The Metal Detecting Debate. Keep all your MD questions and querys here!

RollYerOwn · 01-04-2010 7:05pm

Regarding licencing, anyone can apply for one, but the states current policy towards archaeological sites is to preserve them in situ (ie as they are without disturbance). Currently they probably would frown upon it as there is no threat to the archaeology that exists (eg if it's not known IF it exists or not). To excavate the "hits" you would probably need an excavation licence too - and you have to be qualified to get one. The law is changing soon in regard to licencing but only an elite few know what the outcome will be - they're not really communicating it to anyone as they are still working on it. If a known site is protected (and this pretty much encapsulates all the ones that are known to exist) it is extremely likely that you would not be allowed (unless you could demonstrate a real threat to the known archaeology).

I agree about local archaeological societies organising volunteers to get involved. One of the things that happens in the UK infinitely more than here are field walking exercises - where a group of volunteers plots the location of all finds that they spot on the surface of, eg a newly ploughed field. Again its probably because there are so few finds in Ireland in comparison with the UK. If a group set up a project in this way to search for as-yet-unknown sites, they might be able to demonstrate a research programme they might be able to argue "we found these artefacts, they suggest a previously unknown site, and they are under threat of erosion/damage due to recent ongoing agricultural activity". Might be looked on more favourably. It would probably require a legally binding method statement that specifies you would not dig beneath the ploughsoil (no need to as metal detectors only find things to the depth of about 20cm at best I think), then no further damage would be done to the potentially existing site (ie the features beneath the ploughsoil) and everyone should be a winner.

It would still be illegal to keep the artefacts however, even for the landowner, as all archaeological objects (that includes pretty much everything you find potentially) belong to the state. But as most finds are of little or no monetary value then it wouldn't be worth it for those reasons anyway.

I noticed some people commented that archaeologists don't use metal detectors - that's untrue. They have a place if used properly.

Bob Z · 18-04-2010 12:23am

How much would it cost for a decent metal detecter? What brands are the best?

Riamfada · 18-04-2010 1:22am

Bob Z wrote: »

How much would it cost for a decent metal detecter? What brands are the best?

Please read the charter

METAL DETECTING
- Please refrain from posting anything with reference to obtaining a metal detector, use of a metal detector or ownership of such a product. Metal Detecting for Archaeological finds or close to a site of historical/archaeological importance is illegal under the National Monuments Ammendment Act(1987)

Fighting Irish · 18-04-2010 10:50am

Bob Z wrote: »

How much would it cost for a decent metal detecter? What brands are the best?

<mod edit> seems to be the best cheap one

Riamfada · 18-04-2010 11:51am

Fighting Irish wrote: »

<mod edit> seems to be the best cheap one

Fighting Irish banned for a week depsite the mod warning in the previous post. This thread is not a place to get information about getting, buying or using a metal detector.

Bob Z · 18-04-2010 12:08pm

Grimes wrote: »

Please read the charter

METAL DETECTING
- Please refrain from posting anything with reference to obtaining a metal detector, use of a metal detector or ownership of such a product. Metal Detecting for Archaeological finds or close to a site of historical/archaeological importance is illegal under the National Monuments Ammendment Act(1987)

I ready read the charter. I never said I was going near any site. I don't know anything about archaeology I just asked about using a metal detector. Are they illegal to own/buy? If I'm in the wrong forum/thread then move me. Aren't you being a little over zealous banning someone just for being helpful?

Riamfada · 18-04-2010 12:15pm

FI was banned for naming the make and model of a metal detector and this isnt the first time this issue has come up in this thread. Regarding your earlier question this thread is not an information means for starting your own metal detecting hobby now please stay on the original topic if you have something to contribute to it.

Thank you.

Bob Z · 18-04-2010 12:37pm

Grimes wrote: »

FI was banned for naming the make and model of a metal detector and this isnt the first time this issue has come up in this thread. Regarding your earlier question this thread is not an information means for starting your own metal detecting hobby now please stay on the original topic if you have something to contribute to it.

Thank you.

Well is there somewhere on the site I could ask anout metal detecters? I'm not planning anything illegal

Riamfada · 18-04-2010 12:50pm

Bob Z wrote: »

Well is there somewhere on the site I could ask anout metal detecters? I'm not planning anything illegal

Im not sure when you would ask but certainly not the archaeology forum.

RollYerOwn · 18-04-2010 8:54pm

As far as I'm aware there is no law against advertising, selling or buying metal detectors unless it is implicit that that they are being promoted to use to find archaeological material. Then it is illegal. So perhaps the mod is exercising a bit of overcaution legally, but if you want to look for a metal detector, why don't you try UK metal detectorist sites/clubs and ask them? I'm sure they'd be helpful, and you would be better able to buy a good one there than you could here.

However, using metal detectors is a different kettle of fish because legally you have to prove you are NOT using it to search for archaeological material. That is a tall order, so effectively it means you cannot use one without (if caught) being dragged to court with potentially huge fines and/or jail time. No landowner is legally able to give you permission and so you'd be legally trespassing too probably.

In short, you're probably asking the wrong people to recommend a good metal detector.

Smartypantsdig · 20-04-2010 2:51am

When faced with the obvious, why not just shut this this thread down? Metal detectors are covered specifily under legislation... why a debate?

RollYerOwn · 20-04-2010 8:56am

Why a debate when the law is clear? I'm sure you could argue on three points I can think of from the top of my head...

1) Laws change, and given the (practically ignored) Review of Policy currently being undertaken by the DoEHLG it might be a requirement for all concerned parties to have a say on the things that matter (if there are any archaeologists who have much in the way of opinions on the policy and practice of archaeology in this country they are damned silent despite repeated calls for debate on important issues).

2) Outside of archaeologists there are plenty of people who do not understand how and why the law has come to its determination of the illegality of metal detecting, and might appreciate the chance to learn more.

3) If debates on subjects dealt with clearly in law such as divorce, gay rights, abortion, civil marriage... amongst many others, were closed because the law is the law, then we would have very little to talk about and would have to accept every smutty piece of legislation that our "betters" in society and their best mates in the dail decide to impose upon us.

4) The Constitution allows for "the rights of the citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions". Whilst not a citizen myself....

Oh that's four.... Ah well..

happyoutscan · 22-04-2010 9:28am

If you want to find out about metal detectors, go elsewhere. This is an archaeology forum.

Quite simple really.

Onesimus · 04-05-2010 3:19pm

where can I buy a metal detector and how much do they usually retail at?

Onesimus · 04-05-2010 3:39pm

Grimes wrote: »

Please read the charter

METAL DETECTING
- Please refrain from posting anything with reference to obtaining a metal detector, use of a metal detector or ownership of such a product. Metal Detecting for Archaeological finds or close to a site of historical/archaeological importance is illegal under the National Monuments Ammendment Act(1987)

sorry I did not read this post or see it, I'm new around here.

IrlCasey · 05-05-2010 12:59pm

LOL!!!!

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

thebadmonkey · 28-06-2010 12:35pm

Is it legal to use a MD on a beach?

I've no interest whatsoever in going near anywhere that has any possible archaeological value at all (as has been mentioned, what may be valueless from a material perspective and thrown to one side by someone with a MD may be invaluable if understood in its original context by an archaeologist)

I would enjoy walking along a beach back in Wexford detecting though

RollYerOwn · 28-06-2010 6:47pm

From my interpretation, you would have to prove to a Guard, if caught, that you are not metal detecting for archaeological artefacts, and you must not be near an archaeological site (would you know if you were? They are not all above ground, there are many areas of archaeological potential on coastlines that might get you into hot water..)

It might be presumed, in any case, that you are looking for artefacts (or what else? Loose change spilled out of peoples pockets on the beach?) in which case you could face a hefty penalty or worse. I think its not up to the Guard to prove your guilt, its up to you to prove your innocence - and in court.

My advice; don't.

thebadmonkey · 28-06-2010 6:56pm

RollYerOwn wrote: »

From my interpretation, you would have to prove to a Guard, if caught, that you are not metal detecting for archaeological artefacts, and you must not be near an archaeological site (would you know if you were? They are not all above ground, there are many areas of archaeological potential on coastlines that might get you into hot water..)

It might be presumed, in any case, that you are looking for artefacts (or what else? Loose change spilled out of peoples pockets on the beach?) in which case you could face a hefty penalty or worse. I think its not up to the Guard to prove your guilt, its up to you to prove your innocence - and in court.

My advice; don't.

Thanks for the response RYO. There is certainly no known historical site of any kind near the beach (Curracloe) with the exception of five protected thatched houses well away from the sea - but I take your point.

And yes, loose coints or lost jewellery is why had planned it! I've seen one or two people in the poast doing it so was always curious. The law as it stands is a curious one as a) you are presumed guilty and b) it seems you are not breaking the law if detecting in a site where no archaeological importance has been previously discovered - but that in the event you do actually find something, as your find has changed the definitiuon of the area, you have broken the law.

Still, better to be over protective than leave it wide open I guess!

RollYerOwn · 28-06-2010 7:11pm

That's because the law was designed to stop people metal detectoring, not encourage it as a hobby - however one might feel about that.

thebadmonkey · 28-06-2010 7:26pm

I can agree the motivation behind any such law- but would it not make more sense for the law to be phrased in a more defined manner ie All Metal Detectors can only be used with an archaeological licience etc.

Current legislation is poorly worded and open to (wilful) mis-interpretation.

The stigma attached to MD is unfortunate as it does have a place. As always it is the actions of a greedy few who are willing to pillage their own heritage and flog it on Ebay or wherever that make it so poorly regarded.

At least imho it would be far better to licience the use of MDs and put legal specifics in place detailing where they can and cannot be used (and for example if a qualified archaeologist needs to accompany them or whatever)

It's a pity that both communities are so far apart as both archaeologists and amateur MDs working together can produce effective results. From memory battlefield archaeology is one prime example - archaeologists and MDs worked on thye site of the Battle of the Little BigHorn to create a detailed timeline of what happened and where. The ebb and flow of the conflict was tracked by archaeologists by tagging finds such as bullets, battlefield debris etc

Unfortunately archaeologists talking about MD are perceived as "elitist know-it-alls" who look down their noses at amateurs whereas metal detectorists are seenas invasive parasites who loot and destroy our heritage. It must be frustrating for those on both sides who would seek to actively work towards the same aims

Jakub25 · 16-07-2010 2:59pm

RollYerOwn wrote: »

From my interpretation, you would have to prove to a Guard, if caught, that you are not metal detecting for archaeological artefacts, and you must not be near an archaeological site (would you know if you were? They are not all above ground, there are many areas of archaeological potential on coastlines that might get you into hot water..)

It is all because the law isn't good and should be changed
for British example.Black sheeps are in every community
and we can't stop this for 100%

A lot of places must be protected, but there is a lot places where
archeologysts will never dig.Those places should be allowed for MD.
and the procedure should be, when somebady find something realy old
he should call Guards or Archeologyst who can do everything
in propher rules.

Here is another example of good cooperation beetwen Archeologysts and Hobbysts.Here in Ireland It is impossible.

I think that for those 52000 roman coins is better to go to museum
then to black market.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10546960

Now lets think what is happening with similar hoard when somebady with MD will find this here?

Riamfada · 17-07-2010 2:01am

Mr Crisp got market value for the coins. I don't see the Government splashing out any cash in Ireland. Nor do I see the need to excavated right now, the coins (or other artifacts) have been in the ground since the Iron Age. Whats the rush to dig them up?

Wibbs · 17-07-2010 11:00am

Grimes wrote: »

I don't see the Government splashing out any cash in Ireland.

That's the biggest problem right there and it goes all across the area of study and preservation of our heritage. The MD debate is just one of the more obvious areas of fallout. Even if every single MD was trained and had the honesty of Buddha they would never allow it, simply because they dont want to pay out should someone find something valuable. The resources arent there. They're not there for the pros, the very people who've spent years studying and working for peanuts and who are charged with looking after our heritage. For all the government rhetoric over the years its not on the agenda it seems.

My worry in all this is that spectacular and valuable(monetarily) finds seem to be very thin on the ground since the Derrynaflan chalice find and subsequent court case. I hope it's just because no one is looking in the right place and/or down to luck rather than finds like that sitting in drawers somewhere or worse sold off and spirited out of the country. I have seen items in the antiquities trade described as "celtic" with very vague provenances. Ditto with Viking stuff. I hope its not come from here.

Nebit · 17-07-2010 3:04pm

Metal detecting ONLY finds metal objects! to prove that this is an artefact, it must be dug up, BY WHICH TIME you have destroyed half the information we use as archaeologists, in many cases people forget the exact position where they found it. instead give areas of Kms which is useless. Ergo situ is lost and a find is harder to interprate.
Ireland does not have great amounts of Archaelogical finds unlike UK therefore it cannot be compared, many artefacts we do have in the museum are unable to be placed due to them being found in an era where they simply didnt care for archaeology in some cases dating is hard to accomplish due to this.
Ireland must preserve its archaeology leaving it soley to specialists who can record the relevant data.

snowstreams · 17-08-2010 11:34pm

My fiance lost her engagement ring on Sunday on a beach.
We are going to try and find it with a metal detector.
It seems most detectors cant detect gold as well cause its not a great conductor. But its white gold, which has nickel in it, so could be better?
What depth could you detect down to with a normal detector?
Would the wet salt in the sand, hinder or help detection?
I hope the ring hasnt gone too deep because the tide has come in and out a few times by now. And the waves are big there so it could be well buried.

Jakub25 · 29-10-2010 3:56pm

Grimes wrote: »

There will be no co-opperation as detactorists do not seem to grasp the concept of stratigraphy and contextualisation coupled with the fact that they do not seem to grasp the notion that they are damaging a site by removing metalic features.

That very wrong because a lot of people do MD in Ireland.
and there is no recording of finds.

In UK Law is different and everybody can do MD.

Here is another database where is no artefact founded
by archeologists.

http://www.finds.org.uk/database

May I see any database of artefacts founded by people who are using MD in Ireland?

Or any database created by archeologists?
Who were using a MD.

RollYerOwn · 31-10-2010 11:44am

Jakub25 wrote: »

That very wrong because a lot of people do MD in Ireland.
and there is no recording of finds.

How do you know? Is this something you imagine or do you have evidence? Personally I can't see why anyone would bother unless it were criminal gangs trying to rape known archaeological sites - and despite the fact that I'm sure there are far far easier and surer ways to make a bit of money, these groups and individuals would hardly be handing their black market antiquities over to the museum.

Jakub25 wrote: »

In UK Law is different and everybody can do MD.

Here is another database where is no artefact founded
by archeologists.

http://www.finds.org.uk/database

May I see any database of artefacts founded by people who are using MD in Ireland?

Or any database created by archeologists?
Who were using a MD.

If you have a genuine interest in archaeological finds, there is a database in the National Museum of Ireland which documents all the known artefacts recovered in Ireland. It is not online yet, which may be a matter of funding.

If your interest is solely for metal "treasure" recovered by metal detectorists, then obviously there is no database held as it is illegal, other than whatever few cases the Gardai have (I imagine).

You keep comparing the UK, which is plagued by metal detectorists, to Ireland, which is not. I want to illustrate some of the major differences for you to explain why I think things are different.

There are no known Roman settlements or trading posts in Ireland, and although some few coins would have made it here through trade, currency in that form was not used. This is in stark contrast to England where coins were used in the south even prior to the Roman conquest, which itself was an intensive acculturation that created thousands (or perhaps hundreds of thousands) of Roman-style farms and military posts which used coinage for several hundred years.

There are no (known) Anglo-Saxon cemeteries such as those found in England where burials are often found with grave goods such as spear heads and other metal artefacts. Nor is there any use of early medieval coinage until the Norse creation of major trading settlements such as Waterford, Dublin, Wexford etc. These were apparently very limited in their exchange of coinage with the rest of Ireland, as there are precious few Norse minted coins found beyond these centres as far as I am aware - eager to hear a different argument.

There are much fewer wealthy medieval urban centres (eg deserted or contracted market towns and villages) that would result in the vast amounts of metal debris that are often found as trophies for the professional and amateur metal detectorists (coins, rusty knife blades, axe heads etc.) Those that do exist are frequently known sites which for obvious reasons should not be targeted for treasure hunting.

Without these major sources of trophy antiquities, there is a much reduced chance of finding anything (that is not modern) with a metal detector in Ireland.

Despite that there are obviously going to BE metal artefacts in the ground which are of greater AND lesser significance to archaeologists - when they are considered as part of a site's assemblage of artefacts. It is only when that is brought together that the results of that work can be appreciated by the wider community (and if anyone wants to suggest that more should be done to publish and disseminate the results of the work of archaeologists, then I quite agree). I'd be happy to post some links to some of the many sources for published works and other sources of info (some of which are very readable and not full of data and jargon) but I'm presuming there are many in other threads.

Bob Z · 31-10-2010 9:41pm

RollYerOwn wrote: »

How do you know? Is this something you imagine or do you have evidence? Personally I can't see why anyone would bother unless it were criminal gangs trying to rape known archaeological sites - and despite the fact that I'm sure there are far far easier and surer ways to make a bit of money, these groups and individuals would hardly be handing their black market antiquities over to the museum.

If you have a genuine interest in archaeological finds, there is a database in the National Museum of Ireland which documents all the known artefacts recovered in Ireland. It is not online yet, which may be a matter of funding.

If your interest is solely for metal "treasure" recovered by metal detectorists, then obviously there is no database held as it is illegal, other than whatever few cases the Gardai have (I imagine).

You keep comparing the UK, which is plagued by metal detectorists, to Ireland, which is not. I want to illustrate some of the major differences for you to explain why I think things are different.

There are no known Roman settlements or trading posts in Ireland, and although some few coins would have made it here through trade, currency in that form was not used. This is in stark contrast to England where coins were used in the south even prior to the Roman conquest, which itself was an intensive acculturation that created thousands (or perhaps hundreds of thousands) of Roman-style farms and military posts which used coinage for several hundred years.

There are no (known) Anglo-Saxon cemeteries such as those found in England where burials are often found with grave goods such as spear heads and other metal artefacts. Nor is there any use of early medieval coinage until the Norse creation of major trading settlements such as Waterford, Dublin, Wexford etc. These were apparently very limited in their exchange of coinage with the rest of Ireland, as there are precious few Norse minted coins found beyond these centres as far as I am aware - eager to hear a different argument.

There are much fewer wealthy medieval urban centres (eg deserted or contracted market towns and villages) that would result in the vast amounts of metal debris that are often found as trophies for the professional and amateur metal detectorists (coins, rusty knife blades, axe heads etc.) Those that do exist are frequently known sites which for obvious reasons should not be targeted for treasure hunting.

Without these major sources of trophy antiquities, there is a much reduced chance of finding anything (that is not modern) with a metal detector in Ireland.

Despite that there are obviously going to BE metal artefacts in the ground which are of greater AND lesser significance to archaeologists - when they are considered as part of a site's assemblage of artefacts. It is only when that is brought together that the results of that work can be appreciated by the wider community (and if anyone wants to suggest that more should be done to publish and disseminate the results of the work of archaeologists, then I quite agree). I'd be happy to post some links to some of the many sources for published works and other sources of info (some of which are very readable and not full of data and jargon) but I'm presuming there are many in other threads.

So the uk has more treasures than us but we have stricter laws?

Riamfada · 31-10-2010 11:07pm

Bob Z wrote: »

So the uk has more treasures than us but we have stricter laws?

Its because people call them treasures that we have stricter laws.

The Metal Detecting Debate. Keep all your MD questions and querys here!

Comments