Another place lost.

[fleahillokie]

Went by this morning to pick up a permit at the park office. Nice lady said as of Jan. ; Oklahoma State Parks does not allow detecting in state parks. Frustrating!

 

[cellrdwellr]

Plenty of public parks though right?

 

[metaladdict]

Went by this morning to pick up a permit at the park office. Nice lady said as of Jan. ; Oklahoma State Parks does not allow detecting in state parks. Frustrating!

I won't be moving to Oklahoma.
Actually you can only detect state park beaches in Ca as long as they have no history.

 

[hoser]

Thats too bad. Seems like more and more good sites are getting the door slammed on them. I know there are some bad apples out there that hurt the detecting community and it sad that its exactly what the people in charge hone in on. They don't see what good the the real detectorists do to improve the grounds they hunt on. I suspect we all have hauled out a ton of trash from public land. I guess it boils down to an old saying I had on my tool box at work. "Doing a good job around here is like wetting your pants in a dark suit. You get a warm feeling but nobody notices"

 

[fleahillokie]

The political apointees who make these decisions are so far removed from normal life that they have no idea what we do; and most importantly; they really dont care.

 

[kidlester]

I know how you feel.
Tom

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Went by this morning to pick up a permit at the park office. Nice lady said as of Jan. ; Oklahoma State Parks does not allow detecting in state parks. Frustrating!

This story ^^ is an oft-repeated story : Places that used to have "permits" for this, will often time mysteriously just yank them, and discontinue the process, at some random time in the future.

And the reason is quite simple ! It's because the MERE FACT that it something that is "permitted" (as opposed to merely silent on the subject), means that it's perpetually always on their radar. Ie.: something that has to be administered, passed out, factored for, etc.... And then sure as sh#t, one day, someone in bureaucracy is one day gonna say : "Gee, do we really want all these yahoos out digging in the park ?" or "Gee, doesn't this harm cultural heritage?".

So they will give the reason as "holes" or "archie concerns". And we md'rs will mutter under our breaths "durned them guys that must've left holes" or "durned them archies". But these were NEVER THE REASONS IN THE FIRST PLACE ! Those are just the "go to" reasons, to justify something they decided not to bother with.

Thus permits are NOT A GOOD THING ! Yet for some odd reason, md'rs seem to think they're wonderful. Giving a mental image of being able to "detect nilly willy" blah blah. But as this oft-repeated story shows, they are NOT a good thing. It's just one more method by which you and I are now perpetually on their radar as something they need to think about.

We do NOT need nor want permits. Instead it is MUCH BETTER to simply be silent on the subject. And : The LESS that pencil pushers think of us, the BETTER.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Actually you can only detect state park beaches in Ca as long as they have no history.

Actually ... No. This isn't accurate. There is no over-arching state of CA park's dept rule that says "no md'ing". If you can point to any, they are for *just* specific ones . And those "specific ones" would be those that are either A) obvious historic sensitive monument themed ones, or B) Ones where past md'rs (bless their little hearts) went in swatting hornet's nests.


And actually, if someone CAN find something in CA state parks that they *think* means "no md'ing", then believe it or not, the SAME THING would apply to state-of-CA owned beaches. Because : It is the EXACT SAME PARK'S DEPT. that administers each one. So technically any rule you can find for in-land parks, there's no reason it wouldn't also apply to state of CA beaches. There's nothing at all you can find that exempts the latter.

It's simply become a non-issue. It's just never been enforced. MD'rs have been a common site on state of CA beaches since the 1960s or whatever. So : it's just deemed ok. But there's no technical reason why that is so. In fact, if you went to Sacramento asking enough "clarification questions", to enough state of CA staff archies, you will indeed find someone to tell you that you can't detect the beaches either. Yet the *reality* is, that you can detect state of CA beaches till you're blue in the face. And you will be hard-pressed to find anyone that cares. And : BEST THAT IT IS LEFT THAT WAY !

I have detected inland state parks without issue here. As long as you're not on an obvious historic monument, or waltzing over beach blankets at an archie convention, or somehow being obnoxious or leaving holes, etc.... If there are any examples of persons being scrammed from benign state parks here (ie.: rangers who are appraised and bothered about this), then : I have a sneaking suspicion of why that ranger "cares" or is "appraised".

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....... I know there are some bad apples out there that hurt the detecting community and it sad that its exactly what the people in charge hone in on....

Yup. Just as I predicted. That md'rs will mutter under their breath "durned those guys that must've left holes"

But no, that's not the reason for the "door slamming" . And if that is the justification given (if any of us were to ask "why ?"), then that's merely the go-to-reason. SIMPLY BECAUSE THAT'S THE MENTAL CONNOTATION of the image of a "man with a metal detector". It doesn't necessarily mean that anyone actually saw any holes.

This is nothing other than the perpetual "being on their radar", since this place had an express permit. So it's always "front & center " for their consideration. And then ... sure enough .... one year it's yanked entirely. Hence much better that it had simply been silent on the subject (hence: Not prohibited). We do NOT need NOR want "express allowance" (permits). Instead, the LESS they think of us, the better.

 

[hoser]

Yeah unfortunately that's true Tom. And in the long run we are still left with no recourse. It is what it is I guess.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...It is what it is I guess.

And the best thing to PREVENT those things that are "is", is for us md'rs to stop being our own worst enemy. And to : Stop "swatting hornets' nests" with our perpetual notion that we-must-grovel, and we-need-permits mentalities.

 

[hoser]

Oh, I don't grovel. But I'm too old to outrun someone too. I would rather just call it "my comfort level". I really hate trying to detect and keep looking over my shoulder every minute. And I'm also content knowing NO means NO. But hey, that's just me.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Oh, I don't grovel. But I'm too old to outrun someone too. I would rather just call it "my comfort level". I really hate trying to detect and keep looking over my shoulder every minute. And I'm also content knowing NO means NO. But hey, that's just me.

Haha, the notion to need to "outrun" or "looking over one's shoulder" merely assumes that you're doing something wrong *in the first place* . Says who ? Since when ? If there's no rule or law that *specifically* says "no md'ing", then : No need to run or look over ones shoulder.

This is also why I wince when I see the old adage : "better to ask forgiveness than permission" (as if that was my stance). But again, this merely presumes you're doing something wrong. Says who ? Since when ?

It's notions like this (that we assume we're doing something wrong, or need to run) that merely DRIVE THE ENGINE THAT MERELY BECOMES SELF-FULFILLING ! And ironically, when you "act like you own the place", it turns out that : No one ever gave 2 sh#ts about your or I. It's only when we display the evasive demeanor that you hint at, that THEN it becomes self-fulfilling.

 

[Cfmct]

Went by this morning to pick up a permit at the park office. Nice lady said as of Jan. ; Oklahoma State Parks does not allow detecting in state parks. Frustrating!

Question did they update the laws? I ask because of this:

• 2 laws regulate the hobby – I am talking here about the Archaeological Resources Prevention Act and Antiquities Act of 1906.
• Both of these laws were designed to protect American artifacts and historical monuments. It states that it is illegal to remove or destroy any human-made object, which has been buried for more than 100 years.
• You are not allowed to detect in state-owned parks unless you have a permit from the park management
• You cannot detect or dig up the remains of a historical monument without permission. Even if you detect with permission, and find anything of historical value, it will be taken up by the archaeological department
• Exploring a private property is allowed with the prior consent of the landowner
• 
  
• https://detectingschool.com/metal-detecting-in-oklahoma/

 

[metaladdict]

Actually ... No. This isn't accurate. There is no over-arching state of CA park's dept rule that says "no md'ing". If you can point to any, they are for *just* specific ones . And those "specific ones" would be those that are either A) obvious historic sensitive monument themed ones, or B) Ones where past md'rs (bless their little hearts) went in swatting hornet's nests.


And actually, if someone CAN find something in CA state parks that they *think* means "no md'ing", then believe it or not, the SAME THING would apply to state-of-CA owned beaches. Because : It is the EXACT SAME PARK'S DEPT. that administers each one. So technically any rule you can find for in-land parks, there's no reason it wouldn't also apply to state of CA beaches. There's nothing at all you can find that exempts the latter.

It's simply become a non-issue. It's just never been enforced. MD'rs have been a common site on state of CA beaches since the 1960s or whatever. So : it's just deemed ok. But there's no technical reason why that is so. In fact, if you went to Sacramento asking enough "clarification questions", to enough state of CA staff archies, you will indeed find someone to tell you that you can't detect the beaches either. Yet the *reality* is, that you can detect state of CA beaches till you're blue in the face. And you will be hard-pressed to find anyone that cares. And : BEST THAT IT IS LEFT THAT WAY !

I have detected inland state parks without issue here. As long as you're not on an obvious historic monument, or waltzing over beach blankets at an archie convention, or somehow being obnoxious or leaving holes, etc.... If there are any examples of persons being scrammed from benign state parks here (ie.: rangers who are appraised and bothered about this), then : I have a sneaking suspicion of why that ranger "cares" or is "appraised".

Tom, you know in state parks the rules say no disturbing anything or removing anything so I would like to see you detecting in a state park. But unless it has history then you will find nothing there anyway. Haven't you ever been asked to leave by the ranger? I have, many times.

 

[SirFrancesDrake]

Went by this morning to pick up a permit at the park office. Nice lady said as of Jan. ; Oklahoma State Parks does not allow detecting in state parks. Frustrating!

Ive been running into this sort of thing a lot since i moved back to VA from Puerto Rico. Everyday it seems the metal detecting world gets smaller and smaller.

 

[hoser]

At least Michigan still allows detecting in most of their state parks. Five or six totally open. About a third closed to detecting, and the rest open in specific areas.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Tom, you know in state parks the rules say no disturbing anything or removing anything ....

Huh ? If that ^^ automatically means "no md'ing", then : No, that's not just "state parks". That's EVERY SINGLE PARK anywhere. On ANY PUBLIC LEVEL. Ie.: All city parks, all county parks too. Because rest-assured : Boiler plate verbiage like that exists on every speck of public land. Going by various terms/words like : "alter", "deface", "destroy", "disturb", etc....

And as for "removing", that is also known as "harvest", "collect", "remove", "steal", etc... Yet look around, and you'll see that md'ing is common place in parks, forests, beaches, etc.....

I do not deny that : Yes, all such words *COULD* be construed to apply to us. Granted. But why do we assume they *must* apply, until given a green-light to the contrary ?

Also , as far as the "disturbing" language, here's something to think about: All such verbiage refers to the end result. Right ? So if you've left no trace of your effort (cover, stomped, and fluffed up), then presto : You have not alterED or disturbED, or defacED anything . Now have you ? Will every last nosy-parker agree with those semantics ? Of course not. Ok, fine : Go at lower traffic times and avoid those singular kill-joys. Presto, problem solved.

I'm not denying that I wouldn't prefer "red carpets to be rolled out for me". But the devil is in the details : If we md'rs go asking "can I ?" questions (grovelling as if we're about to do something evil, that needs their princely say-so), then we run the risk of the "No one cared.... UNTIL you asked" phenomenon.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... Everyday it seems the metal detecting world gets smaller and smaller.

And I have a sneaking suspicion why

 

[metaladdict]

Huh ? If that ^^ automatically means "no md'ing", then : No, that's not just "state parks". That's EVERY SINGLE PARK anywhere. On ANY PUBLIC LEVEL. Ie.: All city parks, all county parks too. Because rest-assured : Boiler plate verbiage like that exists on every speck of public land. Going by various terms/words like : "alter", "deface", "destroy", "disturb", etc....

And as for "removing", that is also known as "harvest", "collect", "remove", "steal", etc... Yet look around, and you'll see that md'ing is common place in parks, forests, beaches, etc.....

I do not deny that : Yes, all such words *COULD* be construed to apply to us. Granted. But why do we assume they *must* apply, until given a green-light to the contrary ?

Also , as far as the "disturbing" language, here's something to think about: All such verbiage refers to the end result. Right ? So if you've left no trace of your effort (cover, stomped, and fluffed up), then presto : You have not alterED or disturbED, or defacED anything . Now have you ? Will every last nosy-parker agree with those semantics ? Of course not. Ok, fine : Go at lower traffic times and avoid those singular kill-joys. Presto, problem solved.

I'm not denying that I wouldn't prefer "red carpets to be rolled out for me". But the devil is in the details : If we md'rs go asking "can I ?" questions (grovelling as if we're about to do something evil, that needs their princely say-so), then we run the risk of the "No one cared.... UNTIL you asked" phenomenon.

So what you are saying is you only hunt at night.