meteor-minor, I find your answer interesting, from a psychological perspective. Your answer, that it "looks legal", is based on that thread, right? And reading through that thread, I see that ........ really ...... only a single respondant in that thread, said anything to do with the "legality" of metal detecting the beaches there. The other respondants just chimed in about "watch out for muggers" or airport transportation things, or "good luck and have fun", etc... The single person on that thread that actually said anything pertinent about "legality", was this singular sentence:
"I live here and have not had any experiences with not being allowed to hunt a beach, (not aware of any laws that prevent MD'ing on the beach either)."
Thus I presume that, from that, you gathered that it "looked legal". Right?
But notice that this person who apparently hunts the beaches there with no problems, never said that he's "checked the laws" or "asked anyone". He only says that he does it, and doesn't have a problem. In fact, he even goes so far as to say that he knows of no laws that prevent md'ing". Notice he didn't say that there ISN'T a law that prevents md'ing, but only that he doesn't (personally) KNOW of any law that prevents md'ing.
Therefore, the average reader reading a post like that, focusses on the fact that a) there's someone there detecting b) they don't have a problem c) they know of no laws saying you can't.
However NONE of that means that there isn't actually a law that prevents md'ing. What I mean is, there *might* be a law that prevents md'ing, and perhaps this person just doesn't know about it? However, as you can see, it appears to be a non-issue, as apparently ........ no one cares. Which, by the way, can often be the case, where even if you COULD find some "law", morphed to fit cultural heritage and such, yet in actual effect and purpose, they're meant for people raiding shipwrecks, pillaging pyramids, etc... NOT the guy plying the beach for loose change. Thus you and I tend to focus on "actual reality" therefore, not "laws". See what I mean?
The same psychology came up on a California md'ing forum: Some guy posted a question, wanting to know if he could metal detect on a particular university campus (which has massive sprawling grounds, acreage, etc....). Someone else answered them by saying: "you should go ask campus security, or ask at the front desk, etc...". HOWEVER, a few others who read the post, chimed in to the effect: "I hunt there all the time, and never have a problem" (and then went on to list stuff they'd found, etc....). Humorously, that person who had FIRST answered that the person should "go ask permission", THEN came back on and changed his mind, and said
"well, never mind, it looks like you can detect there, and it's ok". Why did he say that? Because he read about the others who detect there, and no one cares, and decided that it must not be an issue. Ie.: must not be illegal, since others seem to be doing it with no problems.
BUT WAIT! Why does the mere fact of people doing it, and no one caring, "make it ok"? Read my post about the guy detecting a federal beach. Here's a case of someone detecting a place, and having no problems. And of course we all know, that if you looked long enough and hard enough, and asked enough federal rangers, that you would indeed eventually find yourself a "no". And for THAT reason, we therefore say: you can't detect there. But why is it then, that other places, that you might ALSO find yourself a "No" (if you asked long enough and hard enough), that we instinctively give those places the "ok", "simply because others are doing it, and having no problems or issues" ?
Just a curious psychological nuance that is intriguing to me
