Tom_in_CA

Good to see some CA action.

WWaaaahhh, you east coast guys have all the luck.   Old colonial stuff to chase.   Sick sick sick.

Congratulations on the MD'rs holy grail "hole in one".   A gold coin.  You are now officially a "stud-muffin" :)     Welcome to the club.

R.I.P.    I remember,  back in the '70s,  when they were "all the rage ".    😞

1 hour ago, GaryC/Oregon Coast said:

In Oregon permits are a fact of life.  They are woven into the fabric of local clubs with city, county, state jurisdictions.  Coming from California I have been a low profile hunter like so many others are here.  Not asking a lot of questions while doing my hobby unless of course when it's on private or cultural land.  Well that doesn't work here.  You are going to be asked to see your permit some where some day, guaranteed!  It's even worse being on the coast.  You can hunt in "selected" State parks, only on the off season for tourists, with a permit.  That leaves you the winter months.  I'll take that but does put a damper on things a bit.  I'm 60 miles from Eugene, they require you to have a city permit and you can't get it online.  You have to go in person every year to the City Hall.  Haven't done that yet, but mean to every year.  Then every county up and down the coast requires a permit some online some not.  At least the beaches belong to the public.  High tide line to low tide line you are good.  I've been here three years and still haven't learned all the ins and outs of this goofy state yet when it comes to my chosen hobby and the right to pursue it.  GaryC/Oregon Coast

Gary, I'm willing to bet that every single one of the seemingly burdensome hurdles you list, was ONLY a function of past md'rs who went and swatted hornet's nests.   And I'm willing to bet that if I went asking enough questions here in CA, that I too could likewise come up with all sorts of silly supposed restrictions as well.   Well durned that Tom_in_CA (and the rest of us here) for "not asking enough questions".  Doh !

52 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

All I know is in 45 years of detecting I’ve not had any issue of genuine consequence. I actually had a gal a few weeks ago loudly get my attention to tell me I can’t dig in parks. I politely told her yes ma’am, I can, I have a parks permit in my wallet that says so, would you like to see it? She apologized and that was that. I actually like having a permit as it removes confrontation instantly. I will never ask a government type as they usually do not know the rules and no is always a safe answer. 99% of the time I Google for restrictions, and if I find nothing online I use common sense and am discreet. If challenged, I am not going to make a big I know my rights scene, I’ll just quietly go away and either come back later or go somewhere else. The main secret is try to pick times and places when people watching rare at the minimum possible number for the location. I try to be invisible, and it’s worked real well for me.

Steve, we've been detecting about the same amount of time :  Since our teenage years.  I too started in the mid to late 1970s, as a pimple faced teenager.  And since then, have become about AS BRAZEN as they come.  Balls of steel and no scruples.   And like yourself, have never had any legal consquences.   Oh sure, some scrams or stink -eyes now and then.    Ok, so  what.

As far as "permits" (for the very very rare times that any city has ever dreamed up such a thing) :  Yes I know that sounds romantic and inviting.   It conjurs up images of being able to detect nilly willy and deflect busy-bodies, eh ?   Hence who could ever argue with "permits", eh ?   But notice that any time any city ever dreamed up such a thing, they tend to be fraught with sillyness.   Eg.:  Digger tool shall not exceed 3" in length.  Or "not within 10 ft. of any tree".  Or "turn in all valuables to the city hall office".  Or "yes but you can't dig".  Or "on sandy beaches only".  blah blah blah.

And worse yet, you'll notice that some cities that ever dreamed up such  a thing, simply revoke them, and disallow it entirely a few years or decades later . WHY ?  Because the mere fact that it's a "permit", means it's just ONE MORE THING on their radar to monitor.   Eg.: each year, when reviewing their list of administered functions, then sure as sh*t, one year, someone's gonna look at this and say "Gee, do we really want all these yahoos out there digging up the park ?".   And then simply revoke it.  

Hence it's MUCH more preferable to be "silent on the subject" (not addressed either way).   Ie.: the LESS they think of us, the better.  Not the "more " they think of us.

3 hours ago, ketchneddy said:

I found this when I was trying to figure out where it was ok to detect. I can't verify the accuracy so do your homework, but hopefully it's helpful to someone.

http://www.mdhtalk.org/cf/city-regulation.cfm?st=NV

 

ketchneddy, read what I posted to D-dancer about sites/links like this.

4 hours ago, Mike Hillis said:

.... but you have to check in at the local office and find out what sections are open and what sections are not.   Wilderness area's areas are typically open but Federal Forrest Lands are not without expressed written permission.   ...

Mike, this brings up an interesting twist on the subject :   The issue of "Commentary" vs "law".  Let me explain :

There's been a lot of those nifty compendiums , where someone from up-top tosses out:  "with permission" , or "inquire at each kiosk you come to", etc....   Ie.: not unlike what you're saying here.    And this pithy saying may in fact be coming from some authority in the given agency.  Thus:  Pretty hard to argue with that, eh ?   BUT WAIT :   Notice that it's not in the rules or laws.  Ie.: there's not a codified chapter and verse you can turn  to.   So what it REALLY is, is nothing-more-than some sort of answer, that someone  passed out in the past to an md'r who was asking "Can I?" type questions.    Eg.:  like on an FAQ or whatever.   

And I don't disagree that the powers-that-be can indeed say "scram" or "no".   I mean, sure, they are given the discretion to decide that something  you or I  are doing isn't safe or whatever.  So for example, they can ask  you to turn down your boom box if the music is too loud.   Ie.: they have latitude to interpret the grey-area verbiage to keep law and order.   Therefore, if you ever asked them something like : "Can I throw rocks" or "Can I collect sticks", they can say "As long as the park ranger at that location says it's ok", or "with permission from the ranger on duty", etc....    And then every md'r, from then on out, thinks "I must get the personal thumbs up ".

For example, this knee-jerk answer was very common in R.W. Doc Grim's book.   Many of the states said "with permission" or "inquire at each park", etc.... Yet when you went to look up to see where this was written, IT WAS NO WHERE TO BE FOUND.   All it was , was commentary, not law.  And notice that the commentary DIDN'T EVEN EXIST till R.W. Doc (bless his little heart) sent in his inquiries.   All it was/is , is a tacit admission that, sure, they have the say-so to administer as they see fit.   But that DOESN'T mean you  need their approval ahead of time (if not specifically forbidden).  It only means they can tell you "stop", if someone thought it was harmful etc...   So for example, I don't need to  inquire ahead of time if it's ok to  fly frisbees (might poke someone's eye out).   But sure:  They can approach me and say "stop flying frisbees " if they wanted.

Anyhow, this is the difference between commentary and laws.

9 hours ago, kac said:

Aren't a lot of areas down south banned from digging due to their Civil War significance?

I have a feeling that there's not a single city in the entire USA, that if you were to walk into city hall and say :  "Hello, can I take historically significant items from the park please ?" that you'd get a "Sure, go ahead" answer.

So while I agree that there's certain cities and certain parts of the USA that are , yes, more historically significant, yet :   There's not a single city anywhere that would answer "yes" to  the above question.   It would fall under prohibitions of "harvest and collect and remove" wording.   Or cultural heritage wording.   So  to whatever extent what you are saying could be true for certain cities of higher-historic-significance, yet I'll bet that the only reason it ever came on the radar of pencil-pushing lawmakers, is we md'rs, of the past, who went in swatting hornet's nests.  Or were doing something stupid like showing up at high traffic times during archie conventions, and waltzing over beach blankets with their detectors. 

18 hours ago, GB_Amateur said:

.....  I don't recall anyone speaking up contradicting that when it did come up previously, but I might have missed that part of the thread. ....

And this is the inherent ingredient that always occurs in these type news items :  If ever a supposed law, or something negative legally about us is tossed out there for consumption, then it's just human nature to fear it.   And human nature to "pass it on".   And human nature to believe it ("lest you get arrested" blah blah)

Here's an example of the psychology at work:  Consider shark attacks.  Very very rare.   Perhaps only a single person got chomped in all of the USA in a given year.   Yet thousands of people swim daily.  Ok, you tell me:  If 1000 people swam in a day, and none got chomped, then there'd be no headline.   But if a SINGLE person got chomped on a SINGLE day of a year, then it makes the front page news.  And then guess what you'll fear and warn others about, the next time you go to the beach ?   And you'll subconsciously disregard the  million to one odds that you're totally safe to swim.

Actually, that's probably not even a good illustration.  Since in the case of the TN archie, he wasn't even correct in the first place (ie.: there was no shark attack to fit this analogy ).   But I'm just trying to point out how people subconsciously latch on to bad news, and remember only that.  And do nothing to see if it's true, lest they be "throwing caution to the wind" and "better safe than sorry", blah blah.  So we tend to never question this stuff.  

18 hours ago, 2Valen said:

Yes it is and if I have time to go to a couple of towns I will get you a copy of it.

 

And I have a sneaking suspicion of how those came-to-be .   Care to take a guess ?  And no, it wasn't "because someone must've left holes".

On 6/17/2020 at 12:16 PM, GB_Amateur said:

....   Again, I could be misinterpreting what 'state parks' mean.  I've always used it in reference to parks that the state operates, not parks operated by other government agencies -- particularly municipalities.

You are not mistaken.  But this is a mistake that is made over and over and over again, especially by newbies.  They pick up on a list like that, or the FMDAC list, etc....   And find something dire about their state's park.  And make the mistaken jump to think that means "all parks in their state".  IT DOESN'T.  It only means state parks, not other entity parks.

Also, I have my doubts about some of the info spelled out  about state parks too.   On some of them, that appear to be a "no", if you delve deeper , you see no such *specific* rule that truly says such a thing.  Instead it might point to  cultural heritage, for example.  Ok fine, you're  only looking for new coins and/or  the ring your  wife lost last week.  RIGHT  ?  Or nuggets or meteors,  etc...  Or it might point to harvest/collect or alter/deface.  Which tells you what ?  That someone went  swatting hornet's nests years ago and got this 'pressing answer'.

In CA, for example,  some of the listings I've read do sound dire.  Yet , for example,  you can hunt state beaches here (which are administered by the EXACT SAME STATE PARK'S Dept.) till  you're blue in the face.   Moral of the story  ? :  We leave "good enough alone".  And I  hope to h*ll that no one ever goes "seeking clarification".

6 hours ago, phd_angel said:

..... I just came across the U.S map of state legislations at mdhtalk.org......

my opinion of compendiums such as that, was spelled out  in my reply to D-dancer.  Sometimes you can take them with a grain of salt, and must read between the lines.   A little knowledge about how they were assembled in the first place, sheds light  on how worried you need to be about some of that info.

On 6/17/2020 at 7:47 AM, GB_Amateur said:

I wonder if we're seeing the East/West effect native gold detectorists know all too well -- land East of the Rockies is basically private and public properties (meaning parks and forests) tightly restricted. 

I've only hunted the east coast states a single time.   But I have a couple of friends here, who annually fly into the east coast, and get a rental car.  And then proceed to randomly drive around scores of east coast colonial age cities.  Eg. Rhode Island, NY, Vermont, MA, CT, MH, etc.....   And hit any and  all old parks and courthouse lawns , in all the small towns that they come to.  And unless there's a glaring sign that said "no md'ing", they do not hesitate to hit any and all parks they come to.

Oh sure,  they have the 'presence of mind' not to go at high traffic times,  begging for attention.  But  in all their years of doing this,  can recall only a time or two being told "scram" (yeah yeah, that can happen anywhere).

So based on their accounts, I don't think it's any more difficult to hunt east coast parks as it is to  hunt west coast parks.  If I'm wrong, and it's more clamped down there,  then I have a sneaking suspicion of how that came to be.  Care to take a guess ?

On 6/17/2020 at 7:47 AM, GB_Amateur said:

.......  I've heard of parks where detecting is allowed but digging isn't!  Others restrict the size & shape of recovery tools, which is a fair compromise, IMO.  I seem to recall a post here a while back saying that it's a state law in Tennessee that metal detecting is forbidden on public properties. ...

GB-amateur,  I got news for you :  ALL parks disallow "digging".  It might use the word "dig."  Or might use alter and deface.  Or destroy or mutilate, etc...  Yet guess what ?  :  MD'ing, as you know, is common place in parks all across the USA.   Do you think all those md'rs are lawless miscreants ?   So my suspicion of how  any such "yes but you can't dig" type rule came to be, was someone in the past that went swatting hornet's nests with "Can I ?" questions.  

As for the Tennessee thing:   That has long since been debunked.   But , as shown by your repeating it, just goes to show how bad news never dies, but good news never gets off the ground.   Here's what happened , and how it spread, and how it was debunked years ago :

a)  Some purist university archie in Tennessee (who hates md'rs) was interviewed or wrote an article or something, and claimed that md'ing was illegal in all of Tennessee

b) Some sincere well-meaning skittish md'rs , from Tennessee, picked up on that news piece, & got all up in arms worried about this.  And went to 1) spread the news on a lot of md'ing forums, to  likewise get all sorts of other  TN md'rs panties in wads as well.   And 2) who all went "seeking clarifications" (after all, you "don't want to get arrested, eh ?).   And 3) forming solidarities to fight this, blah blah.   Which made this info spread like wild-fire.  The more people  chimed in, then the more people  saw it, then  the more forums it showed up on , etc...

c)  BUT GUESS WHAT ?   That originating kernel of supposed info. was flawed IN THE FIRST PLACE.  Here's why :  That  purist archie, had made his comment based on ARPA.  And tennets of the trinomial archie system (eg.: historic monuments that get an archie # assigned to them) .  He just assumed that since ARPA is federal, that it therefore subrogates down to  lower level states, counties, and cities.   BUT THIS ISN'T TRUE.   And same for  the trinomial archie # system  of locations:  THAT ONLY APPLIES TO JUST THOSE SPOTS.  Not the "entire state".   In other  words, the "entire state of TN" is not an "archaeological spot", as this guy would have you believe.  I mean, go figure, he's a purist archie.  So OF COURSE they couch anything they say in the most dire terms.

So the guy was plain wrong.   But here's the rub:  Guess what happens when enough  md'rs "get their panties in a wad" and worry and seek clarification on this ?  Then sure as heck, this "pressing question" keeps appearing on bureaucrat's desks to answer.  And  then guess what ?   See the vicious self-fulfilling circle ?   It's as if we md'rs can be our own worst enemies 😞

On 6/17/2020 at 7:13 AM, DDancer said:

What the others say I'm pretty much in agreement with 🙂  But legality is a fine line.  For example here in NC there are a lot of restrictions and whole counties where detecting is illegal unless its private properties.  Here's  a link I found useful on legalities, this page is for NC but they have other states and localities.  One thing of note is many restrictions rest on the Antiquities Act as the catch all for no detecting.  Generally if I'm quite, clean and pick quite times of the day I can get a little detecting done.  Big thing is if asked to leave, even if you are in the right, do so.  Plenty of places to have a swing.

http://www.mdhtalk.org/cf/city-regulation.cfm?st=NC

D-Dancer, Re.: your link and post :  There is a lot of info. to un-pack and clarify.   For starters, me thinks you're confusing county  level info, to mean "all land within a county".  Or state info to mean "all land within the state", etc.....   But it doesn't work like that.   Instead, an answer coming from the county would only apply to county land (like county parks).  And have nothing to do with state, fed, or city lands.   And same for something that the state says.   That would only apply to state parks, and not other governmental entity forms of land.

Also, those nifty  compendium sites, like in your link, have a BIG "devil in the details".  Any time anyone has ever tried to make a one-stop-shopping compendium  like that, they are always fraught with "gotchas".   In a few cases, sure, they might point you to a specific rule.  Ok.  But if you read closely, a lot of the supposed "no's" you read, are merely someone's having asked "can I ?" in the past.  They get told  "no", and then it makes its way onto these nifty lists.   Yet is no where codified as such.

This psychology/phenomenon was made very clear when an author "R.W. Doc Grim" wrote a book in the mid 1980s (before the internet) called "Treasure Laws of the United States".  He attempted to make a compendium book, where all the states would be listed in alphabetic order, where users could simply turn to any given state, and see what the laws were for their state parks (hence it didn't deal with county or city level  parks).   And guess how the author went about getting his info to put in his book ?  SIMPLE:  He xeroxed off 50 copies of a letter , sent it to  each state capital heads of parks dept, asking : "What are the rules regarding the use of metal detectors in your state parks ?".  And  letting them know he was writing a book.   Then  he merely sat back and waited for 50 replies to fill his mail box.

Genius  idea, right ?  I mean, who better to ask, than the top-dog of each state park's parks after all, eh ?   And when  he got all his reply letters back, he printed them in his book, with their actual letterhead shown, etc....  So that if you were ever accosted by a busy-body, you could just show them right out of the book that it's ok , blah blah .  And conversely, if the answer was "no", then  you'd save yourself embarrassment, right ?   Genius  idea, right ?  

But a strange thing happened :  A lot of the states sent back confusing  replies.  Eg.: "No because of cultural heritage issues" (even though nothing specifically said 'no md'ing' ).  Or No because  of alter and deface verbiage.   Or no because of disturbing the wild-life.  Or no because  of rules that forbid harvest and collect.  Blah blah.  And oddly,  a lot of these answers were coming from states that, quite frankly,  had never been an issue before.  So you had old-timers sitting around scratching their heads saying "since when ?"

See how that works ?  It's the old "No one cared till you asked" routine.   And trust me:  The same phenomenon can be the originating kernals of info found on those nifty  links,  like the one you give.   So sometimes you need to take them with a grain of salt, or read between the lines.

On 6/16/2020 at 11:51 PM, 2Valen said:

You have not been to ILLINOIS, and yes several cities will not allow MD at parks or on city property.

I have already encountered that problem at a nearby city.

Couple of things to say to this 2-valen :   Is that an actual law/rule on the books (that truly says "no md'ing" ?).  Or was this a "no" answer you fetched when asking someone "Can I ?

If it IS true that there is laws/rules on the books, for their parks , that actually says "no md'ing", then I have a sneaking suspicion of how those came to be.   Care to take a guess ?   In a lot of those cases, if/when you are able to trace back to origins, guess what the usual originating kernel is ?   Yup, you  guessed it:  Someone going in and asking "Can I?" questions.   Thus someone in-power must "invent a rule to address the pressing issue."

In the entire state of CA, I can't think of a single city that has any specific rules.   And can  think of only 3 or 4 (in the entire state) that ever dreamed up a "permit".  And even in those locations, you NEVER get "carded".

On 6/16/2020 at 9:42 PM, 2Valen said:

There are different laws in every state, which state are you in and also check with the city you live in also.

Even cities can have their own laws and rules on metal detecting.

Do not confuse state-level laws, with anything to do with county or city level laws.  State rules would only apply to state parks. Not other entity level's parks.

And it is extremely rare for any cities to  have ever dreamed up a  "no md'ing " law.    Personally,  when I'm traveling around,  and pull into a new city,  I do not hesitate to hit any park I come to.    As long as it's not an obvious historic monument,  or unless there is a sign saying "no md'ing ".

On 6/16/2020 at 1:54 PM, kac said:

Public schools and parks are usually fair game but there may be restrictions. Checking with local PD or town hall may not hurt.

 

I would digress from this view.  It may in fact "hurt" to go asking-when-not-necessary.  If it were true , that there is "restrictions" (eg.: a law or rule that said "no md'ing"), then you would be able to look that up for yourself, if you are skittish.    Ie.: park rules and muni-codes are no secret in this digital age that we live in.   If you see nothing that says : "No md'ing", then presto:   It's not prohibited.

The problem with going and asking desk-jockeys is:  You run the risk of bumping into the "No one cared UNTIL you asked" psychology .  Eg.:  Someone envisions geeks with shovels, so they just give you the "safe" answer.  I've seen this happen countless times at places that, quite frankly,  had never been a problem prior to that.

And to be honest with you, it's actually very rare , on the city and county levels, to ever have a true "no md'ing" rule.  Instead what you might get the stink-eye for is that md'ing has ... uh .... "connotations".  That you might be about to alter or deface the turf.  Fine : Go at lower traffic times and avoid such kill-joy lookie-lous.   We're simply not going to please every last person on earth, and we don't need princely sanctions red-carpets rolled out for us.

2 hours ago, Tom Slick said:

Absolutely beautiful coin! Still waiting for my first after 45 years detecting. 😟

you are on the right side of the USA :  The western states.   

Study the "southern emigrant trail (aka Gila trail) that came through AZ.   Find the stop spots where they would have tended to "rally the wagons" and bedded down for the night.  Eg.: water holes, etc....   Then isolate that that have no modern influence (eg.: a town or modern ranch houses didn't sprout up on the spot, etc.... )    These would be spots where those persons who had packed up their life to head west, might have been packing some gold coins with them.

For that matter, simply stage stops.   Also military camp locations that cover mid 1850s years of usage.

4 hours ago, Dances With Doves said:

Hi Tom,  Have you ever got 2 in one day ?   Have you  got one as valuable as    Cal Cobra  since you have found many more then him.

Ahem ahem, yes I've found many more  than him, haha.   (can you please repeat that for cal cobra ?)  🤣

No I've never found 2 in a day.  But I did find 2 in one week once.

And yes, one of my 16 is as rare as his 1865 s $5 gold :  My 1862 s $10 gold .  In both cases, there's "less than 100 known", or something like that.  It's a crap shoot as to whose is more numismatically valuable.  Depends on grading.  But as I recall, the values were in the same ball park.

You are now officially a studmuffin.    Congrats on the holy-grail hole-in-one of md'ing.   Will you autograph my metal detector please ?

7 hours ago, Dances With Doves said:

Tom, It is nice to see you  on this forum .Why don't you give the  Nox a shot again since it has already made you money.Bring it to your  relic spot and you can use your explorer as a pinpointer since  your so   attached to it   .  A  good  hunter like you with a good machine like the nox will bring good results if you give it time.

Nah, I'm too stubborn.  Besides, if I made the switch, then Brian ("cal cobra") wouldn't have anything to rib me about.  And then he'd be saying "I told you so".  I can't let him do that.   Haha

But seriously now :  I hunted recently a few times , at an  iron-ridden gold rush site here in the sierra foothills of CA.  They had Nox 800s, and I was using the Exp. II "tank".   Their target counts were higher.  So on a few occasions, I had them flag signals , of iffies,  so I could compare.   And I HAD to admit that on some of them, I would not have heard them or dug them.   And they would turn out, sometimes, to be deep camp lead, or some little doohickey that I *SHOULD* have heard.     Other times it would be iron that fooled them .  But, that was to be expected, since we were all "grasping for straws" and chasing any hints.

Thus yes, for  a ghost-townsy iron-ridden spot, the Nox is superior to the exp. II.   It's never been a secret (long been admitted) that there are better machines for iron-see-through.   That's why I've always packed a Silver Sabre or Bandido for when I encounter such locations. 

But I'm still of the opinion that for other venues, the Exp. II would win various duels, for various types hunting and locations.  

good play-by-play and pix !

On 5/19/2020 at 3:01 PM, Dances With Doves said:

You earned all those coins.  Have you ever heard of anyone ever finding a fractional California gold coin.That would be a tough  target. That would be a coin for the nox to find in park2 or field 2 modes or the gold modes. 

I have heard of several CA private mint coins being found .  But I don't recall any fractionals off the top of my head.