Rhode Island Beaches

[togamac]

Looking for someone with firsthand knowledge of Rhode Island beach detecting laws. i'm headed that way tomorrow, Narragansett area with my Infinium and would like to hear from you please. If not, I'll have to waste time checking with the police. Thanks for the help!

 

[togamac]

Sorry, didn't mean to say "waste" time with the police. I meant to say "spend" time. Knowing the law is no waste of time.

 

[Champ Ferguson]

I would suggest looking up the local ordinances online or asking at the appropriate office of those who know, but I don't want to be chastised by Tom. So please don't do anything that responsible.







......opcorn:

 

[togamac]

Well, I did go to Narragansett Town Beach. They charge $15 for non-member parking and $10 to use the beach. I asked at the gate and they told me "No problem" with metal detecting. I brought my Infiniti and used it in salt water for the first time. It worked great. Small responses from passing waves that could be tuned out with the Sensitivity knob. I also brought my plastic green shovel modified with holes and pointy front edge. The sand was too hard for this shovel. If you go, bring a SS scoop. Everything was sanded in and I came up empty but did have 2 hours of fun in the sun!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I would suggest looking up the local ordinances online or asking at the appropriate office of those who know, but I don't want to be chastised by Tom. So please don't do anything that responsible.







......opcorn:

haha, well no "chastisement" here I like your answer : Look up the laws for oneself. Not asking police or kiosk personnel.

Togamac : I have heard of many md'rs, doing as you did (asking the clerk at the entry desk, or asking a cop), and getting a "no". When in fact, no true/real rule/law existed that said such a thing. Instead, whomever you asked, perhaps couched the question in terms of "harvest/remove" or "alter/deface", etc... This happened at a beach near me, for example: A beach that has been detected, no problem , forever -&- a -day. Imagine our surprise then, when they hit the "contact us" button to the administering agency (300 miles away), and got a "no".

So as you can see, it's possible to get a "safe" answer to a question like this, with no basis in actual law or rule. Thus better to look up rules/laws for oneself. If there is nothing there that says "No metal detectors", then presto: Not disallowed.

 

[Champ Ferguson]

When/if you ask, always ask "is there a law that prohibits metal detecting?". Never any other variation. If they say yes, then require them to cite it to you while telling them there was no such thing in your search of the state laws/city or town ordnances/etc.

'Rules' are just madeup bs with huge variations of legal weight behind them- mostly none when it comes right down to it.


Glad you had a good time, togomac. Now you just have to wait until conditions improve........

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....'Rules' are just madeup bs with huge variations of legal weight behind them- mostly none when it comes right down to it..... ........

Yes. Highly "catch-all". And can be arbitrary, whimsical, and mood-driven.

When/if you ask, always ask "is there a law that prohibits metal detecting?"..... If they say yes, then require them to cite it to you while telling them there was no such thing in your search of the state laws/city or town ordnances/etc.........

This tactic has been promoted before, in discussions on the subject. Sounds great, right ? It's phrased in a way that PUTS THE BURDEN OF PROOF on them, to cite such a law, if one existed. Thus removing yourself from the risk of some arbitrary "no" (as if you'd just asked their princely permission). Right ?

But ... although an improved method, there has been failures (if not downright risks) of this method. Example: A fellow walks into city hall, and asks in exactly that fashion. So that, if the gal was going to say "no", it puts burden on the desk-clerk to cite any such law. The tone/task was unmistakable to the desk clerk. She flipped to-&-fro through her rule books and muni-codes, and could find nothing that said "no md'ing". So she was forced to tell the fellow that there was no law prohibiting. Eh ? The md'r flashed a big smile, and asks for her name (another "unmistakable" hint that he was about to cite her authority, as if this gal had just said "it's ok to do that").

When the gentleman left, the confused clerk went to speak to her superiors about this curious exchange . And ... armed with images of "geeks with shovels" in the parks, .... guess what agenda item shows up on the city council meeting docket, as a proposed rule ?

Or what do you do, if you craft that carefully proposed way-of-wording, and the recipient cites "alter/deface" ? Or "harvest/remove" ? Do you *really* think you're going to win a debate with them about these things ? Mind you, these could be pencil-pusher desk-jockey's that would never have given the matter a moment's thought.

So I still say : "Look it up for oneself".

 

[Champ Ferguson]

Tom, I have employed this "tactic" all my career and have yet to be treated with anything but respect by those I've asked.(and have never been denied). I show up presentable, friendly, and NOT with a confrontational/'its my right GDit' attitude. As we have discussed before, I think that a lot of your experiences vs mine are a result of where we hunt. Acting 'Normal' in the southern US makes you friends and perhaps acting 'Normal' in socal...............makes you odd(?)

And also, citing made up scenarios from the far end of the odds does not help your position.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... And also, citing made up scenarios from the far end of the odds does not help your position.

Champ: That story I related was not "made up" . It was in a news article, that was not even on an md'ing forum. There was a rallying cry amongst md'rs, that some city had a proposed rule. When the link to a local news piece got linked to to an md'ing forum, it was as I cited. The person walking in asking "Are there any rules that prohibit". And with the implication being "If you say 'no', be prepared to show chapter and verse".

To expand on the story (as it got linked to an md'ing forum) : The particular city had some downtown park with a historic theme . So the gal at the desk was aghast at the mental perception of this guy possibly heading to that particular park. Yet on the other hand, the way he'd worded the question, left him able to leave "with her name now written down on a piece of paper".

As I said, it's an improved way of wording the question. Rather than asking "Mother may I can I?" (as if this hobby is evil or dangerous thus needing princely sanction) . So that , in this way, you're not asking their "permission". You're asking "what is the law". Glad it has never failed for you. But just sayin' that there's been other NON-MADE-UP accounts where even this has failed.

Another example (taken straight from forum accounts) : The guy gets the answer "No because you can't dig" . And NOWHERE in the question did the md'r ever mention "digging". So he launches into a debate as to probe, vs dig , vs leave-no-trace, etc.... To no avail. And the higher he goes up the wrungs of the ladder, the more resolved they become . That's where I got the question of "Do you really think you'd win that debate of semantics ?". Maybe, sure. But then again, why not look up the rules for oneself ? If you're batting 100%, great.

 

[Champ Ferguson]

Well since we're trading stories, I'll tell one I can personally say is the Truth....

I'm hunting and digging with my wife on a sunday morning at the local small town library. Head librarian stops by (off hours) and huffily asks what I am doing.
"Metal detecting".
"Is that legal?"
"Not only is it legal, Chief (insert his name here) personally told me it was OK on public property:"
She left and I never heard another peep from anyone. Found several silvers there over the course of a few hunts.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...... "Is that legal?"
"Not only is it legal, Chief (insert his name here) personally told me it was OK on public property:"
She left and I never heard another peep from anyone. ....

Sure. And these rejoinders (of "yes's") often get show-cased . To give the implication "See, it's a good thing to ask". Especially if the "yes" resulted in an effective deflection of a busy-body.

But I find this conclusion sort of ... uh ... curious : When someone goes to ask someone "can I detect" (or more carefully : " are there any laws that prohibit?"), and they end up getting a green light, then to them this means: "See ? It was a good thing I asked. So that now I can metal detect".

But this strikes me as odd. Because if they'd said "no" (or shown you a law that wasn't truly specific to result in "no"), then I suppose you'd be saying THE SAME THING: Ie.: "See, it's a good thing I asked. Because now I know that I can't go, and saved myself embarrassment " . So whether you get a "yes" or a "no", both answers seem to imply that asking was necessary (lest how else could they have answered, if they didn't have the say-so ??)

So as you can see: Authority will answer either "yes" or "no". NEVER does authority answer something like this : "Gee that's a funny question. Why are you asking me ?" . Instead they will bestow their princely yes or no.

And to the extent a busy-body *could* admittedly be deflected with a name-to-drop (even though not needed, if no law prohibiting), don't forget there's been an equal # of stories of the exact opposite: Eg.: Busy-body comes to gripe. MD'r proudly whips out their name-to-drop. Busy-body gets on their phone, calls down to city hall and says : "But he's tearing the place up !" (which isn't true, of course). Guess what happens to the permission ?

As I say though: glad this is working 100% for you. I can count several parks in my part of my state, where we can trace trouble back to persons who went asking. Not all of them resulted in actual in-field enforcement. Ie.: we hear of someone who gets a "no" or got booted. But ... after awhile, it goes away. And 5 or 10 yrs. later, you can md. to your heart's content, and ... the "no" or "booting" that someone fetched fades into memory.

 

[Champ Ferguson]

Again, I think your experiences are a function of the area you hunt in. SoCal goobermint people are waaaaay different from rural and suburban Southern folks.

Constantly playing WhatIf with the far end of the scale without acknowledging theres any other possibilities/probabilities seems to me just a way to get yourself all worked up for nothing. And hearsay is just that- hearsay.