Metal Detecting Laws in America

Are You Confused? Where Can You Dig?

Metal detecting laws in America are unclear. The original law protecting the laws of antiquity, meaning, the law that was enacted to preserve artifacts was implemented in 1906. However, in that law, nowhere does it state that the use of metal detectors was unlawful. Of course, metal detectors were not in existence at that time, but to this day, that law has never been updated to make the use of metal detectors a crime.  So who got to decide what artifacts were to be protected, or who had the right to dig and or recover them?  Well, that was President Theodore Roosevelt. The 1906 law regulates artifact recovery, our conservation policies, and our environment on federal properties. This article is not about your right to dig on private property.

In 1906, the President signed into law, the Antiquities Act. This law is the grand-daddy of every existing law that has followed having to do with artifact protection. The 1906 law is the cornerstone of every single land protection law up to today.

The 1906 law regulates artifact recovery, our conservation policies, and our environmental policies. The Antiquities Act of 1906, is also the law that affects the hobby of metal detecting/treasure hunting.  As I mentioned, there is no proclamation within the Antiquities Act of 1906 making the use of metal detecting a crime. However, there are a few state laws that govern metal detecting, those laws are usually not laws, but ordinances in cities, towns, and villages. Sometimes you will see a sign posted stating that there is “no metal detecting allowed”. And because those ordinances are not laws, but just the dictate of a group of archaeologists, beauracrats, or politicians that feel they hold the power over the citizens, those so-called laws, if questioned, have been at times removed.

Again, on a federal level, there are no metal detecting laws in America, anywhere stated in the Antiquities Act of 1906. That 1906 law prohibits the “digging and removal of artifacts” that are 100 years old, or older, on any State lands, Federal, or BLM lands (Bureau of Land Management) land. Did you get that? What that law, and every federal land law after 1906, states, is that you cannot remove old stuff from the ground, but the law does not reference not being able to metal detect or treasure hunt on state, federal, or BLM land. You can ask for a permit to treasure hunt on some of those lands, however, you will be turned down. With the above being stated, my interpretation of the laws or non-laws for metal detecting on state, federal, or BLM land is this. You can metal detect there because the law does not say that you can’t, but…you cannot dig up or retrieve what you found. Do you see the absurdity of this? If you are metal detecting, and you get a signal, how do you know how old the item is until you dig it?

I want to be very clear here. I am not advocating that you go on to federal land and metal detect.  I am not telling you to do that. What I am doing is trying to help you make sense of this nonsense. You need to be the one to pay attention to your state laws regarding whether or not you can metal detect in certain areas. Each one of us needs to be proactive and not have to rely “totally” on someone else's interpretation of these laws. My explanation here should be the beginning of your knowledge and not the end of it.

Before I continue I want to stress that I am not an attorney.  However, because I am not an attorney does not mean I do not understand the laws of antiquities. As a matter of fact, throughout the years I have spoken to many attorneys that did not know as much as I did about this issue. And why do I know about the laws that deal with our right to dig artifacts? It is because I have studied them for many years. I have also heard and read horror stories from people across the country that unknowingly broke one of these laws and were subjected to criminal charges. I studied these laws because I too was subjected to verbal assaults and harassment. My brief story follows.

While filming my TV series, archaeologists called my co-host John and me looters, pilferers, and thieves. They were mad because we showed viewers on TV how to find and dig for artifacts. They accused us of digging on state land. The fact was, we had permission from private property owners. The beauracrats fought me tooth and nail and even involved the state attorney's general office to send me a cease and desist order, or else I would be taken to court. I had to hire an attorney to get them off my back. That was the time I began learning everything I could about the laws that take away our right to metal detect and dig for relics. It is why I pass this information on to hobbyists. I do not want what happened to me and to others, to happen to you.

Many Are Unknowingly Breaking A Law

People across the United States have been unnecessarily ridiculed, harassed, and even arrested, because they were not aware of the laws regarding the digging or removal of relics, and artifacts.

I am not against any metal detecting laws, or treasure hunting laws that protect Native American sites. The 1906 Antiquities Act was enacted to stop the looting of those areas. Unfortunately, though, that law and the laws that have followed have been extended beyond the original intent of the 1906 law, to where we now have fake ordinances and state fiats that disallow metal detecting.

Remember, metal detecting laws in America are not part of the 1906 Antiquities Act.

Millions of people across America participate in the hobby of metal detecting, and other outdoor hobbies such as bottle digging, backpacking, hiking, hunting, fishing, and camping. Some of these individuals have unknowingly broken one or more of the land laws.

Since going public some years ago about my harassment from state politicians, archaeologists, and beauracrats I have received hundreds of emails and comments from people across America that have been either harassed or arrested for doing something they had no idea was against the law. Here are just a few of their stories.

A backpacker on a secluded trail stopped to rest. As he sat leaning against a tree he noticed a stone that was shaped like a bowl. The rock intrigued him. So he picked it up and placed it in his backpack.

The next day, after spending a night camping, the hiker began his trek out of the woods. On his way to his vehicle, he was met by a DEC officer (Department of Environmental Conservation). They stopped to talk…and the hiker showed the DEC officer the unusual rock he found. The officer then informed the backpacker that he had just broken a law.

The officer told him the unusual rock was of Native American Indian origin, and was probably more than 200 years old. He was given a citation and told to report to the local DEC office. The hiker was shocked at what had just transpired. He tried to explain that he was not aware of the fact that the rock was Native American Indian. He pleaded with the officer to let the incident pass, and that he would not pick up any more rocks. To no avail, the DEC officer would not tear up the citation.

After meeting with the DEC office, and an archaeologist assigned to that office, the hiker was warned that if he removed any more stones, flowers, artifacts, etc, etc, etc, he would be arrested and fined. The fine could be as much as $10,000.

Here's another story!

Two men in another State were metal detecting on State land and were arrested, fined $5000 each, and had their detectors confiscated for removing artifacts from an old foundation area. DEC officers saw them with three items in their possession. One artifact, a state archaeologist said, was an old button, another so-called artifact was an 1852  Large Cent, and the third so-called artifact was a clothing buckle.

Two individuals were hiking on federal land. They came upon an old cellar hole. Intrigued by what they saw they walked around the foundation. One of the hikers picked up a small, light-green bottle. Both men noticed that the bottle was old. The fellow that picked it up put it into his backpack. As they continued walking around the old foundation they noticed more old bottles and pottery chards scattered on the ground. Both men picked up a few more bottles and put them into their packs, then continued their hike. At the end of their hike when they returned to the new truck one of them owned, an SUV was driving by and pulled up in front of the parked truck. Two men approached them to ask questions about the truck. One of the men said he liked it and was thinking of purchasing one. And then, the conversation took a different course.

One of the hikers told them he had just found some nice old bottles. He showed them to the two individuals. At that time one of the men told the hikers they were state archaeologists inspecting the area for a proposed watershed project. They also told the hikers they had just broken the law by picking up what they called artifacts. Both archaeologists began to berate the hikers and accused them of intentionally hiking to that area to pick up “ancient artifacts” that were covered by the law.  One of the archaeologists walked back to the SUV and returned to the hikers with a pen and notepad. They were asked their names and where they lived. One of the hikers was an attorney and in so many words he told the archaeologists that they were being harassed and they would give them no information unless the archaeologist could immediately produce the law that stated the hikers had broken.  And if they did see the law and they did break the law, that the archaeologists were not police officers, therefore could not take their personal information and were themselves asking for a harassment lawsuit which the attorney told them he would be very happy to pursue against them. The attorney told the archaeologists that the conversation was now over and they would return the bottles to the area they found them.

A forest ranger arrested a man with a metal detector for using it inside a creek that was located on BLM land. The metal detector was a gold metal detector. The man was fined $5000 and his metal detector was confiscated. After hiring a lawyer, the man got back his $5000 and his metal detector because he had not found and removed any gold. Metal detecting was not a crime on that land and the man did not break any laws. But, had he removed gold he would have been arrested for sure and would not have got back his money or his detector.

Three women  were rock hunting on state land and arrested for picking up and keeping small stones deemed to be of “historical significance.”

I have hundreds of stories just like these from across the country.  

Metal Detecting Laws In America vs The Supreme Diggers of Dirt

Archaeologists view themselves as the supreme diggers of dirt.

For years,  archaeologists across the country, have worked side by side with state government officials and bureaucracies, to manipulate the Antiquities Act of 1906, ARPA, (Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979), the National Historic Preservation Act, and many State laws in their favor. They have bent, stretched, and remolded the above Federal laws to aid their agenda.

What is their agenda? I'll tell you what it is. They want metal-detecting laws enacted, and they would love nothing more than to see the hobby and the metal-detecting manufacturers closed.  Metal detecting manufacturers have collectively spent millions of dollars fighting back against these ridiculous laws.

The archaeologist's scheme is to control every item of history. This includes every relic, artifact, old coin, old bottle, old pottery, and Native American Indian arrow points that lay beneath the ground's surface.

I have said that archaeologists are needed in certain areas. However, archaeologists as a whole despise the person that owns a metal detector, and they believe no individual, has the right to dig up and explore history, other than themselves. They truly believe they have been anointed the Supreme Diggers of Dirt.

Archaeologists, with the help of their sidekicks in power,  have reshaped the above laws so that if anyone other than an archaeologist digs on any Federal, BLM, or State land and retrieves an artifact of historical significance, that individual is breaking the law.

They use phrases such as any item of “historical significance”, or of “cultural significance” to fit their agenda. The problem is in the interpretation or definition of what “cultural” and “historical significance” means.

Is a coin dated 1850 as significant as a piece of pottery from 4000 years ago? I don’t think so! And if it is, who decides and how? Well, the archaeologist does. BTW, archaeologists have always been more concerned with what artifacts they could find on pre-historic sites. We’re talking about artifacts from thousands of years ago. But as you will read below, the 100-year-old rule stated in the Antiquities Act of 1906, has been reduced to 50 years in one state.

My questions are:

Who defines what antiquity is?

What a cultural resource is?

What is an object of historical significance?

What is modern and what is not?

The only clear issue is that the archaeology community has been taking advantage of a set of laws that are vague in definition.

The archaeology community constantly manipulates, what is already a vague definition of what antiquity is and is not.

Webster’s dictionary defines the word archaeology as the “study of ancient times from remains.” How does an object that is 100 years old become ancient and off-limits to anyone but an archaeologist? Does an item that is 100 years old qualify as ancient? What about a coin that is dated 1973?

New York State

As already mentioned, there is no federal metal detecting law in America. But each state has its version of ordinances and fiats of its own. New York State is one such state.

NYS has an extended version of the above laws regarding digging artifacts on State lands. It is a law that was devised and then hidden inside what is called the Education Law. Give me a break.

To help the archaeologist agenda, NYS State passed a law in 1958 that was specifically designed to enhance and stretch the state ARPA law. ARPA on its own is a travesty, but by sneaking through a clear act of deception to benefit archaeologists and hurt hobbyists, the state inserted “Section 233” of the state Education law. Section 233 of the Education Law reads:

“This law intended to protect these “publicly owned” cultural resources “both for scientific and for educational and historic purposes.”

Section 233 also states that it protects “objects of archaeological interest.”

And “it requires anyone who unexpectedly discovers such objects on state lands to report it to the appropriate persons.”

What follows points directly to my argument of who decides what is of “historical or cultural significance.”

Section 233 of NYS Education law states that,

“Objects deposited on state lands that are less than 50 years old are not considered to be of “archeological interest.” 

What a joke. Suddenly, what was modern 50 years ago has become of archaeological interest.

How does Section 233 of the Education law look when it is compared to the Antiquities Act of 1906?

Remember, the Antiquities Act states that, “no item shall be treated as an archaeological resource under regulations under this paragraph unless such item is at least 100 years of age.”

In NYS, what only a few years ago was modern is now termed as being of “archaeological significant.” 

So at the time of my writing this, a 1973 Lincoln Penny is of cultural, historical, and archaeological significance. I say that every person that has a metal detector in NY keeps all of their modern pennies and we turn them into the state museum like we’re supposed to do. I for one am all for preserving items of “cultural significance.”

NYS knew this law was a farse, that’s why they tucked it away and hid it in the Education Law

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­In Closing

Nowhere in our Constitution does it sanction the federal government to purchase or take control of America’s land other than for the defense of America.  The Constitution limits federal ownership of land to 10 miles square for a capital. In addition, the only other land that government can acquire is for military and defense use where it is specified in the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17, as that clause reads, “and to exercise like Authority over all places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the same shall be for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock Yards, and other needful Buildings.”

So in other words, according to the Constitution and the above clause, the federal government cannot purchase any lands outside the capital unless it has the consent of the state legislature where the land exists, and it must be for military purposes. Article I of the Constitution is law, like the entire Constitution is the law of our great land, and the government, with the help of archaeologists, and beauracrats have abused that law.

Everyone that metal detects/treasure hunts or enjoys the outdoors, should pay attention to their state laws and watch to see if any federal metal detecting laws in America are passed.

The history of America that lay beneath and above our revered land, belongs to all of us.  

NOTICE:

I shall not be held responsible for any information on this page that has been outdated due to new federal regulations. Although I try to keep up to date of any new Federal Laws, it is not my responsibility to monitor every law that affects our hobby. From time to time you need to follow up with your State regulations as well.

Of course, if I know of any changes in Federal laws, I will update you here.