A new thread on "Harvest & remove" statutes/laws

Tom_in_CA

Elite Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2013
Messages
20,636
Hey gang, we've all seen md'ing hobbyist forum threads, where the legality of md'ing at various places is discussed. And/or someone posts about getting a "no" or a "scram" or whatever. All of the pro's and con's of this subject are not new to md'ing forums.

But I would like to bring up one aspect of it :

Every single park or beach or forest (every speck of public land) has rules that ...... in some form or fashion .... forbid removing things, harvesting, stealing, theft, of park features. Right ? So that, of course, no numbskull thinks he can take home the park benches. Or show up with heavy equipment to start removing truck loads of sand or tan bark to sell commercially. Or to cut down the trees for firewood, and so forth. Right ?

Yet none of us thinks these statutes apply to our actions of "removing" (aka harvesting, stealing, taking) coins.

HOWEVER, I have read threads where ....... if a governing body is wondering whether or not to allow md'ing (or whether or not to "scram" an md'r they see), they HAVE INDEED used this rationale to conclude that md'ing is wrong. They do indeed consider the coin in the ground to be a "park feature".

Granted, it's probably only occurring when someone has made it a "pressing issue" in need of "pressing attention" . Like: Someone coming in and swatting hornet's nests asking permission. As if permission were even needed. But on other occasions, I've heard of it being the rationale for a "scram". (Perhaps only because the matter crossed that person's desk on a prior occasion, so now he/she subsequently scrams other people after that ?)

In any event, it has indeed been the rationale for some no's and/or scrams.

What do you think ? Does coins in the ground constitute "park features" that we are not to be removing ? Even if "no one cares" or you "got a yes", that could simply mean the question hasn't been formed right . For example, if you pointed out that statute and then asked "Can I remove things ?", they would, of course, say "no". Thus to say "can I metal detect" is sort of mincing words. Because, technically, I suppose they could say yes you can detect, but no you can't take anything.

Example: A buddy of mine, who was a newbie at the time (so he simply didn't know any better) pulled up to a ranger station kiosk to pay his campground entry fee. And asked the clerk "Is it ok if I metal detect?". The confused clerk hee'd and haw'd and was thinking of what answer she would give. Then she concluded : "Well, the rules say no removing objects, so I guess the answer is no".

When my friend told me this encounter at the kiosk, I thought : "Gee, if that's the necessary conclusion of that type verbiage, then we can summarily conclude that every speck of public land is off-limits. Since, of course, such language exists everywhere." Eh ?

Yet, the last I checked, the forums are FILLED with md'rs with show & tell from public parks. Are we all just miscreant law-breakers ? :laughing:
 
What do you think ? Does coins in the ground constitute "park features" that we are not to be removing ?
(OP's words edited for brevity)
********************************************************

Strictly speaking, by the statute's wording, yes they are.
That being said, by any stretch of the imagination, common sense, or just plain visual inspection, I see no sense in claiming that any object buried in the ground and invisible to the naked eye, can be construed as a "feature" of a public-owned grounds whether a neighborhood park, or a federally protected site, such as the battlefield at Gettysburg. There was no knowledge of anything with any remote sense of value in the ground at the time that the local park was "commissioned", and the same applies to federally protected sites. There might have been reasonable suspicion that there was something with either intrinsic or historical value in the area, but to arbitrarily call it a "feature" is a real stretch.
Now, saying that, it seems to me that National parks such as the Gettysburg battlefield should be quite welcoming to voluntary efforts to locate any historical object under the surface, as to leave it there eventually destroys the object. The park personnel would obviously have to escort each MD'er to ensure the unscrupulous wouldn't attempt to abscond with any of the finds, but that is logical foresight anyway.

Will this discussion change anything? Not likely, but the mental exercise is always a good thing.

Roger
 
.... Strictly speaking, by the statute's wording, yes they are....

Ok. So you, being a law-abiding citizen, will now cease metal detecting on public land. Right ? :laughing:

.... That being said, by any stretch of the imagination, common sense, or just plain visual inspection, I see no sense in claiming that any object buried in the ground and invisible to the naked eye, can be construed as a "feature" ....

YES ! There is a BIG difference between the seated dime in the city museum display case versus the seated dime in the park turf. Right ? We all know that taking the dime from the museum would be "stealing". But none of us bats an eye about taking a seated dime from the park.

If .... strictly speaking ... there's no difference, then technically both would be stealing. Taking the dime from the park is no less stealing than taking the dime from the museum.

But of course we intuitively know there's a difference. Maybe not a technical difference, but a common-sense difference. Otherwise, we're all guilty of "theft". I do not define my hobby as "theft". And this example of the common-sense notion shown by this example, is the reason we do not construe our hobby as theft.
 
Tom I have a RECENT Story for you..

First off.. I am not one to ask permission in a State park.

About three weeks ago I went to Portland for my granddaughters 5th birthday and on the way home I saw a sign for a "Historic State Park".. I talked the wife into a little detour and we went the 7 miles to check it out.
This park was fully manned and even had a Museum. It seems that it was once a little town back in the 1860's that had been flooded out.
just outside the museum there was a VERY old barn and what was supposed to be an old blacksmiths shop and a little apple orchard.

I told myself "dang I would love to hunt this place." but like I said it was deemed "Historic".

Well on the way back to the car I stopped into the Museum and talked to the gentleman there and I casually asked if it was ok to Metal Detect in the park.. He said "Sure why not I have seen a few guys around here doing it".
I then asked if it was ok to hunt around the old barn and such and he gave me the green light. He then told me about an area of the park where the settlements were and said they were parceled out and even pulled out a Map of the parcels.. He said nothing was standing anymore but occasionally the moles push up something and people find things..

I was pretty much blown away that I had permission to hunt but didn't show it. On my way out the door I thanked him and told him if I found anything historic I would stop in to see him.

Well I hunted for about a half hour around the old barn and found only an Owl pendant.. it was old but not OLD. I also found a "What's It" down in the Orchard that I am going to do some electrolysis on and then I will post here for identification.

We then went down to where the old settlement was and found a few posts that had a Number of the parcel on them that were at least 10 acres each and there were probably 10 or so.
I chose one close to the parking and went to work. Really didn't find anything besides 5 wheat's all from the 30's - 50's.

Well the wife wanted to get back on the road as it was another 4+ hours home so I Vowed to come back at the end of this month for my other granddaughters 2nd birthday and will allot More time for the Settlement.

I guess my point of the story is if your feel that you MUST ask as in my case it being recognized as Historic then I felt I HAD to do it.
It also goes to show that it depends on the day, depends on who you ask and depends on the location.. Everyone's mileage will differ, so I think there is no true answer that fits in everyone's box.
 
Tom I have a RECENT Story for you..

First off.. I am not one to ask permission in a State park.

About three weeks ago I went to Portland for my granddaughters 5th birthday and on the way home I saw a sign for a "Historic State Park".. I talked the wife into a little detour and we went the 7 miles to check it out.
This park was fully manned and even had a Museum. It seems that it was once a little town back in the 1860's that had been flooded out.
just outside the museum there was a VERY old barn and what was supposed to be an old blacksmiths shop and a little apple orchard.

I told myself "dang I would love to hunt this place." but like I said it was deemed "Historic".

Well on the way back to the car I stopped into the Museum and talked to the gentleman there and I casually asked if it was ok to Metal Detect in the park.. He said "Sure why not I have seen a few guys around here doing it".
I then asked if it was ok to hunt around the old barn and such and he gave me the green light. He then told me about an area of the park where the settlements were and said they were parceled out and even pulled out a Map of the parcels.. He said nothing was standing anymore but occasionally the moles push up something and people find things..

I was pretty much blown away that I had permission to hunt but didn't show it. On my way out the door I thanked him and told him if I found anything historic I would stop in to see him.

Well I hunted for about a half hour around the old barn and found only an Owl pendant.. it was old but not OLD. I also found a "What's It" down in the Orchard that I am going to do some electrolysis on and then I will post here for identification.

We then went down to where the old settlement was and found a few posts that had a Number of the parcel on them that were at least 10 acres each and there were probably 10 or so.
I chose one close to the parking and went to work. Really didn't find anything besides 5 wheat's all from the 30's - 50's.

Well the wife wanted to get back on the road as it was another 4+ hours home so I Vowed to come back at the end of this month for my other granddaughters 2nd birthday and will allot More time for the Settlement.

I guess my point of the story is if your feel that you MUST ask as in my case it being recognized as Historic then I felt I HAD to do it.
It also goes to show that it depends on the day, depends on who you ask and depends on the location.. Everyone's mileage will differ, so I think there is no true answer that fits in everyone's box.

I know the place you are talking about. Whatever you do watch out, It is on the National Registry of Historic places. Keep an eye out for the State Parks Archaeologists.
 
.... depends on who you ask ....

I know the place you are talking about. Whatever you do watch out, ....

My thoughts exactly.

While getting a "yes" is noble, it does not show that "asking was a good thing". All it shows is : That you got lucky in the game of Russian Roulette.

Example: One time a guy here in CA told me he'd gotten permission to detect at a super sensitive historic monument site here in CA. He wanted me to join him on the maiden voyage hunt. I couldn't believe he'd gotten permission, since it was a sensitive historic monuments ! But he insisted that a "friend of a friend knew so & so who was on the flower committee board there, who had said it was ok", blah blah.

I didn't argue with the "permission", and we made the trek to the site :) Sure enough, after an hour or two, we came within view of some administrative offices. And sure enough, someone inside must've seen us. They came out to read us the riot act. My host tried to explain our "permission". The griper returned to their offices (apparently "making some calls to sort this out"). They returned to the field and ... of course .... told us our "permission" did not hold water. And thus was promptly revoked.

Oddly, the person scramming us didn't check our aprons for what we'd found up-to-that-point (a very valuable historic button !) It was just a polite scram, in-lieu of sorting out this supposed "permission".

Thus yes, when I read about So-Oregon-MD's experience, I figured he just got lucky on the Russian Roulette. And that the next passerby could just as equally revoke that. With harsh reprimands for getting permission under false pretenses, etc....

But .... hey .... I TOO never argue with a "yes". Even if the yes comes from the little girl on the swing-set, it's good enough for me ! :laughing:
 
.... Keep an eye out for the State Parks Archaeologists.

Haha. And if those lone type-individuals never happen-chanced by, at the times he was there, then ...... presto, his "permission" is golden up-to-then. Right ? He is under no obligation to go "seek clarification" from those archies ahead of time. Right ?

And if someone calls that "keeping an eye out for..." to be akin to "sneaking around", well gee ......... fine then ........ call it what you want :laughing:
 
My thoughts exactly.

While getting a "yes" is noble, it does not show that "asking was a good thing". All it shows is : That you got lucky in the game of Russian Roulette.

Tom, I too would not of "normally" asked permission.. but.. had I not.. I would of never even tried detecting there.. So I had nothing to lose really..

and after I got started I figured hey, if I later got a scram then at least I would of had some time detecting in, and at least I had the excuse of "Hey I ASKED" first.

As to the Archies.. It was a Sunday..
 
My thoughts exactly.

While getting a "yes" is noble, it does not show that "asking was a good thing". All it shows is : That you got lucky in the game of Russian Roulette.

Example: One time a guy here in CA told me he'd gotten permission to detect at a super sensitive historic monument site here in CA. He wanted me to join him on the maiden voyage hunt. I couldn't believe he'd gotten permission, since it was a sensitive historic monuments ! But he insisted that a "friend of a friend knew so & so who was on the flower committee board there, who had said it was ok", blah blah.

I didn't argue with the "permission", and we made the trek to the site :) Sure enough, after an hour or two, we came within view of some administrative offices. And sure enough, someone inside must've seen us. They came out to read us the riot act. My host tried to explain our "permission". The griper returned to their offices (apparently "making some calls to sort this out"). They returned to the field and ... of course .... told us our "permission" did not hold water. And thus was promptly revoked.

Oddly, the person scramming us didn't check our aprons for what we'd found up-to-that-point (a very valuable historic button !) It was just a polite scram, in-lieu of sorting out this supposed "permission".

Thus yes, when I read about So-Oregon-MD's experience, I figured he just got lucky on the Russian Roulette. And that the next passerby could just as equally revoke that. With harsh reprimands for getting permission under false pretenses, etc....

But .... hey .... I TOO never argue with a "yes". Even if the yes comes from the little girl on the swing-set, it's good enough for me ! :laughing:

Damn Tom, sniping that government employees private hunting ground!
 
Our group had permission for a sports complex. The permission was revoked because someone dug circular patches of sod out that got sucked into the mower this past week.
 
Using this verbiage the other direction, does this also apply to littering? Someone throws their gum wrapper on the ground, don't pick that up since you are stealing from the park. Better get permission to pick up those empty pop cans after the kids B-day party (scrappers beware) what about those needles the junkies leave behind?. Can the people who dropped those coins and rings in a park be fined for littering? Sounds like you can flip this any direction you like. :?:
 
Tom, I too would not of "normally" asked permission.. but.. had I not.. I would of never even tried detecting there.. So I had nothing to lose really..

and after I got started I figured hey, if I later got a scram then at least I would of had some time detecting in, and at least I had the excuse of "Hey I ASKED" first.

As to the Archies.. It was a Sunday..

Loved your post So-oregon :) As I had said: I never argue with a "yes". And you're right : There's some places where that is the ONLY way to proceed to hunt them (d/t fences or whatever). And then ... yes .... even if the source of the "yes" is dubious, I don't question it. And even if it means being .... uh ... discreet, then yes .......... I'll be ... uh .... discreet. Problem solved.
 
Using this verbiage the other direction, does this also apply to littering? Someone throws their gum wrapper on the ground, don't pick that up since you are stealing from the park. ....


Watch out T-man, you're talking common sense here man !! :laughing:
 
Wait What? Ya mean to tell me those nice park benches are off limits?...or the tennis nets and picnic tables?? Well thats a bummer!...OK then..As long as I can still dismantle and haul off the aluminum bleacher sections every so often for scrap, and the brass irrigation valves, and some chains off a swingset every now and then...for the good of protecting the image of this Sport, I will henceforth comply...

Thats some nice chain though, and the benches, and the picnic tables...well, there goes a good portion of my Park Hunting finds right down the crapper! Speaking of which, I bet I could get $50 for a nice clean portapotty!..I'll need to procure myself a trailer though, maybe I can find one of those left unattended over by the Maintenance shed?...Is that OK?
 
.......Is that OK?

It is every bit as "ok" as removing the coins.

If you doubt the parallel logic, you and I can get on the phone with some lawyers and city-personnel. And I'm sure they would agree that there's no difference. A "park feature" is a "park feature" is a "park feature". Whether it be the aluminum bleachers, or the tennis nets, or the mercury dime you just took.

How can you be so cruel mud-puppy ? How could you possibly be in a hobby where the inherent implicit function is for nothing other than "theft" ? Sssheeesskk. What's next ? Clubbing baby seals ?? :wow:
 
In my city all the parks are ran by the park board. I was detecting 1 of those parks when I was approached by some groundskeepers telling me I can’t. I knew different but they were sure about it. I politely told them different but they disagreed.

Next thing you know we’re on the phone with the main office, I got permission and the groundskeepers were told not to worry about it as long as holes are filled properly.

That gave me official permission for 15 parks. And yes it’s in the books as legal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
.... I got permission and the groundskeepers were told not to worry about it as long as holes are filled properly.

That gave me official permission for 15 parks. And yes it’s in the books as legal...

In terms of the subject of this thread, me thinks that your situation was merely a matter of "asking the wrong questions" and "talking to the wrong (or should I say ... right) people.

For example, if you were to give me the name of that city and park. And if I were to study the rules/laws for that city and parks, I bet I can find something that forbids harvest & remove and theft. Right ?

If I were to ask enough higher-up-bureaucrats in that city: "Is it ok for LOS3R to be removing park features, for his own profit ?", I'll bet I could find someone to say that you can't do that. Like as if ... sure you can detect (as long as you fill holes). But no you can't take anything. But for a mere $100 (I accept paypal) , I can be persuaded not to ask that question to your city people. Ok ? :cool3:

As an example of this, there has been actual humorous cases where some entity gives an express "allowance" or "permit" to detect. But then humorously has the fine print that any items of value are to be turned in to the city or at the kiosk. Hmmmm.

The permit for NYC parks was an example of this. And after a few years, some city personnel were asked if anything had been turned in (old coins, rings, etc...). The city person could only recall a token item or two. Hmmm, I guess none of those NYC park hunters were finding anything of value, eh ? :laughing:
 
To be fair, yes you would find that in the code. But after talking to the board and they looked it up. It is also in the code allowing metal detecting. The board also agreed with the code.

Nothing says anything about turning stuff in. Every city has their own books though.

2 cities over only allows detecting in certain parks, and state parks are off limits here all together except sanded swimming areas. I hear some states allow it though to a degree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom