WISCONSIN WATERS

[427mike]

Would like to know if any one has any info on the reasonable use of detector's in wis water's ?and if any law's have passed on this.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Minrelica]

I believe Wisconsin banned water and river hunting about a year ago. the second link is a little less confusing.

Metal Detecting In Wisconsin? Know The Law!

Wisconsin Metal Detection Laws | eHow.com

I think that stinks since there's so much tubing that goes on there. I'm sure there's a TON of things to be found in places such as the Apple River.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Wit, both those links you give deal with state-owned lands, not city or county level lands. Certainly not all waters are state or federally owned there, eh? And I notice that both links dedicate themselves to primarily archaeological wording. Therefore, if someone is angling for modern jewelry (and his coins aren't old), then he'd be ok.

I believe Wisconsin banned water and river hunting about a year ago. the second link is a little less confusing.

Metal Detecting In Wisconsin? Know The Law!

Wisconsin Metal Detection Laws | eHow.com

I think that stinks since there's so much tubing that goes on there. I'm sure there's a TON of things to be found in places such as the Apple River.

 

[Minrelica]

WISCONSIN WATERS ARE 100% OFF LIMIT!

That's that. No loopholes, No exceptions.

This was clarified by a metal detecting club in Wisconsin just today. You will receive a ticket and you will be fined if caught breaking the law.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

WIT, but what you're saying fails to define "wisconsin waters". Because that may, by definition, refer to state owned waters. Again, not city, county, private, etc... waters. And even the term "navigable" is sometimes involved in such legal things (as opposed to ponds, creeks you can step across, etc....

And FOR SURE it doesn't apply to private waters. Ie.: persons with ponds on their lands, creeks that go through their land, etc.. And I'm certain it wouldn't apply to city waters either. Like if a city had a park with a lake in it, then this would be outside the scope of state lands, for example.

So when you say "that was clarified....", sure: all they're doing is repeating a state level law, without going deeper into the definition of what the words within it mean.

 

[Bum Luck]

Here's Tom again.

FYI:
The DNR controls all the waters of the State. The detector ban is for state-controlled waters. Even privately owned waters. The State has sovereignty over cities and counties.

Using Metal Detectors - Wisconsin DNR

Metal Detecting In Wisconsin? Know The Law!

Ergo, NO detecting in the water.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

The State has sovereignty over cities and counties ......

Bum luck, I've heard this line of reasoning before, that the state law applies, even down to city and county level. But if that's necessarily always the case, then why do we see, in many posts on the subject, where persons here freely detect city parks, county park, private parks, etc... and "avoid state parks" in their state, because they feel that the state level parks are off-limits. Because if what you're saying is true (that state law filters down to city level), then by logical deduction, all those persons are wrong to be hunting city parks, in their states.

If you looked through the FMDAC list of their state-by-state listing, you would see many states with outright "no's" or .... at least .... dire sounding wording. Yet hunting in city, county, and private locations goes on all the time, with no problem.

So I take exception to your premise that state level laws, for state level parks (or water, in the case of this particular post) "automatically" subrogates down to the city and county parks or waters. For example: state parks may disallow dogs off leash, yet a city park may have no such restriction. Rules differ, from park to park, ALL THE TIME. Closing times, allow or disallow alcahol, over-night camping vs no over-night camping, etc...

What your saying may be true for civil law, like for example, a city can not "allow" murder, since of course, the higher authority (the state and fed) disallow murder. So state and fed. law would "trump" the city law, on something like that. Granted. But for something like md'ing, if what you're saying is true, then you've got oodles of people breaking the law in many states, by hunting their city, their private, and their county parks.

On the contrary: that state by state listing has ALWAYS been interpretted to mean state level, not city or county. But the legal angle your taking, interprets that it means EVERYTHING in the state, right?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Or how about this bum-luck : If what you're saying is true , then why doesn't federal level ARPA just simply trump every states laws then ? Afterall: fed is over states, so if you're saying it subrogates downwards (because afterall: states are merely a sub-part of the larger fed.) Wouldn't ARPA's federal stricter standard over-ride , & thus prevail over states laws, counties and cities whose laws are silent on these issues ? (if your down-filtering theory is correct).

 

[dustytrails123]

Wisconsin sucks ...period

 

[logger1]

It really comes down to what the DNR have control over, and they have control over lakes,rivers, streams and creeks the private ponds should not be a problem.

 

[Bum Luck]

Bum luck, I've heard this line of reasoning before, that the state law applies, even down to city and county level. But if that's necessarily always the case, then why do we see, in many posts on the subject, where persons here freely detect city parks, county park, private parks, etc... and "avoid state parks" in their state, because they feel that the state level parks are off-limits. Because if what you're saying is true (that state law filters down to city level), then by logical deduction, all those persons are wrong to be hunting city parks, in their states.

If you looked through the FMDAC list of their state-by-state listing, you would see many states with outright "no's" or .... at least .... dire sounding wording. Yet hunting in city, county, and private locations goes on all the time, with no problem.

So I take exception to your premise that state level laws, for state level parks (or water, in the case of this particular post) "automatically" subrogates down to the city and county parks or waters. For example: state parks may disallow dogs off leash, yet a city park may have no such restriction. Rules differ, from park to park, ALL THE TIME. Closing times, allow or disallow alcahol, over-night camping vs no over-night camping, etc...

What your saying may be true for civil law, like for example, a city can not "allow" murder, since of course, the higher authority (the state and fed) disallow murder. So state and fed. law would "trump" the city law, on something like that. Granted. But for something like md'ing, if what you're saying is true, then you've got oodles of people breaking the law in many states, by hunting their city, their private, and their county parks.

On the contrary: that state by state listing has ALWAYS been interpretted to mean state level, not city or county. But the legal angle your taking, interprets that it means EVERYTHING in the state, right?

You're missing the point (deliberately?) again.

The state has jurisdiction over waters, not city and county non-water parks. If you can't understand the difference, I'm not going to argue with you, like a bad Monty Python skit. I had enough of that in the St. Augustine thread.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Ok , i thought meant land parks as well . ok. But i betcha it is only "navigable" waters

 

[rustyman9791]

WISCONSIN WATERS ARE 100% OFF LIMIT!

That's that. No loopholes, No exceptions.

This was clarified by a metal detecting club in Wisconsin just today. You will receive a ticket and you will be fined if caught breaking the law.

I think I found a loop hole. It is illegal to metal detect Wisconsin waters yes this is true. But it is legal to recreationally pan gold in Wisconsin waters with the aid of a metal detector. So get a gold pan, and your panning for gold and not metal detecting. Here's the link I found from the WI DNR on panning gold.

http://wausauprospectors.com/images/Recreational Gold Panning In Wisconsin.pdf

check this out and now tell me what you think.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

I think I found a loop hole. It is illegal to metal detect Wisconsin waters yes this is true. But it is legal to recreationally pan gold in Wisconsin waters with the aid of a metal detector. So get a gold pan, and your panning for gold and not metal detecting. Here's the link I found from the WI DNR on panning gold.

http://wausauprospectors.com/images/Recreational Gold Panning In Wisconsin.pdf

check this out and now tell me what you think.

Rustyman, I've heard of this tactic "loop-hole" before, where if someone is harassed in the field, while metal detecting, where some busy-body ranger has some text that he thinks dis-allows detecting for coins/relics (cultural heritage verbage, for instance), that the md'r can merely say: "I was looking for nuggets" (which would fall outside the scope of cultural heritage, since they are naturally occuring).

The same tactic has been used by simply telling the busy-body: "I'm looking for meteors" (since they are from neither earth, NOR man-made. They are from space).

Heck, you can just tell them you're looking for the boyscout ring your dad lost there when he was a kid. My dad lost LOTS of boyscout rings when he was young, in whole variety of places

 

[Bum Luck]

Fantasy Island again.

I just happened to be in a meeting with a top DNR attorney and some legislators a bit ago, and the subject came up. It is as I've outlined above.