What archaeologists think metal detecting is.

I don't really have anything else to say

Any possibility of seeing the 3rd slide, where it says "The good"?

I am under the impression that in NY a relic is described as being anything over 50 years. So it you pick up a 1964 penny off the ground you're breaking some law. Now I could be wrong but I'm sure someone will chime in.

I hope nobody has ever called an archaeologist because they found a 1964 penny. I have feeling that would only get them ridiculed for wasting someones time.

Except for the language... it sounds so "French" !! Sad to see this happening on this side of the pond too...

Taltahull said:

Except for the language... it sounds so "French" !! Sad to see this happening on this side of the pond too...

Click to expand...

I did not know that this was a problem in France. I like the way England has its laws set up. Wish we could do something like that here.

In Scotland anything found belongs to the Crown, not the Landowner. We use a system which although not perfect, does control where the artifacts end up.

if you find something of interest, you must by law, report it to the Treasure Trove Unit. The find is handed in, along with details of find spot and method of finding (eyes only, metal detecting, ploughing, etc). If T.T. Decide to keep it, they award an ex gratia payment to the finder.

The landowner has no rights in this at all, but most Detectorist have private agreement with land owners, to share any award for finds of interest made. Sometimes you can even be lucky enough to have your claimed item displayed in a museum.

if your artifact or coin is not claimed by Treasure Trove, then you get it back, with a certificate of provenance.

not a perfect system, but better than some.

Lumpendoodle said:

In Scotland anything found belongs to the Crown, not the Landowner. We use a system which although not perfect, does control where the artifacts end up.

if you find something of interest, you must by law, report it to the Treasure Trove Unit. The find is handed in, along with details of find spot and method of finding (eyes only, metal detecting, ploughing, etc). If T.T. Decide to keep it, they award an ex gratia payment to the finder.

The landowner has no rights in this at all, but most Detectorist have private agreement with land owners, to share any award for finds of interest made. Sometimes you can even be lucky enough to have your claimed item displayed in a museum.

if your artifact or coin is not claimed by Treasure Trove, then you get it back, with a certificate of provenance.

not a perfect system, but better than some.

Click to expand...

It sure sounds perfect to me !

@ aloldstuff : yes, they are unfortunately making it super tough in France !

Yeah I've heard of the laws in England and Scotland and I like the way that system is set up. Although the government is claiming anything below the surface as theirs, it is willing to share it with the keeper and the General public. In the states we don't really have any agreements between the federal government/state government and the finder of the artifact which leads to many finds not being reported for fear of being claimed as property of the state or federal government and taken and put in storage box in the basement of a musuem, never to see the light of day again. Federal lands are off limits to detecting anyway and state laws vary from definite no's to "yes but only in certain areas". I've found town lands are the best bet. I just wish the US government set up clear guidelines about what happens to finds and doesn't keep it so confusing.

There is a treasure trove law here and I believe it's anything older than 300 years. The only other laws are native American remains and national parks. It's very likely if someone found human remains they might notify the authorities. I do think tho if there is any 'system' imposed here at a federal level that it will become a bastardized bauchery. Leaving it to state and local levels is a better bet because it allows anyone (detectorists) an option. If it's not ok one place, there can be a place not to far away that it is ok to detect. Usually it's town level about detectable lands, and then state level who owns right to the finds. It may not be the best solution either because a town or state you don't live, you might not have a voice to change things there. I just wouldn't want to go thru red tape to keep what I find.

Altho there have been many great finds on the forum, maybe there's 2 or 3 things worth a museum. Those FEW finds it's a shame they end up in a private collection but the rest of the good finds I would probably rather have someone concerned with the matter have the say what happens to it versus someone far up the ladder who has no idea about the situation making the decision.

The guys from Diggers have an archaeologist on site who documents the location and description of every item found during filming, so using that show as an example is out of context. After all, context is everything. Ironic, no? I just can't see an archaeologist being willing to accompany me for free to properly remove an outhouse hinge from the ground.

Well there is a great article about "America's First War" (a project that I was very closely working with) in this months Archaeology magazine . Anyways the writer interviews a Dr. McBride (the head director in charge of the project) and he praises the metal detector and those hobbyist who helped out. here is a snippet of the interview....


" Since most of the sites in question are located on private land ,the Battlefields Projects

relies heavily on noninvasive archaeology methods such as GIS modeling , remote sensing

and survey archaeology , although small-scale excavation is also used in conjunction with

these approaches.


The most important tools available to the archaeologists though , are metal detectors.

Although their use in archaeology can be controversial , they are proving essential to the

field of battlefield archaeology.

McBride and his team have been aided considerably by a local group of experienced metal

detectorists known as the Yankee Territory Coinshooters."

...speaking of that, Dan. I guess the meeting is tomorrow. YTC hasn't updated the web page for meetings cuz it still says 2014. Saw the 2012 article on them about Wadsworth house. Wondering if this year something similar is in the works.

Jim , the meeting is tomorrow . I'm going to make an effort on going.

Thanks Dan - I was hoping you would point that out.

"Assumption: Archaeologists are not inherently stupid."

Assumptions (and generalizations) can be dangerous.

However, "Advanced Metal Detecting for the Archaeologist" consisting of 1 day of lecture and 2 days in the field is not much experience with a detector. Many people with only 2 days in the field still can't tell the difference between a flattened beer can and a small piece of iron. Depending somewhat on the detector too, of course.

It has nothing to do with being "stupid", but everything to do with years of experience in the field.

I hate to see the stupid reality detectorist shows come back to haunt the hobby. They were never a good idea.

Yeah but Epi, you gotta admit the first bit of slides make the assumption from the arcaeologist point of view that hobbysits are bad. And some points are invalid. Really? Items in the ground are preserved and it's only when they are removed they break down? Then how do so many items come out of the ground in terrible shape? Do we really need an archaelogist around when you find a single large cent to tell you that it probably fell out of someone's pocket and has no bearing what so ever on determining history? Or because you find a button or a single dropped mini ball or a three ringer there needs to be an entire site excavation? On private property their entire lawn needs to be dug up? Idk.. I just feel like there are already some protections put in place like Fort Griswold CT which is a site for a historic battle is off limits to hobbyist detecting. The public property along Rochambeau's route in Bolton is off limits. Only in known areas of historic importance would the two sides need to meet. Anything else two sides need to stop with the blah blah blah. Facts need to be set straight as well.

Jim , here are some facts ...

England knows more of its history now after then it did before they enacted these treasure laws.
far more history is found by the "hobbyists" (detectorists far out number archaeologists) then by archaeologists there .
they (archaeologists) knew this and they also knew that even when you ban or make something illegal it still doesn't really keep people from doing it secretly.

England made a bold decision to embrace the hobbyists and work with them and its paid off , now its America's archaeologists turn because we're not going away and we have a lot to offer them.

Stop me if I've told this story before....okay, nobody stopped me :lol: well ...many years ago Brown Univ did an archaeological dig for an entire summer on my property. This was before I built my house and occupied the land. They were trying to locate a 1720s house site. They made many pits and beautiful maps. They found super small shards of brick and pottery. They took soil samples and found what each field was used for. Well, they decided that the 1720s house site could be located at one of two places. I'm not certain why they decided this but they did.
Fast forward 50 years...my wife bought me a $150 metal detector and within minutes I find an ox shoe....a legend is born :lol: but I digress...
Then during my first week of detecting I found a spot that had machine gun like nails. The spot is directly between the two places they thought the house was. The archaeologists back then didn't know about MDers but I can't, for the life of me, understand why they don't use them today. The first thing an archaeologist should do is go over a property with a MD. Make a map of areas where there is metal, then they'd have a more educated guess as to where to dig test pits.

del said:

England knows more of its history now after then it did before they enacted these treasure laws.
far more history is found by the "hobbyists" (detectorists far out number archaeologists) then by archaeologists there .
they (archaeologists) knew this and they also knew that even when you ban or make something illegal it still doesn't really keep people from doing it secretly.

England made a bold decision to embrace the hobbyists and work with them and its paid off , now its America's archaeologists turn because we're not going away and we have a lot to offer them.

Click to expand...

I had to re-read this to know it wasn't quite an argument against what I said. My statement was more broad and generalized and yours is more specific. Sure, by all means an archaelogist should be involved and bring the detectorists, which are many, to check areas of significance. Just like the areas involved for the pequot war you were involved in. Sure, have a gov't funded check of the battle places near Danbury and Arnold's troops. My generalized inclusion of all old places I don't believe an archaelogist needs to be involved to document what is found. I used the example of a largie earlier and just say it was at a house with no members serving in a war nor patented anything significant. Say a 1926 schoolyard. I don't feel the either is going to provide any useful information and will be a waste of the archealogist's time. It's only fruitful to the detector who might get a few coins or buttons. There had to be some reason for them looking at Drew's property....

The part making some spots illegal or against an ordinance is the government's way to regulate even tho I am sure the laws weren't imposed before detectorists got to some spots. Regulating so they can control when and if it occurs at certain spots. And yes, if things being illegal prevented them from happening then drugs and guns wouldn't be a problem either. However, there was something recently within past few years I believe it was near the Grand Canyon, being a national park, two younger guys got their detectors taken away because they were on federal land.

Yes, by all means there should be more organized hunts with people who know how to use the detector accurately along side with archaelogists. And no it's not often done. My point earlier was 'they' should step in only when necessary and no there shouldn't ever be any red tape for the finder even if you find an expensive coin. Set appropriate boundaries on each part so that it works out for everyone's benefit.