Devil’s Den Preserve Weston, CT

My vote would be OK to metal detect. Since it does no specifically say NO to MD'ing it is OK. You have to figure out what to do about the 'digging' and removing of artifact bit. It seems those park signs are everywhere, they all seem to say the same. Most of the areas here in Mass have the same rules. I really wonder why they left out MD off the rules list? since that is what most use to dig and find artifacts with???? It would have be easy to put it on there if needed if was indeed a #1 problem which it clearly isn't...Places that we all know not to use a MD always have signs saying NO MD'd, ie battlefields etc. IMHO the digging and artifact hunting removal has to do with full scale looting of archie sites, removing stone walls stones, tree harvesting, plant removal, and general destruction of town land. I MD many areas that have those same rule on the signs. Just don't dig. Figure out a way to look at the artifact and leave it there, maybe just surface hunt lol, no need to bring home all the rusty junk we fine lol. If you must dig that is where the legal issues may get messy. Good advice here in this thread tho.

I reached out to the manager and she reiterated the rule that "the collection of items from the preserve is prohibited". She didn't say no metal detecting or no digging. So, i'm still not sure what to do.

TB8788 said:

I reached out to the manager and she reiterated the rule that "the collection of items from the preserve is prohibited". She didn't say no metal detecting or no digging. So, i'm still not sure what to do.

Click to expand...

Are you aware that there's not a single park in the USA that doesn't have something in their boiler-plate that forbids "collect", "harvest" "remove" "take/steal" or some variation of wording ?

Example: There is a state of CA beach near me, where someone asked the head of the parks dept. if they could detect. They got a reply email back : "No". On the basis of collection-of-items (aka harvest/remove). Not unlike your answer.

Oddly, you can hunt state of CA beaches till you're blue in the face (including the one they asked about), and .... you will never hear so much as "boo" (In fact, I was hunting there just yesterday )

So here's what will probably happen next; Assuming that park manager , that you asked, is stationed there on-site, ... guess what will happen the next time she sees another md'r ? She'll remember the earlier inquiry and start booting people.

I don't think you're ever going to find a place where there's not something ambiguous that *could* be applied. So I guess that you'll inquire of each place. Until you find someone to give you an express "yes". Hence the game of arbitrary-whimsical Russian Roulette self-fulfilling loop begins.

And BTW: I'm speaking in general terms. There is ... yes.... some places that do indeed police on the basis of "ambiguous catch-all" verbiage. But even then, I have a sneaking suspicion on how those concerns got started. If not someone current, then someone(s) in previous years. And thus now .... sure, I admit, there are places to "lay-low" at. So I'm just speaking to the general psychology of the situation.

Naturally, every place is different. I mean, for example, if it's an "obvious historic sensitive monument", then common sense dictates you're not going to get-by with the notion that it didn't specify "md'ing".

The solution to discerning the places where the grey stuff "applies " vs "doesn't apply", is not to go asking someone "can I ?". Instead, you just go. Eg.: look for the ring your wife lost last week there. If someone wants to scram you, they're welcome to. Then you'd be appraised. No harm no foul. Assuming, of course, there weren't truly a specific rule, or posted, etc... And assuming not a sensitive monument.