So you want to look for treasure on the National Forest? No problem - looking is free, as long as you abide by the laws protecting archaeological and historic sites and artifacts. Recovering treasure, now that’s another story…. However, if that is your heart’s desire, I can tell y’all a few things that might make your application for a treasure trove permit a little less traumatic for some and, I suppose, really frustrating for others.
DISCLAIMER: nothing that I am about to tell you should be taken as an endorsement or encouragement of treasure hunting on the Forest; I already have enough work to do (including myself, I have three archaeologists to deal with three million acres on the Tonto – I think you get the picture). Though the Regs I posted a few minutes ago apply generally to all National Forests, they specifically do not apply to State or BLM, and certainly do not apply to Park Service land, although all the Federal land managing agencies have their own version of 36 CFR 296 which only differs by the number in the title. What I am about to tell you interprets these regulations into the way we do things here on the Tonto NF; I wouldn't necessarily expect you'll find the same details on other Forests, but the basics should be familiar...
First of all, the treasure trove permit is discretionary and the authority for its issuance in the Forest Service is delegated down to the District Ranger level. There is no necessity for us to issue such a permit if we don’t want to, no matter how compelling an argument the applicant makes. What that means is that there is no set checklist of information or activities and no standardized method for evaluating proposals. The only real standard established for the evaluation of a treasure trove permit is the “reasonable man” standard. This is usually taken to mean that the proposal must be logical, flow from verifiable historic sources, and have physical evidence to back it up.
The process of application is relatively simple – you can contact your friendly, if somewhat jaded and sarcastic Forest Archaeologist to talk over your theories or you can go straight to the Ranger District where you plan to search and attempt to obtain a permit application from the Ranger. There is a $200 non-refundable fee that will be due when you submit your application. If you plan on searching in several non-contiguous area, that might mean $200 for each separate area depending on the discretion of the District Ranger.
In your application you must disclose the exact location of your search area/discovery and what you expect to find there and explain exactly why you expect to find it, ie. the evidence that led you to that particular place. Once you have disclosed the location (on current USGS topographic maps, preferably with UTM coordinates on the NAD 27 CONUS datum), we are obligated under the National Historic Preservation Act to examine this location for the presence of historic or prehistoric artifacts and/or features. As you might imagine, given the workload we already have from planned activities on the Forest, treasure trove permits don’t get a very high priority – it can take weeks or months to schedule the time for this. Of course, you do have the option of hiring a qualified archaeologist to conduct a survey; they would then submit their report directly to us or you could include it in your application if you have it done beforehand. This costs money, of course, and you have to hire someone who holds a permit to conduct this kind of work on the Forest.
If we determine on the basis of either our own inspection or that of your contractor that there is nothing man-made or modified at your search location, that it is nothing more than, say, fortuitously suggestive erosion or just an intact natural landscape with no evidence of any of the activities specified in your application, we can do one of two things – issue the permit because we know that there is nothing there that will be disturbed (aka “archaeological clearance”); in other words, if we prove that there is nothing there we may issue you a permit to search there (Catch-22). On the other hand, we can always choose not to issue it because we don’t wish to have that natural landscape disturbed by your search and recovery activities. If we choose not to issue, you’re out your $200. If we do find evidence of prehistoric/historic activity at your location, you’ll need to prepare a plan for our approval that will allow you to conduct your search is such a way as to avoid disturbing or destroying any artifacts, buildings, ruins, or other man-made features. If this is even possible and you have provided sufficient evidence from historic documentation or other sources that we agree is valid, we may then issue the permit. Under these circumstances, however, there will be additional requirements to protect these resources from your search activities. We may require mitigation for any disturbance to archaeological or historic resources, including scientific excavations and other studies to be done prior to your search and/or requiring that a professional archaeologist be on hand to monitor your work and stop it if anything archaeological comes to light to ensure that no damage is done to any historic features or artifacts. Depending on your proposal, we may also require restrictions to protect certain plants (e.g. saguaro cacti) and animal habitats. The plan for conducting all of this activity will require consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer and in some cases with those Tribes having historical connections to or interests in the area, a process that generally takes a couple of months to complete. Patience is a valuable asset in this process.
For the most part, if there is something historic or archaeological there, we usually just don’t issue the permit. The only time that we have gone through this entire process within the last couple of decades was for Ron Feldman’s treasure trove permit at Rogers’ Trough last year. It cost him a bunch of money and all he could claim for it was the confirmation of what we already suspected was a horizontal well that provided water to the mining camp and mill located just downslope.
Assuming that you have made it through this gauntlet and spent wads of cash on your search and you do actually find something that qualifies as a treasure trove, it is entirely possible that you may not be able to keep much or any of it. Basically, the only ‘treasure’ that you can keep would be a portion of any bullion, plate, coins, or unmounted gems, assuming that it clears escrow without any other claims of ownership. Any and all other artifacts are and will remain the property of the United States. Your portion of the trove would be determined as part of a negotiated settlement with the Federal Government. You would also have to declare this as taxable income.
Obviously, the process is not designed to encourage people to submit applications….
So, assuming that you want to go through with all of this, how can you maximize your chances of being taken seriously and getting a permit?
My first bit of advice is to be selective and do your homework (and fieldwork). Quite frankly, if someone comes in telling us that they deciphered some allegedly authentic treasure map they saw in a book or bought in a bar in Apache Junction and figured out right where the treasure ought to be but haven’t been there yet and so are asking for some huge search area to go fishing in, the chances that their proposal will be sarcastically dismissed and end up in the shredder are quite high.
My second bit of advice extends from the first and basically applies to all other parts of the process and this is: make sure that your research is unimpeachable. If you are looking for lost mines, learn the geology of your search area and the technology of mining. If you are basing your proposal on an historic incident, make sure that it really happened; provide original documentation from authentic historical sources and don’t fall for the idea that “every legend has a grain of truth in it.” For example, here in the Southwest many treasure legends are predicated on the idea that the Jesuit Order came rampaging through Sonora and Arizona locating and operating hundreds of mines that they worked for the sole purpose of accumulating wealth and that they were thrown out of the New World because of it. Yes, I know that this has become an almost mainstream assumption in Arizona history by virtue of constant repetition, but when you look at the real history, that dog won’t hunt. The truth is that the Jesuits – and there were never more than a handful operating in this area at any given time – came to convert the Indios. They established missions, taught the Indians how to farm European crops and raise cattle, and fought to prevent the virtual enslavement and actual mistreatment of the native population by Spanish colonists. They were dirt poor and built their missions almost invariable out of mud. The only recorded association between Jesuits and mining has to do with a campaign to stop the brutal treatment the Indians received while working at many of the mines in Sonora. The reason they were tossed out in 1767 had, in fact, nothing to do with anything they did here – it was the result of a political “disagreement” they had with the kings of France and Spain back in Europe. They explored the Southwest (well, a couple of them did) but never made it north of the Gila River. So, any treasure story based on the idea that the secretive and avaricious Jesuits had mines or hid treasure anywhere in Arizona is nothing but a myth and isn’t going to be an easy sell if your proposal is based on it. Pretty much the same goes for the so-called “Peralta” Stone “Maps” (see parallel thread in this forum) which neither mention the name Peralta nor contain any overt indication that they constitute a map. “Evidence” based on an interpretation of a fake map or a false history is hardly the basis for a valid claim - and yet I know that nothing I just said will matter to some people. The Jesuit/Peralta Myths will probably never go away no matter what I do or say and I’ll be hearing about “18 locations” and witches and hearts and churches buried by earthquakes until I wise up and retire from this job).
In addition to making sure that your story has some actual historical basis and providing the documentation to prove it, bring in some physical evidence to back up your identification. Now, by this I don’t mean that you should bring in artifacts that you find. For one thing, this would be illegal, not that I have ever busted anybody for bringing me artifacts. If you do, however, remember that I can’t give them back to you; they are the property of the US and so have to stay here. In these days of relatively cheap autofocusing digital cameras it’s actually easier to take a lot of photos. Just remember to take overviews with skylines and details/closeups with scales.
Actually, that’s pretty much it – Documented historical evidence, a logical story, and enough photography of the place you want to work to recover your trove that it can be recognized as something other than natural, and you will stand a much better chance of being taken seriously and maybe even getting that permit. Independent wealth is also a good idea considering that it will cost you money up front and may net you nothing on the other end even if you find something.
Anyway, that’s about it for now; I have to get back to work. Reports are stacking up on my desk even as we speak…
