What European Countries Have You Found To Be The Least Complicated To Detect In?

[Tom_in_CA]

On 4/5/2024 at 3:16 PM, Luis said:

.......... by getting into places they shouldn't have .....

If you were to ask some legislative personnel NOW :  "Why did this & such law come about ?", they will give you pat canned answers like that ^ ^   

Eg.:  That "people went where they shouldn't have".  And then you and I curse those md's under our breath that must have went where they shouldn't have.  Or you'll be told " No d/t cultural heritage concerns" .  And you and I will mutter under our breath :  "Durned them archaeologists !!".  Or they'll say : "No because of holes".  And you and I will mutter : " Durned those md'rs who must have left holes".   And so forth and so on.  

But I am convinced that none of those "go-to-reasons" are the real reasons for why there's new & added rules in the last 20 yrs.   The real reasons are that md'rs over the decades (bless their little hearts) have spent decades "swatting hornets nests" .  Showing up at desk-bound bureaucrats offices (and border consulates, and lawyers, and kiosks, etc...) grovelling for express sanctions.  As if silence on the subject wasn't good enough.   They seem to think it required red-carpets to be rolled out for them.   Asking "Can I ?" questions. 

Like when they went to make those wonderful compendiums that circulate , how do  you think they made those ?  Yup :  By asking bored pencil jockeys.  🙄

And then these "pressing questions" got passed up the chain to various desks.  Until it finally lands on the desk of a purist archie.  Who perhaps never gave the matter a moments thought !  Nor would ever have happen chanced bumped into md'rs in-the-field.  So He addresses this "pressing issue" with a whimsical "no".   Then presto :  Another law or rule is born.  🙄

Do you see ?  And decades later, when we go NOW to ask anyone "But why ?", they will never say :  "Because someone years ago was swatting hornets nests".  Instead they'll allude "holes" or "removing" or "cultural heritage" or "guys went where they shouldn't have", etc...   When in fact, those are only the "go-to" reasons to justify the rule they ALREADY made.   And the REAL reason is that :  We md'rs simply became victims of the psychology of :  NO ONE CARED UNTIL WE ASKED  😡  

[Tom_in_CA]

I can give case-examples of this psychology at various levels of govt.  Where, when we trace back to origins, it is EXACTLY this.   So I have no doubt that the same psychology happens on larger country wide scales.  

[F350Platinum]

22 hours ago, Tom_in_CA said:

I can give case-examples of this psychology at various levels of govt.  Where, when we trace back to origins, it is EXACTLY this.   So I have no doubt that the same psychology happens on larger country wide scales.  

Tom, I wondered how long it would take you to jump on a topic like this. 🤔

While I am a supporter of dissent, and sort of agree with you regarding asking "authorities" about metal detecting, I have a few scenarios for you. I've read your opinion on one of the forums I listed above:

First one was when I stopped into the Tybee Island Police department to ask about metal detecting on the beaches. I had "heard" it was ok, but was so new to detecting I wanted to make sure of all the locations it was acceptable. They were very kind and told me it was any beach as the beaches are island property.

Well as expected some self-appointed "beach monitor" called the police on me, and I watched the police woman radio in to the HQ from afar, and the angry face on the woman who wanted to ruin my vacation when the cop shrugged at the woman and left. 🤣 She never approached me. 

One thing for sure where I live, if you just decide to hit a place where you think "no one will care" or get told by a third party "oh, I don't think they will mind", just about anything can happen to you, from getting arrested for trespassing, to a butt full of buckshot, or worse. Ever run into an angry Hunt Club? I've found that while farmers may leave you alone if you detect without permission, your name will get around and someone could well object in any manner above. Is it worth the risk to "skunk" someone with valid permission?

There are towns in Virginia whose police will arrest you and confiscate your gear if they merely see you walking around with a detector, even if you're not currently using it. Williamsburg, with all its history, is a prime example.

Here's my last scenario:

A portion of one of my permissions is part of a National Wildlife Refuge. While it is a farm for the most part, and the owner said "just go there, I own it", I have seen state Wildlife Officers driving by, who have the same authority as police and possibly more. I don't think I'd like to stand a federal trial for detecting there despite any lofty ideals, or with permission of a person who didn't understand the possible consequences.

Consider also that if vast hordes of detectorists adopt your stance, it would also be cause for detecting to be banned. Quite frankly that has incurred more damage than asking ever will.

I think every detectorist should at least know some of the ground rules to avoid the other side of the coin, and always be mindful and respectful of property that they don't own.

[Tom_in_CA]

18 hours ago, F350Platinum said:

.........  and sort of agree with you regarding asking "authorities" .......

Hi F350Plat :   Please be aware, this is strictly an intellectual pro/con hobbyist discussion.   This is no way "personal" or meant to be ornery.  I am only studying what you say, point by point, for the topic at hand.   So please do not take any of this wrong.   It is a necessary subject that, yes,  deserves discussion :

You say : ".... when I stopped into the Tybee Island Police department to ask about metal detecting on the beaches. I had "heard" it was ok, but was so new to detecting I wanted to make sure of all the locations it was acceptable. They were very kind and told me it was any beach as the beaches are island property...."

Maybe I'm not interpreting  this ^ ^ right, but I think that when someone offers up a personal anecdote story like this (of them-having sought express permission somewhere else is :  Meant to suggest that :  Since we got a "yes", that :  We can conclude that it was necessary and good to have asked.   Since, after all, they had a good experience.   Therefore we can conclude that : " It was necessary & good to be asking 'Can I ?' ".   

And notice that the SAME EXACT TAKEAWAY would have ALSO been deduced if they told you "No".  Because the person receiving the "no" would likewise say : "See, it was a good thing I asked, because now I know I can't detect".   So whether it's a "no" or a "yes", the implication seems to be :  Therefore asking everywhere I go is needed .  Instead of looking up for ourselves in muni codes and park rules, eh ?

But the problem is that :  

1)  No one in authority is ever going to say "shucks, why are you asking me ?  That's a silly question.   Because If it's not prohibited, then presto, you don't need my yes or no". 

 No, they never answer like that .  And will instead bestow on you their princely yes or no .  Depending on their mood and mental connotation of what your question entails.    And here's why:  Because the mere fact that we are standing their asking, MERELY INFERS that their say-so was needed. ( Lest why else would we be asking ? )   And implies that something must be amiss about  your hobby (ie.: risky, dangerous, harmful, etc...).   Because if it were benign and harmless, you and I would not be asking, eh ?  Eg.:  No one asks if they can fly frisbees, for instance.   This  implication is picked up on, subconsciously by the recipient, and influences & drives their answer   😪

2)  The exact opposite of your story can also happen, where a "no" gets passed out.  At places where, quite frankly, it was never  problem before.   And now the risk is that :  The same desk-jockey (who perhaps never gave it a moments thought before), will now maybe see another md'r in the park or beach and think : "Aha !  There's one of *them*".  And start booting others.  I've seen this play out before  🙄

You say : "...just about anything can happen to you, from getting arrested for trespassing, to a butt full of buckshot, or worse ...."

If you have any examples of these ^ ^ type  dire imminent outcomes , then I bet that it was someone snooping on obvious historic sensitive monument type stuff.   Or was hopping fences.  Or private property.    I bet that it was NOT a mundane park, beach, forest, etc....     And if it WAS a routine park, beach, forest, then I bet that with a bit of common sense and google, could have looked up park rules, muni codes , and HAVE SEEN if had said "no md'ing".   

I see these "imminent doom" suggestions on forums, yet whenever I ask "Got any examples", there never is any.   And any time arrest, or buckshot CAN be shown, it is invariably for trespassing private property, or, if  public, the person could have known via looking-up-for-himself.  Or someone being obnoxious who can't take  warning, etc...   But I never see such ramifications for benign innocuous parks, schools, beach, forest, or farmer-bob with his permission, etc..., where there is no law or rule forbidding.   

You say : "There are towns in Virginia..."

A couple of responses to this ^ ^  :  A) And in each case, I bet that whatever code violation those "arrests" would fall under, can be looked up by md'rs.   So again, still no need to ask "permission" wherever we go.  Any such Virginia location can-be-looked up for ourselves.  Presto, don't detect, if something codified truly said :  No md'ing,    B)  I have a sneaking suspicion WHY such a status exists in those Virginia towns you speak of.   Care to take a guess ? 

You say : "... Consider also that if vast hordes of detectorists adopt your stance, it would also be cause for detecting to be banned. ..."

This isn't making sense to me ^ ^   I am talking about places where there is no rule or law forbidding md'ing.   So if "vast hordes" detect where it's not forbidden, how does that cause md'ing to be "banned" ? I don't get it  🤔

You say : ".... I think every detectorist should at least know some of the ground rules...."

Ok, sure.  And the ground rules are :  Look up laws and rules for ourselves.   Eh ?  And if there's truly a law or rule that said "no md'ing", then sure :  Don't detect.   But let's not become victims of "no one cared UNTIL we asked" .  

[F350Platinum]

Hey Tom,

I agree that this is a discussion, not some ornery or polar stance I've taken. 

Heck I went to a VA State Park, and was told by the ranger who I had to ask for a permit (VA State law) to metal detect the beach, the Ranger told me I had to ask DCR, a state agency that gave the rangers the authority to grant such permits. 🙄 I wrote them and got a boiler plate reply including the law except - conveniently - the part about granting permits. I'm definitely not a fan of even bothering now with that sort of ignorance. 🤪

It would have been nice if they did grant it, that beach is so loaded with discarded fishing gear they won't let anyone go swimming. 😵

Yes, my situations regarding farmers are all about private property, but I do consider those who detected their farms without permission are lucky to not have records or had surgery. This place hasn't changed much in 300 years. And one bad apple will spoil the whole bunch. There are stories... 🤐

I'm just a little confused about your stance that the majority of people who cause new laws and other hindrances are those that ask permission, is that right? 🤔. Have not Tomb Raiders and other nefarious critters always existed? More recently, there appear to be more people that "just do it", and leave holes and damage. Those are the new hordes. There are "self-appointed authorities" everywhere now too.

I'm a little leery of encouraging people to do stuff until they get thrown out, that's bad press too, isn't it?

The OP asked for rules/laws, I gave them what they asked for. 🙂 

One more parable if you will:

When I was in Turkey with the Army, we were on break after it was over at a Turkish resort on the Black Sea, a couple of guys in my unit spotted a watch in the water, and they borrowed a fishing pole to get it out. They returned the pole and were walking away with the watch, before they got back they were arrested by the police, not for retrieving the watch, but for not giving it to the man they borrowed the pole from. Cost the unit a pile of hush money to get them out.

You have to be aware of customs and laws no matter where you go.

[Glittering_Ship4193]

On 4/4/2024 at 2:19 AM, Heavy Metal said:

Hey guyz, and cheers from southern Europe.

Let me tell ya few thingz..

1. one thing is on paper - and the other thing is in real life. - This list on the link listed above is incomplete ( I don't mean the list of countries, but the details ).

2. In most of European country the law about metaldteecting is undefined! That means that is allowed, but under million of circumstances. Undefined depth, undefined history landmark circle, goverment permissions...

3. There are several countries inwish REALLY detecting is forbidden in ALL SITUATIONS, even tha sale or import of detectors are not allowed! And that countries, foreginers should avoid by all means!

4. UK is the best organized country for metaldetecting, and it's safe, ut still you should check all things before planing to go there..

5. There are always situations with curious neighbors, that dont know what are you doing, under the impression, thinking in a bad way, as usually the media spreads nonsense that detectorists are thieves, or jellous collegues detetorists.. or if u have such a bad luck to ran onto some hunting guard or cop with lower IQ or with same thinking under the impression from the media ( stated above ), then you can even get arrested. (Of course, we all know that law enforcement agencies do not have to know the entire law by heart).

6. There are places where there were some roberies happened of some historical site. and over there people hate detectorist, and they live underimpression, that detecorists are thievs, going out with giant caterpillars.. and stole the ancient gold fromRomans, or whatewer..

7. Foreigners in some countries will maybe get license before domestic people, in some other countries no way..

 

So,, it's all about traveling, googleing, and detecting.. and if you do it with passion..  and spend a lot of time in it.. you will probably figure it out!  Bt always, always RESPECT THE LAW!!!

 

Good luck!  aND CHEERS FROMSOUTHERN eUROPE!

 

 

 

Very good information and I have been on your channel for a bit.

Now the real question is will you take any of us detecting with you if we pay our own way and ask real nice 😆

[blackjack]

This topic reminds me of a quote I recently saw " I may be old but at least I saw the world before it went to sh.t " I will again quote what I have quoted in the past, " Insurance companies, and their lawyers are cause for a lot of concern", I think we can add bureaucrats to that as well. Those with out a functioning moral compass will break the law anyway. It's not about laws, it's about doing what's right. Of course I see the flaw in this reasoning is that we all differ on what the "right" thing is, but in the end a consensus should give us that answer.

[Tom_in_CA]

15 hours ago, F350Platinum said:

............

I agree that this is a discussion, not some ornery or polar stance I've taken. 

.....

You say : ".....  Have not Tomb Raiders and other nefarious critters always existed?...."

With this ^ ^ , I'm beginning to see the disconnect:  To liken md'ing to destruction, tomb-robbing, damage, evil, etc.... :  Seems to be a default definition of md'ing, eh ?     Ie.:  That We should assume our hobby is harmful, reviled, dangerous, hated, etc....  So that : "silent on the subject" isn't good enough.  We need express allowance, eh ?    

But why do we start with that implied definition ?  Since when ?  I happen to consider md'ing to be :  Harmless, benign, wise, innocuous, etc...   Why this starting implication that "everyone hates us" ?    And that we must therefore grovel ?  In fact, when I'm out md'ing it is JUST THE OPPOSITE :  People come up and ask "what's the best thing you've ever found" and "where can I get one of those" and "how deep does it go", etc...  So why this implication that everyone is "waiting to bust our chops" ?

So wherever someone was thinking of doing tomb robbing,  would have been able to look up laws and rules for the place where he was thinking of "raiding tombs".  And would have seen the law/rule that forbids tomb robbing.  Right ?    And therefore again :  No need to have asked any desk jockey "can I ?".  He can have looked up rules, for himself, and seen the answer.

  So again :  All laws are available for the public to look up and avail himself of.   And if there is no rule or law forbidding something, then :  Not disallowed.  Eh ?   

You say : "...... I'm a little leery of encouraging people to do stuff until they get thrown out, that's bad press too, isn't it?..."

"Thrown out" ?   If someone can be "thrown out" of a place, then :  That means there's a law or rule that forbade what he was doing, right ?  Ok, fine then :  They look up laws/rules, for themselves, for where they're going.  And if there were a law or rule, then by all means don't detect.   But if there's no law forbidding, then presto, they're not going to get "thrown out", right ?

You say : ".... I'm just a little confused about your stance that the majority of people who cause new laws and other hindrances are those that ask permission, is that right? 🤔...."

Yes.  And I've collected many many point-blank examples of this ^ ^   That, yes, when you trace back to the origins (which might be decadeS ago, yes), this is the exact evolution of it.   MD'rs who, in the past, went swatting hornet's nests. 

If You'd like to see a few such examples, yes I can cite them.     Thus I say :  If someone is skittish, they/we need to look up for ourselves.  If there's nothing that says "no md'ing", then presto :  Not disallowed. 

You say : "... there appear to be more people that "just do it", and leave holes and damage...."

Uh, what does this ^ ^  have to do with our conversation ?  By all means, cover & stomp & fluff up your holes .   And leave no damage.   So what did this have to do with the topic ?

You say : "You have to be aware of customs and laws no matter where you go...."

Fine.  And we can look those up for ourselves.   Right ?

[Tom_in_CA]

15 hours ago, F350Platinum said:

....  and was told by the ranger who I had to ask for a permit (VA State law) to metal detect the beach,

You say : "....  had to ask for a permit (VA State law) ...."

 I think I know where you're going with this ^ ^  You must have seen something that says "With permission" or "ask at each kiosk", blah blah.   So the md'r assumes that there is a law or rule saying : "You must ask wherever you go".   But there's  a little psychology and evolution behind how those nifty answers came to be in the compendium listings you're referring to :

In order to answer that, I take you back to the early 1980s, when a first attempt was made, by a fellow Named R.W. Doc Grim.  He attempted to make a book where users could look up all 50 states, in alphabetic form, to know what the laws/rules were, for each of the states' state parks dept's.   (Naturally it didn't do "county" parks or each "city" parks, but ;  Only state level parks).   And in order to get the answers for his nifty book (since this was pre internet days), guess how he went about gathering his information ??  Yup, you guessed it :  He xeroxed off 50 form letters, and sent them to the top-most official (in each state's park's dept. in state capitols) asking "What are the laws regarding the usage of metal detectors in your state parks ?"   And explained that he was writing a book, and that their answer would appear in the book.  And enclosed an SASE.  

Then Doc simply sat back, and waited for 50  replies to flood his mail box.  And then , using their OWN LETTERHEAD letter reply, had those in-his-book.  So that in theory, if someone hassled you in-the-field, you could simply show them the letterhead reply saying that there's no issues.  And shucks, I guess they "leave you alone".   Or conversely, if the answer was "no", then shucks, you know that those states's state parks are a no-no, eh ?   Genius idea, eh ?

 And shucks, who better to ask, than the top-most officials in-each-state themselves, RIGHT ?   BUT THE DEVIL WAS IN THE DETAILS !! :   Some, yes, might have said "come have a ball !  No rules forbidding."   Others, sure, might have indeed had something specific that truly said : "No md'ing".  But the vast majority had odd-ball answers.   Like "no", and then cite some ancillary verbiage about not bothering nesting bird eggs.  Or "harvest and remove" verbiage.  Or "lost and found" issues. Or sure, the dreaded "cultural heritage" obligatory fine print.  Yet were not citing anything that specifically said "no md'ing".   

And here's what a lot of them answered back with (which I think is what's befuddling you about VA) :  Is that they'd say :  "with permission from each individual park" Or "Ask at each kiosk you come to" or "At the discretion of the sector supervisor over each individual district", etc.....   Giving the md'r the impression that he was supposed to ask everywhere he goes.   BUT NO WHERE DID IT EVER SAY THAT MD'RS were required to be asking "Can I ?"  Instead, here's what's going on :   Some parks in each state, yes, are sensitive historically themed monuments.   While others are just benign innocuous beaches, forests, sand boxes, etc...   So there is simply no way that the person answering that is going to say "No at these 11 parks, but go ahead at all the others".   Or "Yes in this forest, except not at the single historic cabin on the far NW end."  Or "yes, but not in the middle of active ball games , nor inside the tents of  other people sleeping", etc...   

So instead, the person answering simply says "ask wherever you go".   And as far as the "with permission" or "ask at each kiosk" , I am not disputing that the powers that be DO INDEED have the latitude to interpret grey area verbiage as-they-see-fit.   Ie.:  Yes, they can come scram you or I (because they think we're harming earthworms), but this does NOT therefore mean that :   We were required to get their say-so ahead of time.  It is simply saying that they have authority over their park.  Sure.  Just as they can ask you to lower the volume on your boom box radio, or to stop flying frisbees in the middle of other people's active ball games, etc.... But notice we do not have to ask "Can I fly frisbees" or "can I play my radio"

Nonetheless, the answers Doc got were sometimes of the type I think you're citing for VA.  And now, 40+ yrs. later, we can never "put it to bed".   These things got picked up, and repeated over and over.  And pretty soon it can never be put to rest.   If anyone ever asks "says who ?", guess how someone else will "clarify it" ?  Yup :  Go ask a bored official.   See the vicious circle ?

And I will add this :  When Doc's book came out (I saw it circulating in the mid to late 1980s), a lot of the states with .... uh .... dire sounding answers had the following effect :  MD'rs, in those states, often looked at the answers saying :  Since when ?  And Says who ?  In other words :  The odd-ball answers were often coming from states WHERE IT HAD NEVER BEEN AN ISSUE prior to Doc Grim's "pressing question", that got bandied about, desk-to-desk.    Do you see the self-fulfilling vicious loop going on ?

[F350Platinum]

Here's the vicious loop: 

https://www.dhr.virginia.gov/metal-detecting-and-permits/

And we have the DWR, police with SUVs, handcuffs and guns, we see them all the time, I know people who ended up cleaning the roads for violations (community service):

https://dwr.virginia.gov/conservation-police/

They even do undercover arrests. Not just for hunting and fishing. You have to look for "DGIF" to find old accounts, they changed their name, a moving target.

I believe that the webpage exists because people ask, it says so. 👍 But it's also there because people detect without asking. Ratios aren't available.

Here's an interesting publication from the Archaeologists worth a look: 

https://www.archeologyva.org/PDF/HICKS-TIMECRIME.pdf

I love how they call it "time crime". Cue the show tunes.

Isn't it putting the cart before the horse to assert that it's because people ask, when the laws and regulations came because people did it in the first place?

I believe that history should come to light, envy is the worst sin.

Apology to the OP.  🙂