Update on Wisconsin DNR Issue

[Bubba707]

fibber, in many respects I like the scheme they use in Britain. It lets MDers hunt and keep anything not of great historical value or things that are already in abundance in museum collections while paying fair value for things the archys keep. It could actually save the officials money, increase our knowlege of the past while letting us hunt. It could also turn up many undiscovered historical sites before they get bulldozed for development.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[fibberjibber]

Bubba,
I also like the UK model and is similar to what I would like to see implemented here. Since I am a short-timer in the MD community, I cant say with certainty but isnt the old system here in Wisconsin that you obtain a permit from the DNR, you show them your findings and if there isnt anything of significant historical or prehistorical research value, you keep it - am I right? I dont think they paid you for anything they keep but is the rest I said accurate?

I like the idea of both sides giving a little. If we find something that is significant, then I think it should be kept for the people. Lots of research can be done on what most people see as junk or worthless. If we turn something up that is extremely remarkable, then that area should be searched by archaeologists because context is everything. But the archaeologists and officials have to give MDers the freedom to potentially find those sites. And, yeah, I think there should be some sort of reimbursement or something done if an object is kept in public coffers. I wince a little at payment because it can put an open market value on something that shouldnt have one and I dont think the government should be putting prices on artifacts anyways. Have you ever heard of eminent domain seizures and the land owner actually getting 'fair market value'?? Maybe the object - and remember there wouldnt be many of these in any given year- could just be kept for a period of, say, a year for research and possible display by a museum and then returned to the finder. The finders name would be attributed to the item if displayed. Returning it would remove any concern of value, etc. The finder could then opt to allow the museum or institution to keep it for another year and so on to continue research or display if the owner agreed. That way everyone benefits.

The sticky wicket would be when a significant find is discovered with really cool stuff and the MDer having to resist going back to unearth the finds themselves!! But the smart archaeologist would invite the finder and others to assist in the excavation.
-e

 

[Bubba707]

fibber, I don't think Wisconsin ever had a system beyond State parks being out of bounds. I'm sure something reasonable could be worked out if we were dealing with reasonable people. The Govt archys we have are not reasonable. In fact, the State archy has stated a while back that given the authority he'd outlaw all metal detecting in Wisconsin.

 

[Bum Luck]

fibber, I don't think Wisconsin ever had a system beyond State parks being out of bounds. I'm sure something reasonable could be worked out if we were dealing with reasonable people. The Govt archys we have are not reasonable. In fact, the State archy has stated a while back that given the authority he'd outlaw all metal detecting in Wisconsin.

I've hunted Devil's Lake in the past; I've asked the rangers if I could hunt the beach, and they said OK. No big deal; in fact, judging from the lack of pennies, I'd say that I wasn't the only one that hunted the beach.

 

[Bum Luck]

Most everything they get their grubby little paws on goes into boxes and gets hid in the basement of the State museum among other places never to be seen again. And they claim we're stealing our heritage. Dudzik is a recent appointee who just happens to agree with the position of the Office of the State Archaeologist that our history and heritage belongs to the Govt and not the people. They claim to preserve things for the people of Wisconsin yet say it's better to rot in the ground than to be found by the public. I hope Walker will do something about those nutcases and I'll write and suggest it, but I'm not going to hold my breath. I expect it to get worse.

So that's where the Copper Culture celt I donated to the State Museum went. . . I was hoping it would go on display
in Madison. . . or at least be transfered the local DNR trail head museum. . . about 2-miles from where I recovered it.

Yep, they got a ton of 'em. Never see the light of day, but really how many can they have before they aren't anything special, or how much can you learn from just having hundreds of them?

It may be more important to know WHERE they come from than what they are. And that's where we can come in. I've been in on some archy hunts, and I have to say, they have no clue how to run these things. As we know, it takes a while to learn one.

I agree that it should be transferred to a local museum since they have as many as they have, and too many to display.

The world of US archaeology is bogged down in dogma, something the Brits don't seem to suffer much from.

Not only that, but they don't know how to reach out to the citizenry from the Ivory Towers either.

 

[Bubba707]

High Cliff up here is a no, even the picnic and swimming area. You're only allowed a permit if you specify an item you're looking for and anything else has to be turned in to the park officials.

 

[fibberjibber]

Bubba,
I am hoping that past is past and maybe we can find new ways to open communication with the changing of the guard in Madison. Thats why I am opening dialogue here with all of you so that when I do approach the right people in Madison, etc I kinda have a background in what has happened so far, and what would be reasonable to ask for.

Bum Luck,
I would suppose that individual sites in the state have always done things as they see fit up until the rule change two years ago. I would not be surprised if Devils Lake has been hit hard by MDers over the years. I would stay away from the beach however and hit areas where, long ago, there were shelters or halls.
I also have to say that I agree with you completely on your second post. They do get too many and while there are small things to learn from new copper culture artifacts, the only thing left to learn is where they are found. And that is an important piece of information. We are also making strides in learning where the copper originated from by taking a small sample and analyzing it. Neither of these pieces of information requires keeping the artifact in archival storage in museums. And, yes, most museums dont even accept many of these artifacts as donations anymore because it does cost them a lot more money than most think to keep even one thing. They will readily admit that they have enough already.
And the communication thing is a big issue, as I mentioned earlier. It is interesting to note that I am not alone in my beliefs. There are important people in prominent museums and universities, some of whom I have known personally, who also see the value in working with MDers and allowing MDers to do the thing they do best- covering a lot of ground and recovering our past.
Bubba,
On your last comment, that is the current policy dictated by the state. It is that way everywhere here now. Officially anyway. I am going to test this policy this spring by calling around a bit and popping in different park ranger offices. I plan on going to some blindly as an MDer and some I will use my archaeology background and name-dropping to see if it gets me in the door. I think if some of these people in power see exactly what we are pulling out of the ground (mostly loose change and pop tabs!) I think their mind might start changing....
Time will tell

 

[Bubba707]

Y'know, I wouldn't even be against a $10 annual permit to detect State land, including parks. With the new political atmosphere that might have a chance to fly.

 

[fibberjibber]

I dont personally like permit fees. Government has a tendency to raise them and use the funds for anything they please. Take fishing and hunting licenses. The funds are supposed to be used on restocking fish supplies, maintaining public launches, etc. Instead, they are used often to prop up road projects or pet projects around the state. I dont have a real issue - and most sportsmen would agree- with game licenses so long as the money is going to keep the sports vibrant. With metal detecting, there is no infrastructure or resources that need replenishing. No level of regulating either in the form of law enforcement patrols, etc outside the norm. I dont see anyone burying copper culture fishhooks for me to find.

I think that if we are doing something on public land like this, I would equate it more with picnicking. That said, I am sure a good argument could be made that we are removing a non-renewable public resource and we should pay for that kind of public land usage. This will be a good debate down the road, but for now I really want to regain unrestricted access.
-e

 

[Bum Luck]

And the communication thing is a big issue, as I mentioned earlier. It is interesting to note that I am not alone in my beliefs. There are important people in prominent museums and universities, some of whom I have known personally, who also see the value in working with MDers and allowing MDers to do the thing they do best- covering a lot of ground and recovering our past.

I've worked with them too, as I've said. And I must say all archies aren't all like that; I've known some that "play well with others". It's worked out well for them, actually.

I have heard some of them call us grave robbers and looters, though, and it seems like they need to take a step in our direction.

 

[fibberjibber]

Hear Hear!! I do agree that many archaeologists need to take a few steps in the MD direction. I have also met some great people and I have met some who are very arrogant, especially if they have a PhD. I have also learned to pick my battles and still smile and nod sometimes when I know it is a lost cause with someone.
Ultimately, I would like to approach a few of the clubs and possibly have a summit of sorts by inviting officials from the state archaeologist office, the DNR, state representatives, and officials from Walker's administration to a combined club meeting. It would have to have rules and order because not only is that efficient but it is what they are used to dealing with. A free-for-all would ensure the officials all walking right out the door. At that meeting we could all- both sides- air our grievances and talk about where we would like to meet in the middle. Offer up the pros and cons of each other and potential solutions with residual consequences that only enhance each other's goals. Community involvement, open communication, sharing of information, invitations to co-author research or similar papers to be presented at conferences. It does have the potential for real earth-shattering shifts in both fields.
-e

 

[watercolor]

Watercolor, just put a query in to the agency you donated it to. They should be able to track it and let you know the status. Tell them you were wondering if there was any research done on it like dating or such. I know there are a bunch of museums that would love to have one of those on display!
-e

Thanks fibberjibber, I just sent off a query this morning. . .

 

[milco]

One last thing to throw out there... I think we could develop a community between MDers and Dirt Diggers that could benefit both parties AND do some nice things to get the public involved too.

Lets keep this conversation going and nurture it so we can really get this done!
-e

A real big double ditto on this comment!! My two cents from Milwaukee.

 

[ewcoinhunter]

I will keep my fingers crossed!

 

[lockman209]

Just a reminder that the Spring DNR meeting is set for April 11, 2011 at your respective county seats. Locations are differant in each county. I will be attending the meeting at the Chippewa Falls Middle School. Question #74. Do you support the DNR establishing a permit system whereby participants may purchase an annual metal detecting permit for the sum of $20.00 and be allowed to operate metal detectors on all state owned or managed property and properties purchased with stewartship money. Please try and make it to the spring meetings in your respective counties and voice your support for our hobby.

 

[fibberjibber]

I agree whole-heartedly. This is the first important step. But I would encourage EVERYONE to write Gov. Walker and your state representatives after the meeting to emphasize how careful we are to leave no trace, our holes are about as small as planting a tulip bulb, and we carry all dug trash out with us. I think 20 bucks is a reasonable request but I would ask where the money would be spent. I would not think the DNR will be getting rich off of our permits but it is still our right to know how asn where it will be spent.
-Eric