deepbeep]

"(just added an umbrella policy to my home owners DIRECTLY due to this thread, your "rights" just cost me $144 extra per year, "thanks" )"



I am rather curious how you insured property you don't own

Tim

 

[blurr]

"(just added an umbrella policy to my home owners DIRECTLY due to this thread, your "rights" just cost me $144 extra per year, "thanks" )"



I am rather curious how you insured property you don't own

Tim

He never said he was insuring the easement. He said he took out an umbrella policy to supplement his homeowners. You don't follow, do you.

John

 

[deepbeep]

"(just added an umbrella policy to my home owners DIRECTLY due to this thread, your "rights" just cost me $144 extra per year, "thanks" )"



I am rather curious how you insured property you don't own

Tim

He never said he was insuring the easement. He said he took out an umbrella policy to supplement his homeowners. You don't follow, do you.

John

Ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhh I think I am starting to now! You guys live across from that vacant house don't you??!! (not that there is anything wrong with that!)

 

[blurr]

"(just added an umbrella policy to my home owners DIRECTLY due to this thread, your "rights" just cost me $144 extra per year, "thanks" )"



I am rather curious how you insured property you don't own

Tim

He never said he was insuring the easement. He said he took out an umbrella policy to supplement his homeowners. You don't follow, do you.

John

Ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhh I think I am starting to now! You guys live across from that vacant house don't you??!!

Well, I don't have to join this fight. You will do what you want. Just remember that when hunting is banned everywhere except for private property, WITH permission. It has been talked about here already. No need to be a jerk, just treat people the way you would want to be treated.

John

 

[Blacksheep]

"(just added an umbrella policy to my home owners DIRECTLY due to this thread, your "rights" just cost me $144 extra per year, "thanks" )"



I am rather curious how you insured property you don't own

Tim

He never said he was insuring the easement. He said he took out an umbrella policy to supplement his homeowners. You don't follow, do you.

John

That`s the problem, people refusing to follow how our actions in a hobby loved by thousands can effect others who have no real opinion. Those who do not share our love of the hobby will most definitely form an opinion if we run rough-shod over their neighborhoods.

Get involved, introduce yourself and our hobby to those who may not have an opinion, do the right thing and ask.

 

[cybercop106]

Thanks Hogge.........

Interestingly enough I had one of these incidents happen over the weekend on my vacation to my home state of MO. I lived in Rolla from 1992 thru 2008, finishing my second college degree and then doing policework there for 14 years. My Dad lives less than 30 mins from Rolla, has been retired for over 15 years and goes detecting almost every day for a few hours. He met me at a city park in Rolla to spend some time and we were detecting together when a lady opening the concession stand came over and told Dad metal detecting wasn't allowed in the park. I approached her and asked what City Ordinance she was referring to. She avoided the question and continued to assert her claim. I told her if it was not a law, ordinance or posted policy, it wasn't prohibited. She finally said the Parks Director prohibits detecting in the parks. I asked "how would someone KNOW it wasn't allowed if they couldn't access that information because it's not made available". Then she switched to "digging is dangerous because of underground electrical lines", which I chuckled at and told her why that assertion is ridiculous for detectorists who don't have anything more than a garden trowel and screwdriver, to which she shrilly started insisting "calm down sir, you need to calm down". I told her "just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they aren't calm", and about having done policework in the community for many years. I told her just to give me the Parks Director's phone number, which she did. I thanked her and walked away.
There was no answer at the Director's office, so I left a message. Then I called the city police department and asked them to contact the Parks Director for me, knowing that when a city official is on duty he carries a radio or a cell phone he can be contacted on.
Then we continued to detect until he showed up.
After talking for a while, I found out he requires 'written permission' to detect on the 'playing fields' at the parks, and he has that right under the Ordinance that allows him to make decisions for the protection of resources and facilities. So it isn't information publicly available...... you'd have to call him personally to find out. Detecting in other parts of the parks is fine as long as there is no 'major digging' without permission and whatever ground you disturb otherwise is repaired.
He appreciated that we weren't really 'digging' anyway and that he couldn't even tell where we had recovered the few items we found because the ground looked undisturbed. We had also picked up a number of trash items (had them in our junk bags) and he thanked us for doing that.
He offered to give us his written permission to detect wherever we wanted and said he needed to have a meeting with his employees so they will know what to correctly tell detectorists in the parks, because it had been a few years and there were new people who apparently don't know his policy.
Then he told us about some civil war memorabilia being discovered on a hillside in the city park just a few blocks away when they did some excavating a couple years ago. It was apparently a practice skirmish and camp area for troops passing through.
( http://www.rollanet.org/areainfo/nwhist.html ).
So by not allowing the shrill harpy to chase us off, we accomplished a number of positive things.
So clarification from city or county authorities about 'public land' is usually beneficial, and talking to them in person is probably better.
Sidewalk easements in front of unoccupied houses would be and should be a judgement call. After contacting the local authorities to be sure it's allowed of course.
It's always better to know the law and abide by it, but it's equally important not to let poop-disturbers and grumpy jerks control our hobbies OR lives.
Just my

Keep swinging and good fortune!

 

[BuckleBoy]

Cybercop, I appreciate you telling this story--but this thread is about easements and curb detecting.

It is "confirmation bias" at work here. If some important case of asking permission has resulted in permission being granted, then folks are quick to say that that is the way to do things.

If asking permission has resulted in lots of "NO's" then folks advocate not asking permission.

It is a well-known, scientifically proven fact of human nature. Confirmation bias. Look it up if you don't believe me.


The most upstanding people continue to ask permission to detect even if they have gotten an occasional "no." I have been dealt some absolutely heartbreaking "no's" over the years, about spots that it took me hours and hours of research to find. It's all part of the hobby. And I will continue to ask before I detect. Most of the time I ask a private property owner each time I wish to detect their land, even if they have said yes before. To me, letting them know that I will be there, touching base with them, having a conversation and some basic human interaction, and making sure that there will not be any problems like deer hunters on the property...these are all just plain old common sense and respect.


-Buck

 

[lostcauses]

Hmm right of way does not equate to own. It means a person or community has the right of use. Easement is even more restricted.

You folks saying the city or what ever owns the property, well such can be a problem. It is even in some location up to the property owner to maintain the side walks. They can be a risk to the oner of the property and such liability due to them, and that right of way game.

The title of such property still belongs to the owner, not the city in most cases. Know your laws folks.

 

[Newt]

Thanks Hogge.........

Interestingly enough I had one of these incidents happen over the weekend on my vacation to my home state of MO. I lived in Rolla from 1992 thru 2008, finishing my second college degree and then doing policework there for 14 years. My Dad lives less than 30 mins from Rolla, has been retired for over 15 years and goes detecting almost every day for a few hours. He met me at a city park in Rolla to spend some time and we were detecting together when a lady opening the concession stand came over and told Dad metal detecting wasn't allowed in the park. I approached her and asked what City Ordinance she was referring to. She avoided the question and continued to assert her claim. I told her if it was not a law, ordinance or posted policy, it wasn't prohibited. She finally said the Parks Director prohibits detecting in the parks. I asked "how would someone KNOW it wasn't allowed if they couldn't access that information because it's not made available". Then she switched to "digging is dangerous because of underground electrical lines", which I chuckled at and told her why that assertion is ridiculous for detectorists who don't have anything more than a garden trowel and screwdriver, to which she shrilly started insisting "calm down sir, you need to calm down". I told her "just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they aren't calm", and about having done policework in the community for many years. I told her just to give me the Parks Director's phone number, which she did. I thanked her and walked away.
There was no answer at the Director's office, so I left a message. Then I called the city police department and asked them to contact the Parks Director for me, knowing that when a city official is on duty he carries a radio or a cell phone he can be contacted on.
Then we continued to detect until he showed up.
After talking for a while, I found out he requires 'written permission' to detect on the 'playing fields' at the parks, and he has that right under the Ordinance that allows him to make decisions for the protection of resources and facilities. So it isn't information publicly available...... you'd have to call him personally to find out. Detecting in other parts of the parks is fine as long as there is no 'major digging' without permission and whatever ground you disturb otherwise is repaired.
He appreciated that we weren't really 'digging' anyway and that he couldn't even tell where we had recovered the few items we found because the ground looked undisturbed. We had also picked up a number of trash items (had them in our junk bags) and he thanked us for doing that.
He offered to give us his written permission to detect wherever we wanted and said he needed to have a meeting with his employees so they will know what to correctly tell detectorists in the parks, because it had been a few years and there were new people who apparently don't know his policy.
Then he told us about some civil war memorabilia being discovered on a hillside in the city park just a few blocks away when they did some excavating a couple years ago. It was apparently a practice skirmish and camp area for troops passing through.
( http://www.rollanet.org/areainfo/nwhist.html ).
So by not allowing the shrill harpy to chase us off, we accomplished a number of positive things.
So clarification from city or county authorities about 'public land' is usually beneficial, and talking to them in person is probably better.
Sidewalk easements in front of unoccupied houses would be and should be a judgement call. After contacting the local authorities to be sure it's allowed of course.
It's always better to know the law and abide by it, but it's equally important not to let poop-disturbers and grumpy jerks control our hobbies OR lives.
Just my

Keep swinging and good fortune!

I could not agree more.
Newt

 

[Goes4ever]

I know in my city it is legal to detect the curbs, I emailed the mayors office and they contacted me back with the proper person in the city to speak to, he informed me it was the city ROW and it was absolutely fine for people to detect AND dig on. He also said "IF" a homeowner did not like it and wanted me too leave, to just move on, even though it was fine for me to be there.

I have hunted many curbs and no one has ever said a word to me, if I see the owner outside I simply say "do you mind if I detect on the strip of grass THAT THE CITY OWNS?" not one person has told me no yet.........I just make sure to let them know the city owns it, I think it is best to ask permission, even if legally you do not have to.

I stick to old areas with run down houses, rentals etc...and most of the curbs are not nicely planted with flowers etc. I would NEVER detect curbs that are planted nicely or really well maintained.

 

[onfire]

Boy alot said on who owns what.The home I own has no side walks on one side the city owns 13ft from curb and yes it is considered a easement now when the street lites need repair and the city decides to rip up (my lawn?) who do you think has to do the repairs I mean trying to match the sod ,weed control and not to mention my under ground sprinkler system witch they have tore up 6 times in 12 years. yes I have to cut, water, maintain this section yet the city owns it. My restrictions are sump pump discharge cannot flow over this ground and into the gutter and no building within 25ft of this invisible line Anyway what Im getting at who gives permission me or the city(good luck there. the city is run by dems. they have no idea)

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Buckle boy & jb7487, you ask if I've flip-flopped on "being discreet" "not being a target to begin with", etc....

Please refer to post #117 on this thread, where I say: "This ...... doesn't mean I hunt eavesements, nor would I suggest it, since why expose yourself to the headaches? " Amazing how things clear up when you read slowly and carefully, eh? So you can see that I am not advocating hunting these. But for those that do or did (like the Ray case), the issue of whether you ever actually can & such legal matters, is the case of this thread, not whether it's the "best place in the world to go" I think we would ALL agree there are better places to go, to just avoid hassles to begin with. I have to say though: If there were one in front of an abandoned house (like in the Ray situation) I would not consider that to be such a sore thumb. Especially if it looked really old, and really innocent, and really abandoned, and really on the public eavesement. But in someone's nicely maintained green front strip? NO! But that was not the point of this thread as I understood it.


buckle boy, you say: "The problem is when you ask permission like you said in the quote above ("Hi, can I dig up your yard?"). This tells me that you're either warping things out of proportion just to try and make a point .... "
I rhetorically phrase the question in this way to make a point: For persons who make the automatic definition that md'ing = destruction, how can they NOT be consistent, and believe this, when they're asking permission? Obviously they DON'T ask in this fashion. They/you/me wouldn't even mention words like "digging", right? Oh sure we might alude to something, like by saying: "I'll be sure to leave no marks" or .... "you won't even be able to tell I was there" etc.... But the reason for my phrasing is just for illistration purposes here, amongst fellow hobbyists, to point out, that anyone who thinks he md'ing automatically means destruction (and thus we need to go about asking permission in parks or schools where it's not specifically dis-allowed), is in reality, themselves, skirting the issue anytime they get permission. In reality, they don't really they are "damaging the landscape", etc..... Lest why bluff the issue with city clerks and such? Why not tell them outright "..... and I plan to dig. Is that ok?" Obviously because we know the outcome, and we know it's silly to think we're going to hit sewer pipes buried 4 ft. deep, etc....

SWR, that utility Co. admonition: "Call before you dig" is seen in the inserts people receive in their utility bills (you know, the glossy inserts we all throw away, right?), and on their pamphlets, on signs, etc... I'm sure it was borne out of people with back-hoes accidentally dozing into underground pipes, cables, etc.... Do you REALLY think it applies to an md'r going for coins in turf? Even probing? Because if so, you have to do this even for private property, not just public property. Afterall, lines might go through private yards, right? Or what if your wife is going to plant petunias? Or how about if you're going to play croquette in the park, that requires you to push those wire looped probe things in the ground? In short, I don't think that was the intent of the "call before you dig" stuff. Sure, someone might tell you that (if you asked enough people and used the word "dig" long enough), but do you really think that applies to us? I can't imagine what would happen if you were trying to get permission from a city clerk, and assured them "don't worry, I'll call the utility company before I dig each signal" (as if you were getting ready to dig several feet or something!)

blacksheep, you say: "...... do you think that I or anyone else who owns property wants somebody DIGGING there and leaving us stuck with paying the damage" [emphasis mine] So now you're back to equating md'ing with automatic damage? I thought we got that cleared up already?

cybercop106: glad that worked out for you in the end. But just to clarify, I don't doubt for a minute that some places who "issue permission" would indeed follow that up with talk that would indicate that you did, indeed, need that very permission. Afterall, they're ISSUING IT TO YOU, thus apparently it was NEEDED, right? (lest they wouldn't have to give it to you, to begin with ). But I still wonder (bear with me), if that same clerk might not have ever given the matter thought, if they had just passed you by in a park or school or eavesment? I mean, just like your example, so too are there examples of places that got detected for 30 yrs, no problem, no one cared, etc... (coming from the times when these things never even occured to anyone). Then along comes someone into city hall, or the police and asks: "can I detect in the park?". Someone tells him "yes", and PRESTO, the md'r says: "see?? you were supposed to ask. Afterall, their "yes" means it was a necessary step for me to have asked". Or they get a: "no because we think you'll hurt the earthworms", and PRESTO: the md'r says: "see?? it's a good thing I asked, because it was illegal". All I'm trying to point out that "Yes's" and "No's" don't necessarily prove, or dis-prove the asking thing. All it prooves is that you can ALWAYS find someone willing to tell you "yes" or "no" to ANYTHING you ask (or I guess the 3rd alternative is: "why are you asking me such a silly question? You don't need my yes or no". But of course, most people, cops, clerks, etc.. will gladly take the power under their authority, since you asked). But that that person, or city, or county might not have ever cared less (till you asked). And this is where I fear that, if you get a "no", that it may actually, thereafter, become a new "clarification" passed down to the rank and file, to "be on the lookout" type thing. I've seen that happen! Parks where no one ever gave a r*t's *ss before, but then someone asks, gets a no, and ...... you can guess where this goes!

PS: Sorry everyone for switching back & forth from "parks" to "eavesements". Others have been doing this too. It's a difficult topic to try to cover for all of us, because public places are so inter-twined for purposes of legal illistration. But we all agree, that nice manicured eavesements of occupied homes ....... may be legal, and may not need permission, but still doesn't make it a good idea.