The Slow Death of Treasure Trove Law in the US

Who cares what the law says in this case. A construction worker vs. the owner of Rolling Stone magazine? yeah, this guy really needs the money. Let the construction worker have it.
 
Interesting.....seems that it shouldn't be complicated though. Why not just split it 50/50 between the finder and landowner?....Seems reasonable.
 
finders keepers!! this almost makes me want too call off my privet land hunts for fear of failing in court, for caches are the most rewarding part of this hobbie.

i have never found such a cache, but i would love to. i do know that such a find would never go unnoticed and cause considerable pain for all involved, finder and land owner, but if i found such an item or items i would never say a word about it for may years and slowly rediscover this find over a very dispersed area as to not indicate that a cache was ever found! one gold here one gold coin there!

unless i felt ther was a historical relevance to the town i found it in then i would do as much research as a non collage grad could to quantify its display in a museum and relegate any monetary value to the state of which it was discovered as a historic treasure, but my name would defiantly have to be attached to the stories of the find, no mater what!
 
here's the way I see it, without this hobby many things would go undiscovered.

Those private land owners... they've been sitting on these hidden and undiscovered treasures for quite sometime. Then when someone finds it, it's 'oh, that's mine'. Well... question is, IS IT? Without the hobbyist or experienced detectorist it would have gone undiscovered. I say screw 50/50 and make it 99/1 if I am in a good mood.

:p
 
here's the way I see it, without this hobby many things would go undiscovered.

Those private land owners... they've been sitting on these hidden and undiscovered treasures for quite sometime. Then when someone finds it, it's 'oh, that's mine'. Well... question is, IS IT? Without the hobbyist or experienced detectorist it would have gone undiscovered. I say screw 50/50 and make it 99/1 if I am in a good mood.

:p

As a hobbyist or experienced detectorist then you know that if it is private land, you should have obtained a written "division of found property" agreement signed by the owner before hand. You are not going to go digging on private land without permission are you?
 
I personally know Larry Anderson and his employee that found the coins just couldn't keep his mouth shut. He was at a bar that night running his mouth and basically in a small valley word gets around fast.
 
As a hobbyist or experienced detectorist then you know that if it is private land, you should have obtained a written "division of found property" agreement signed by the owner before hand. You are not going to go digging on private land without permission are you?

Unfortunately, regardless of "permission", doesn't mean that if you find a great find they won't take you to court claiming it as their own. It's the American way! :lol:

I am not suggesting anyone search private lands or trespass, just stating one of human natures flaws... greed.

EDIT: Question remains... if a land owner (permission or not) lets someone detect on their property and the detectorist finds a treasure of value... should the private land owner stake claim to it, regardless of the obvious lack of interest in searching the grounds prior to the find?
 
The land owner would have to know that by giving permission to search his/her land that something of value might be found. If a land owner then gives permission to a detectorist to search there land then the detectorist should be able to keep what they find.
 
Gregory Corliss and his employer were contracted to put in a driveway. When Jann Wenner bought the property he bought the rights to whatever is on/in the property. When Mr. Corliss took the coins off the property he was stealing them from Mr. Wenner. Mr. Wenner even offered Mr. Corliss and his employer a reward but they turned it down. It is one thing if we as md'ers ask permission to search an area but when a contracted worker just so happens to stumble upon something is a different matter. It would be like if someone went onto your property and "found" something of value and then left with it. "Look what I found, a gas grill just sitting around". I would have to side with Mr. Wenner on this one even though he had no idea the coins where even there when he bought the property.
 
"Look what I found, a gas grill just sitting around".

A grill would be a piece of physical property that is in obvious and plain sight. Even if it wasn't purchased by the property owner, it's an obvious piece of the property. It's not a pseudo-inherited item that's hidden within the earth out of plain sight.

Without the contractors in that case, the items never would have been found. This is a sticky matter for sure.
 
Gregory Corliss and his employer were contracted to put in a driveway. When Jann Wenner bought the property he bought the rights to whatever is on/in the property. When Mr. Corliss took the coins off the property he was stealing them from Mr. Wenner. Mr. Wenner even offered Mr. Corliss and his employer a reward but they turned it down. It is one thing if we as md'ers ask permission to search an area but when a contracted worker just so happens to stumble upon something is a different matter. It would be like if someone went onto your property and "found" something of value and then left with it. "Look what I found, a gas grill just sitting around". I would have to side with Mr. Wenner on this one even though he had no idea the coins where even there when he bought the property.

As much as I'd like to take the side of the construction worker I have to agree Captlou. He was being paid to dig by the property owner, he wasn't there on speculation investing his own time. That being said, I personally would kept my mouth shut:whistle:
 
Back
Top Bottom