NYC Permit - Overly Restrictive? Ignore?

[Metro Retro]

So with great anticipation, I finally receive my permit from the NYC Parks Department, which states a list of "do's and don'ts" which includes,
"no digging within 25 feet of a tree or it's drip line, whichever is further".

It also states no digging in woodlands, and native vegetation areas, among other places. So now I'm wondering, where does that leave me? If I can't detect on the athletic fields (which makes sense) nor in the woods (which is the whole point), or near a tree, then it leaves no place really.

Does anyone do any detecting in any of the five boroughs of New York? And if so, do you ignore these things? Many thanks for your advice.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[joe_dirt]

I'm not familiar with the laws/regulations in your area, but might be worth trying to determine their definition of "digging".

 

[Metro Retro]

Thanks Joe_Dirt. It's an MD permit, and also states that any digging is restricted to a tool that can be used with one hand only, and which is no more than 4 inches wide and 12 inches in length. I don't know how it's possible to avoid both the athletic fields and the trees. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[joe_dirt]

Hmm, hopefully someone more knowledgeable than myself will respond because it does sound awfully restrictive.

 

[Metro Retro]

Thanks Joe.

 

[Don57]

I have seen people metal detecting in the wooded area of Kissena Park off 164th st many times , while there were park workers in the area .

 

[Metro Retro]

That's good to know Don. I've seen people MDing at the park that I want to go to also. I guess I'll give it a shot. I also want to practice in the park behind me, but it's not on the list. Do you MD in the city parks Don? Or do you steer clear of them?

 

[rickv14623]

You will want to read this:
Legal Challenge update in NY - Task Force for Metal Detecting Rights

HH,
Rick

 

[Metro Retro]

Thank you for that link Rick. The timing is perfect, and I can see now that heavy restrictions were put into place in the past year.

I used to see MDers from time to time, including a family from Jersey on occasion, but not anymore. I'm guessing that this is likely the reason why. I'll be going back to that site, to see if there is anything that I can do to provide some support. Thanks again!

 

[Metro Retro]

Oh my goodness -- I'm reading through that website and had no idea of the fight that's been going on. They had recently imposed 50 feet, now reduced to 25 feet. Thank you again for that link Rick. I'm very glad to have been informed. Right now, this permit is rendered useless, which seems to have been the objective.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

So with great anticipation, I finally receive my permit from the NYC Parks Department, which states a list of "do's and don'ts" which includes,
"no digging within 25 feet of a tree or it's drip line, whichever is further".

It also states no digging in woodlands, and native vegetation areas, among other places. So now I'm wondering, where does that leave me? If I can't detect on the athletic fields (which makes sense) nor in the woods (which is the whole point), or near a tree, then it leaves no place really.

Does anyone do any detecting in any of the five boroughs of New York? And if so, do you ignore these things? Many thanks for your advice.

Of course you realize why this "fight" is going on, right? For the very reason why it's instinctive for people here to tell you to "go clarify" various things, "ask" if you can do such & such, etc.... In other words, I bet the very reason why this "permit" (or any type of their "princely sanction") exists in the first place, was people went asking "can I?" to begin with. And low & behold, they must "address this pressing issue". And for sure archies and city officials lurk behind every tree waiting to jump out and measure the length and width of your digger, measure how many feet you are from a tree, and so forth, right? I mean, heck, they probably hire navy seals to do this sneak-up-behind-you work afterall! I mean .... seriously now folks. Did you plan on leaving a mess or holes?

 

[joe_dirt]

Of course you realize why this "fight" is going on, right? For the very reason why it's instinctive for people here to tell you to "go clarify" various things, "ask" if you can do such & such, etc.... In other words, I bet the very reason why this "permit" (or any type of their "princely sanction") exists in the first place, was people went asking "can I?" to begin with. And low & behold, they must "address this pressing issue". And for sure archies and city officials lurk behind every tree waiting to jump out and measure the length and width of your digger, measure how many feet you are from a tree, and so forth, right? I mean, heck, they probably hire navy seals to do this sneak-up-behind-you work afterall! I mean .... seriously now folks. Did you plan on leaving a mess or holes?

In this case the permit already exists. So, as you say, the asking has already been done. I fail to see how your post helps him.

 

[Metro Retro]

Thank you for your thoughts Tom. The link that Rick provided is a real eye-opener. It looks like typical city bureaucracy at play. And like you say Tom -- it's likely 'addressed' so that they can state that it is allowed, but truly it isn't. Every open field is an athletic field (banned), and the trees, woods, and vegetated areas are banned. So there's no place to go.

It's pretty farcical. I think I'm going to head into the small Park Rangers office at the park. They were very friendly and had directed me to the website for a permit. I figure if I say hello first and let them know that I'll be around, that they'll leave me alone. I'll be tipping my hand, so hopefully it won't backfire.

Sigh. It shouldn't have to be this difficult.

 

[Metro Retro]

Cross posted with you Joe. I plan on stopping at the rangers office first, with a smile and a box of donuts, lol.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

In this case the permit already exists. So, as you say, the asking has already been done. I fail to see how your post helps him.

You're absolutely right. There's nothing that can be done in the case of places where such rules *already* exist ( except ....... abide by them if you wish). I was only pointing this psychology out, because I noticed you .... yourself .... had mused the following:

" might be worth trying to determine their definition of "digging". "

Couple of thoughts on that: For starters, you're right! There's been persons over the years that avoid the word "digging", and say they're only "popping" or "probing", for example. For starters, what are the odds that anyone would really come up and even start this semantics discussion to begin with? And if they did, just be sure you're only "popping" as you say. But when you say "try to determine", what would be a person's course of action, to "determine" that? If ...... by that ... you meant "go and ask" (ie.: "clarify"), then the psychology that I speak of could take hold. It can cause a "no" (where no one might ever have cared or noticed), or another meeting of bureaucrats to further "address this issue" when the next update of the "permits" comes about, etc....

In other words, all such "trying to determine" (ie.: clarifying), seems to lead to the very thing we're all trying to avoid: visibility, scrutiny, attention, etc....

If it were me, and such an ambiguity existed, I would just capitalize on it, and NOT ask questions. Just avoid lookie-lous and busy bodies, and ...... as you say ..... you're not "digging" afterall.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... I figure if I say hello first and let them know that I'll be around, that they'll leave me alone.

If it were me, and I had any intention of chasing the deep ones, then the LAST thing I'd do is walk in and announce my intention to metal detect (even if "friendly" introductions and so forth). The LAST thing I'd want is more people to "be aware" of some "pressing issue" that might cause them to think/say to themselves, the next time they see a md'r: "Look there's one of THEM" and start watching me. Seems the less visibility is better, not more. But that's just me.

 

[Metro Retro]

If it were me, and I had any intention of chasing the deep ones, then the LAST thing I'd do is walk in and announce my intention to metal detect (even if "friendly" introductions and so forth). The LAST thing I'd want is more people to "be aware" of some "pressing issue" that might cause them to think/say to themselves, the next time they see a md'r: "Look there's one of THEM" and start watching me. Seems the less visibility is better, not more. But that's just me.

You may be right Tom. I'm not sure which way to handle it. Do I make friends upfront, in case I get one of the overzealous types (or people "reporting" me?) Or do I try and keep a low profile and hope that no one even knows about the 25 ft from a tree rule? Hard to predict. I guess I'll play it by ear.

 

[joe_dirt]

You're absolutely right. There's nothing that can be done in the case of places where such rules *already* exist ( except ....... abide by them if you wish). I was only pointing this psychology out, because I noticed you .... yourself .... had mused the following:

" might be worth trying to determine their definition of "digging". "

Couple of thoughts on that: For starters, you're right! There's been persons over the years that avoid the word "digging", and say they're only "popping" or "probing", for example. For starters, what are the odds that anyone would really come up and even start this semantics discussion to begin with? And if they did, just be sure you're only "popping" as you say. But when you say "try to determine", what would be a person's course of action, to "determine" that? If ...... by that ... you meant "go and ask" (ie.: "clarify"), then the psychology that I speak of could take hold. It can cause a "no" (where no one might ever have cared or noticed), or another meeting of bureaucrats to further "address this issue" when the next update of the "permits" comes about, etc....

In other words, all such "trying to determine" (ie.: clarifying), seems to lead to the very thing we're all trying to avoid: visibility, scrutiny, attention, etc....

If it were me, and such an ambiguity existed, I would just capitalize on it, and NOT ask questions. Just avoid lookie-lous and busy bodies, and ...... as you say ..... you're not "digging" afterall.

Ok, point taken.

 

[YukonCorn]

So with great anticipation, I finally receive my permit from the NYC Parks Department, which states a list of "do's and don'ts" which includes,
"no digging within 25 feet of a tree or it's drip line, whichever is further".

It also states no digging in woodlands, and native vegetation areas, among other places. So now I'm wondering, where does that leave me? If I can't detect on the athletic fields (which makes sense) nor in the woods (which is the whole point), or near a tree, then it leaves no place really.

Does anyone do any detecting in any of the five boroughs of New York? And if so, do you ignore these things? Many thanks for your advice.

That's because they really don't want you to do it.

 

[YukonCorn]

I don't think agents really care to see you digging or want to bother you about it. Unless someone makes a complaint about what your doing. Or an agent has nothing better to do because he or she is not happy with what is happening in their life and nitpicking.