National Wildlife Refuge Oklahoma

[Cfmct]

.....


You say : " ....because one scumbag hunted a historic property and refused to fill his holes in... "

Craig, I hope you can see that this ^ ^ has nothing in common with the thread/discussion at hand. Right ? OF COURSE we should avoid "obvious historic sensitive monuments". We stand in solidarity there. And OF COURSE we should fill in our holes, and not be obnoxious. But this is not at all what the thread is about, no one's being obnoxious. No one's snooping around obvious sensitive monuments. No one's leaving holes. So : Why do you think this has any bearing on the topic at hand ?

Re.: Your spot in the woods, you say : "....I always want to know whether its legal or not before I detect an area..."

2 responses :

A) Ok, then : Can't that be looked up @ wherever the rules/codes/laws, of those rules, exist ? Surely any laws/rules governing usage, are listed. Right ? Eg.: dogs on leash, no fireworks, etc... Right ? Ok, then : What could be more-law-abiding than that ?

B) As for the ranger who said "yes, go ahead", I think I know what this is meant to convey, in the current discussion : That, the mere fact that someone tells you "yes", would obviously mean : "See, it's a good thing I asked". Right ? Because notice the implication involved : The mere fact that someone tells you "yes", seems to imply that their say-so was needed. Right ? Because otherwise they would have said : "Shucks, that's a funny question. Why are you asking me ? You don't need my say-so. If it's not listed as prohibited, then ... shucks, why are you asking me ?" Eh ?

As you know : Authority never answers in that fashion. Instead they will bestow on you their princely "yes" or "no". After all, you're standing there asking them. Which merely infers that their say-so was needed (lest ... why else are you asking them ?)

So you see, whether someone tells me "yes" or "no", to me does not mean : "Therefore their say-so was necessary". So when any one enters these discussions, and points to a "yes" or "no" they got from some place, it does nothing to prove their point.

And ask yourself: Where is that person getting their "yes" or "no" from ? Are they just arbitrarily making it up ? Just their whimsical mood that day ? Or is it based on actual rule ? I think you would agree that they'd need to be basing their answer on actual law or rule. Right ? OK, great! Then : Why can't we look up said law or rule ?

You say : ".... I will not walk onto a property not knowing what is and what isn't allowed.... "

And : I totally agree with you ^ ^ Great ! And guess how you can allow yourself to know what "is and isn't allowed" ? Easy : You look it up. Then you do not risk becoming the latest victim of the: "No one cared UNTIL you asked" phenomenon.

Tom... your first paragraph about staying away from historic spots like they are taboo... I knew of a property that was historic... I asked if I could hunt it and I was allowed... I did offer to share and show my finds... they didn't want them they said they would end up in a drawer somewhere collecting dust...

You are always saying those who ask are what is making lands and areas off limits to the rest of us... my opinion is different... I believe those who nighthawk are what is taking spots away from us...

Half the parks around here say no injuring the grass or endangered species, how would anyone know if something was endangered


Most metal detecting laws are vague at best...

A lot of the back and forth is just that... first thing when I dirt hunt I only hunt private property, I won't waste my time and energy park hunting... sure there can be good stuff in them but I have no interest knowing that for 60 plus years people have been dropping bottlecaps and pull tabs in these parks... I find enough on beach but its easy digging there with a scoop...

 

[KOB]

Ok, right. Then: Wouldn't that ^ ^ have been available info by looking it up ? It is apparent from the context, that they were referencing "laws" (or the lack thereof, to be precise). Ok, then : Isn't that city's muni-codes, park rules, etc... available on-line at their website ? Or in binder form behind the desk at city hall ?

You say you "didn't have to worry about tickets". But this is not a function of having asked "can I ?". This is only a function of the fact that there were no laws or rules forbidding you. Which, as said, you could also have looked up to know that exact same thing. Right ?

And there are ample stories like yours, where ... instead of getting a "yes", there are persons who got a "no". And when the md'r says : "But where is that written ?", the desk-clerk finds something about alter & deface, or a mining permit, or harvest & remove, etc..... And then you realize you've just been the latest victim of "No one cared till you asked". Why play Russian Roulette ?

I think I did try looking it up online and it was a PIA. Besides , I'm a people person by nature ( when I want to be. Lol) and I'd rather go face2face. On purpose so I can be I'D. Imagine that , nothing to hide ! And yes , I did just ask if it was OK, or legal to hunt the local parks. Didn't care about anything else , nor did they. All that matters was I was given the greenlight. No big deal. Also thanked them for their service. In this day and age , they don't get enough of that. Sucking up sometimes pays off

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....

.......

You say : "... I knew of a property that was historic... I asked if I could hunt it and I was allowed... "

Ok, then that ^ ^ is not normal benign public woods. Is it ?

You say : "... You are always saying those who ask are what is making lands and areas off limits to the rest of us... "

And : I can give you scores of examples of where , yes, this was the genesis of what got balls rolling.

You say : " ...I believe those who nighthawk are what is taking spots away from us... "

Huh ? What ? Where did that ^ ^ come from ? Who is talking about "night-hawking" ? Night hawking is for off-limits places. This thread is about a place(s) where no such prohibition exists. So ... what's up ?

You say : " ...Half the parks around here say no injuring the grass or endangered species,..."

No, it's more than "half" . It's ALL. Yes, every single speck of land, in the entire USA, will have some boiler plate verbiage to this effect. AKA alter, deface, molest, injure, destroy, blah blah blah. AND SURE ! Those *could* be construed to mean : No md'ing. Right ? And the FASTEST way to make sure it applies to us, is to present our "pressing question" to desk-jockies. Eh ?

If we are to automatically assume it applies to us (till told otherwise), then : Why are our md'ing forums so filled with show & tell that came from (gasp) parks ? forests ? beaches ? deserts ? Trust me : The language is there too. Yet, lo & behold, people hunt such places all the time. How can this be ?

You say : " ...Most metal detecting laws are vague at best..."

Actually, ALL laws are vague at best. Laws are often time written vaguely , so as to apply to a myriad of circumstances that *might* arise in the field. That's why there's laws that , ... for example .... forbid annoyances. Or blocking sidewalks, etc.... It is simply impossible to write laws and rules for every conceivable thing that *might* arise in the field. So they are written broadly enough, to allow LEO's, to get their job done . But this in no way means that our actions are illegal, until given an express sanction to the contrary .

I mean, would we assume that since laws are vague, that we shouldn't throw frisbees in the park (or need to ask "Can I ?") ? I'm sure I can find rules that *might* apply to this activity. Eg.: "Throwing dangerous projectiles", that "might poke someone's eye out", that are a "public nuisance" and "blocked the sidewalk", etc.... It's endless :/ Why do we seem to think that md'ing is so evil and harmful, that it needs express say-so ? That md'ing is illegal, till-told-otherwise ? Why ? Says who ?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Sucking up sometimes pays off

Kob, I think I told you the story of what happened in my town (as an example). Everything said about yourself and your method, could have equally been said of the person in our town. The newcomer to town, took it upon himself, to go to city hall and ask "Can I ?" Someone there told him "no".

Shortly thereafter he found out there was a local md'ing club, and attended his first meeting with us. When the show & tell time came, each entrant was there showing off whatever his entry was for that month. One fellow's turn came, and he was showing off an old coin ".... found in central park".

The visitor newbie raised his hand and asked : "I thought md'ing wasn't allowed in Central park ?"

A few of us turned around, looked at him, and said : "Since when ?". That's when he told us the story of how he'd gone to city hall and asked (bless his little heart, eh ?). Confusion erupted in the room of the 25 or so attendees. Some people assumed this meant that md'ing wasn't allowed in the parks here (hard to argue with an answer "straight from city hall", eh ?) While other long-time salts said "Nonsense. You can hunt the parks till you're blue in the face. So I'm not stopping" Others insisted we should (as a group club effort) go to city hall and "get this clarified". And so on the confusion and debate, at that meeting, went.

I was only in my early 20s at the time. So I was just an observer back in those days. But it "woke me up" as to the psychology of "no one had cared, TILL someone had asked" . And to be honest : I don't know how he phrased the question, I don't know no how exactly they phrased the answer. But here it is, 35+ yrs. later, and : You can hunt the parks here to your heart's content. As long as you're not being an eyesore or a nuisance.