No Metal Detcting On BLM?!?!?!
Posted 03 February 2009 - 06:48 AM
Posted 03 February 2009 - 09:36 AM
Posted 03 February 2009 - 09:44 AM
I have heard versions of this story as well...
I too am interested in hearing what you turn up.
It's a topic we all need to stay current on.
Posted 03 February 2009 - 09:45 AM
Posted 03 February 2009 - 10:50 AM
Posted 03 February 2009 - 06:18 PM
Posted 03 February 2009 - 07:08 PM
I've been stopped a few times by Forest Rangers around Prescott, but never had any trouble with the BLM. Heck, in the last 10 years I think I've only bumped into one BLM ranger in Arizona, and he only waved as he drove by (probably with the AC on full blast ). Unless he was detecting on a protected site I highly doubt the ticket would stand up in court. Keep us posted...
Your Metal Detection Experts!
N. American Distributor for Nugget Finder Coils
Tel: (928) 777-0267
Posted 03 February 2009 - 08:28 PM
43 C.F.R. Subpart 3809—Surface Management
Title 43 - Public Lands: Interior
(1) Casual use generally includes the collection of geochemical, rock, soil, or mineral specimens using hand tools; hand panning; or non-motorized sluicing. It may include use of small portable suction dredges. It also generally includes use of metal detectors, gold spears and other battery-operated devices for sensing the presence of minerals, and hand and battery-operated drywashers. Operators may use motorized vehicles for casual use activities provided the use is consistent with the regulations governing such use (part 8340 of this title), off-road vehicle use designations contained in BLM land-use plans, and the terms of temporary closures ordered by BLM.
(2) Casual use does not include use of mechanized earth-moving equipment, truck-mounted drilling equipment, motorized vehicles in areas when designated as closed to “off-road vehicles” as defined in §8340.0–5 of this title, chemicals, or explosives. It also does not include “occupancy” as defined in §3715.0–5 of this title or operations in areas where the cumulative effects of the activities result in more than negligible disturbance.
Posted 04 February 2009 - 09:13 AM
You now have the choice to defend...get a lawyer or yield and pay, either way the citizen gets the big screw!
Posted 04 February 2009 - 03:37 PM
out the real reason for the ticket.
BLM law enforcement officers are well trained in the rules and regs.
They don't write tickets or make an arrest unless they have a real
There is certain places on BLM land that is off limits to prospecting,
The old Barney Fife cop thing does not apply anymore. BLM and Forest
Service law enforcement officers go through the same training and tests
as the FBI and all Federal officers do.
There is a difference between a law enforcement officer and patrol
persons. Any Forest Service or BLM officer can make an arrest or
write a ticket on Federal land,or detain someone until the enforcement
officer shows up. They are not armed,but do have the authority to
enforce the laws. Some of these guys or girls do get a little out in left
field at times,and some of their advice or understanding of the laws
gets kinda fuzzy.
Also both agencies have campground patrol people ,they can write
tickets too or call for help to arrest someone.
If a real BLM or Forest Service law enforcement officer or special
agent shows up and says you are in trouble,you may have a real
problem,because they don't joke around.
I know several Federal cops,and all of them are real professionals.
Some are kind of hard nosed,but most are just doing their job and
are decent people. The trouble with special agent's is that nine times
out of ten ,you won't know who he or she is until they flash a badge.
If you have a problem understanding why they are bothering you,
they pack,a federal code and law book with them. They will be happy
to share it with you,but most can recite the codes and laws forward
and backwards. The real enforcement officers can read and comprehend
pretty darn good though.
Posted 04 February 2009 - 05:51 PM
Posted 05 February 2009 - 12:11 AM
I must say that I have not witnessed the destruction that you are claiming is going on here in the Redding area. Please send me the areas so I may take a look see. I have worked areas off of Clear Creek, Walker Mind, Rock Creek, and Whiskey Creek to name a few. I have come across the occasional pick hole that wasn’t filled back in. But they were only a couple inches deep and took me a second to kick some dirt in them. But open trenches and the complete destruction of any and all plant life and water courses? (As you stated)
This I must see for myself!! I know several prospectors in and around Redding and I belong to the Shasta Miners & Prospectors Organization. I have not met anyone who would do such a thing. If there has been damage done, we as prospectors should get together and put a weekend aside to make repairs.
Posted 05 February 2009 - 07:49 PM
Posted 05 February 2009 - 08:12 PM
Behind the GPX5000
US ARMY 1966-1973
Viet Nam Vet. 67-69 MOS 91B20
Posted 20 February 2009 - 12:19 PM
I realize that old coins can be considered "antiquities,but they are still also considered "spendable" money, are they not?
Posted 21 February 2009 - 12:38 AM
The basis for this is the American Antiquities Act of 1906, Federal Law: 16 USC 431-433. It has been pretty much forgotten until the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, Federal Law: 16 U.S.C. 470aa-mm. The 1979 Act has been amended 4 times since. They are easy to look up with Google. They are much more difficult to understand because of course they are in two strange languages, Politicalese and Legalese.
In the last few years archaeologists, archaeological societies and universities have really been pushing to have all of these Federal Laws enforced right down to the letter on individuals like Jake and us all just out there doing what we like to do. Jake said the BLM Ranger was young and aggressive, well he also probably had the Antiquities Laws in his training. The Ranger was doing his job and had the Laws to back him up. I really doubt complaining to the Supervisor went far. It made Jake a little bit happier about it and the Supervisor was probably happy to have Jake out of his face.
The following is from the Prescott National Forest web site. It is the current basic guide line for National Forests, BLM and other federal public land controllers that don't have stricter rules.
Link to webpage: http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/prescott/recreation/propect.shtml
"For the Use of Metal Detectors on the National Forest
The allowable use of metal detectors on National Forest system lands takes a number of different forms. Detectors are used in searching for treasure trove, locating historical and pre historical artifacts and features, prospecting for minerals, and searching for recent coins and lost metal objects. Of these four types of uses for metal detectors, the first three are covered by existing regulations that require special authorization, i.e. special use permits, notice of intent, or operating plan.
The search for treasure trove, which is defined as money, un mounted gems, or precious metals in the form of coin, plate, or bullion that has been deliberately hidden with the intention of recovering it later, is an activity which is regulated by the Forest Service. Searching for treasure trove has the potential of causing considerable disturbance and damage to resources and thus requires a Special Use Permit from the Forest Service. Methods utilized in searching for treasure trove must be specified in the permits issued. Permits may not be granted in each and every case, but applications will be reviewed with attention being paid to the justification given and guarantees for the restoration of any damage that might occur to other resources. The use of metal detectors in searching for treasure trove is permissible when under this type of permit, but must be kept within the conditions of the permit.
The use of a metal detector to locate objects of historic or archaeological value is permissible subject to the provisions of the Antiquities Act of 1906, the Archaeological Resources Preservation Act 1979, and the Secretary of Agriculture's regulations. Such use requires a Special Use Permit covering the exploration, excavation. appropriation, or removal of historic and archaeological materials and information. Such permits are available for legitimate historical and pre historical research activities by qualified individuals. Unauthorized use of metal detectors in the search for and collection of historic and archaeological artifacts is a violation of existing regulations and statutes.
The use of a metal detector to locate mineral deposits such as gold, and silver on National Forest System lands is considered prospecting and is subject to the provisions of the General Mining Law of 1872.
Searching for coins of recent vintage (less than 50 years) and small objects having no historical value, as a recreational pursuit, using a hand-held metal detector, does not currently require a Special Use Permit as long as the use of the equipment is confined to areas which do no posses historic or prehistoric resources."
The 3rd paragraph above states the Federal Acts. The line about mineral deposits comes up short because it doesn't mention that Wilderness Areas are a no-no. It is probably going to get even more restrictive with more aggressive enforcement as time goes on. Some in archeology and universities are pushing for basically the same antiquity laws in states for private land. This adds more to the long list of restrictions to us on our own public land and it wouldn't be a great surprise if they got it put on our private land some day too.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users