# The Law



## Rocket101 (Jul 23, 2012)

What is the law about picking up points here in GA.? Is it against the law?


----------



## GLS (Jul 23, 2012)

Can't do it on a WMA.


----------



## Nicodemus (Jul 23, 2012)

It`s against the law on state and federal lands. On private property you must have written permission of the landowner.


----------



## Forest Grump (Jul 23, 2012)

Remember also that "State Property" includes any waterway defined as navigable. 

Start here:

http://georgia-archaeology.org/GCPA/frequently-asked-questions/

http://www.georgiaindiancouncil.org/Documents/collecting.html


----------



## Forest Grump (Jul 23, 2012)

While I was looking for you some links, google pulled up an old post from here. Sometimes these older posts not only give info, but you get a chance to see some of a few folk's collection that they don't usually post up. One day I'm gonna find the time to really look back through some of the years before I started lurking here & later joined up. Either way this is related, and interesting: 

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=107421


----------



## JustUs4All (Jul 24, 2012)

I agree that that is the law.  Now for the question.  You are on corps property and see a perfect grooved axe head in shallow water.  What should one do?


----------



## Nicodemus (Jul 24, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> I agree that that is the law.  Now for the question.  You are on corps property and see a perfect grooved axe head in shallow water.  What should one do?





Well, I just don`t rightly know.........


----------



## NG ALUM (Jul 24, 2012)

I'm gonna take my chances. ...


----------



## fish hawk (Jul 24, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> I agree that that is the law.  Now for the question.  You are on corps property and see a perfect grooved axe head in shallow water.  What should one do?


Thats a baited question!!!!


----------



## JustUs4All (Jul 24, 2012)

Yep, baited pretty well too.


----------



## fish hawk (Jul 24, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> Yep, baited pretty well too.



Yea.....I'd leave it right there.
I do need more rocks for my rock garden though.


----------



## chadf (Jul 24, 2012)

Guess it was good knowing y'all............


----------



## Son (Jul 24, 2012)

In my opinion, there's too many things illigal these days. Seems everything is regulated, taxed or completely illigal. It was much better back in my early days of collecting.  Wasn't so many anti's of any kind back then. Life must be too easy when people can find worthless things to spend their time on, such as being against what others like to do, that does no harm.


----------



## kwayne (Jul 24, 2012)

Moving from corps property to the river bank. 
You're fishing/walking along the bank and see a nice artifact exposed on the bank. Pick it up for your personal collection or leave it so that the next rise and fall of the river washes it away?? I know what I would do!
I agree with Son-There are way too many people with not enough to do!!


----------



## Rocket101 (Jul 24, 2012)

Thanks for all the info and points of veiw on this matter. I brought the question up because someone in my area was supposedly fine 1500 dollars for picking up 3 points. Don't know if it is true but that is what brought on the question. Thanks again!!


----------



## JustUs4All (Jul 24, 2012)

Yep, I would not be surprised.  I think the Government has lost its focus on the real purpose of a government.


----------



## fish hawk (Jul 24, 2012)

$1500 is a steep fine you would have to know the circumstances..........I'll just stick to the private property I hunt,where I have permission.I have never trespassed or been anywhere i shouldn't be while hunting arrowheads.It's just not worth it.I hunt arrow's for relaxation,enjoyment and the exercise.Having to look over you shoulder every 30 seconds to see if someone's trying to sneek up on you or arrest you is not enjoyment to me.


----------



## fish hawk (Jul 25, 2012)

More arrests in TVA land.

HUNTSVILLE, Alabama -- Five people were recently found guilty on federal charges stemming from violations of Archaeological Resources Protection Act during court proceedings in Huntsville.

David Jolley, TVA's vice president of Security and Emergency Management said it is illegal to take any artifact, including arrowheads, from TVA-managed property.

The misdemeanor charges stemmed from three separate incidents, two near the Guntersville Reservoir and another at the Pickwick Reservoir in southwestern Tennessee.

Joey Willis of Tuscumbia was cited in June after investigators for the Tennessee Valley Authority reported seeing him bringing up Native American artifacts while he was diving at Pickwick Reservoir.

Willis was fined $250, plus related costs on July 17 by U.S. Magistrate Judge Harwell Davis.

Don Hawkins, of Monteagle, Tenn., was convicted of an ARPA violation after TVA investigators reported finding him digging for Native American artifacts on the shore of Guntersville Reservoir in February. Davis fined him $500 for the ARPA violation and another $250 for misdemeanor marijuana possession, according to TVA.

On the same day, three people from Stevenson were found digging along the shoreline at Guntersville by TVA investigators. Deborah Arnold, Darius Hutchens and James Owens were convicted of ARPA violations and each was ordered to pay a $250 fine plus related costs.

Jolley said a second violation of ARPA could lead to as many five years in prison and up to a $250,000 fine.









The Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (Pub.L. 96-95 as amended, 93 Stat. 721, codified at 16 U.S.C. §§ 470aaâ€“470mm), also referred to as ARPA, is a federal law of the United States passed in 1979 and amended in 1988. It governs the excavation of archaeological sites on federal and Indian lands in the United States, and the removal and disposition of archaeological collections from those sites


----------



## gregj (Jul 26, 2012)

Why is it illegal  for the average citizen to pick up an
arrowhead or other relic on state or federal land  but  if you are from a  university and say that you are doing a 
dig/study of the areas  native  peoples  then  by golly  its  
just  fine  to do it?  I ran into a dig  many years ago in Michigans  Upper  Penenusla  where  a team from NMU
was digging  at an old site of a saw mill that was over 100 years old,  I happened to mention that  i had  found many relics there in the past  and the  Professor  got all pi___ed that  i would keep them. Said i should have left them where i found them.  I asked him if he was going to leave what he found  behind  and he said  of course not  he would be taking themback for  "further study"


----------



## Rocket101 (Jul 26, 2012)

This law needs to be over turned or at least modified. It makes no sense to leave these relics to be destoyed or lost to time!


----------



## fish hawk (Jul 26, 2012)

gregj said:


> Why is it illegal  for the average citizen to pick up an
> arrowhead or other relic on state or federal land  but  if you are from a  university and say that you are doing a
> dig/study of the areas  native  peoples  then  by golly  its
> just  fine  to do it?  I ran into a dig  many years ago in Michigans  Upper  Penenusla  where  a team from NMU
> was digging  at an old site of a saw mill that was over 100 years old,  I happened to mention that  i had  found many relics there in the past  and the  Professor  got all pi___ed that  i would keep them. Said i should have left them where i found them.  I asked him if he was going to leave what he found  behind  and he said  of course not  he would be taking themback for  "further study"



Further study,Right......Archs dont do any digging until they have a grant for it.......They put the relics in a box in a dusty,dark,dank room where the public never gets to see them!!!!The most digging some of em has ever done is in a bottom of a donut box.


----------



## Pointpuller (Jul 26, 2012)

If you are on private land with the owners permission you are legal.  If you are in the water it must be a non navigatable waterway and you have to have written permission from the land owner. Georgia law says the land owner owns the bottom of the waterway to the centerline in a non navigatable waterway.  Here is a 5 3/8" Savannah River I pulled legally from a non jurisdictional waterway with written permission.


----------



## florida boy (Jul 26, 2012)

Jason that is a fine point !


----------



## Pointpuller (Jul 26, 2012)

Thanks Phil.  Its my first "big one".  Hope yall have a good look tomorrow.


----------



## Forest Grump (Jul 26, 2012)

gregj said:


> Why is it illegal  for the average citizen to pick up an
> arrowhead or other relic on state or federal land  but  if you are from a  university and say that you are doing a
> dig/study of the areas  native  peoples  then  by golly  its
> just  fine  to do it?  I ran into a dig  many years ago in Michigans  Upper  Penenusla  where  a team from NMU
> was digging  at an old site of a saw mill that was over 100 years old,  I happened to mention that  i had  found many relics there in the past  and the  Professor  got all pi___ed that  i would keep them. Said i should have left them where i found them.  I asked him if he was going to leave what he found  behind  and he said  of course not  he would be taking themback for  "further study"





fish hawk said:


> Further study,Right......Archs dont do any digging until they have a grant for it.......They put the relics in a box in a dusty,dark,dank room where the public never gets to see them!!!!The most digging some of em has ever done is in a bottom of a donut box.



I think this is symptomatic of our whole society: rather than encourage responsible use of anything, it has become de rigueur to prohibit anybody from doing much of anything, except academics. I respect what academics do, or try to do. But truly, archeologists don't want to investigate every little village or camp. That's an enormous repetition of the same stuff (to them). To us, it's priceless finds we wouldn't trade anything for. And how many things would never have been found at all, were it not for collectors with an interest. How much of what we now "know" is due to finds by non-academics?

There are 2 sides to this: look at what looters & profiteers did with the Egyptian mummies, lots of knowledge lost forever. Same with Indian mounds. But we can't sit around for 10,000 years, waiting for some archeologists to get funding to pick up every point & put it in a museum, can we? 

I really think we need to establish either a working relationship with professionals, or failing that, if they are too self-involved, then a mutual interest group, where both sides recognize that there are people seriously interested in learning the truth of the past & collecting data without destroying it. There may well be a way to unite around government & ego's.

We got us a few, if not official archeologists, very knowledgeable people, some of whom have gotten frustrated with dealing with academics who think nobody should look at anything but them. I think we can fix that, but I spent enough time in academia getting a variety of degrees to know what those folks are like. 

I do find it hard to believe, that archeologists would be so self-obsessed, that they couldn't see the value in something like the Kolomoki Society. Am I still too naive, after all these years?


----------



## fish hawk (Jul 27, 2012)

Forest Grump said:


> I do find it hard to believe, that archeologists would be so self-obsessed, that they couldn't see the value in something like the Kolomoki Society. Am I still too naive, after all these years?



That just shows that there not really concerned with just artifacts........They really dont care about the isolated point you found in a field,if it's not in it's original context they could care less....I dont think bedding up with the Archs. is necessarily the answer.The head Arch for Georgia{I wont mention any names}Is not collector friendly.The answer lies in educating the general public and media.The media always tries to portray the collector as pot head,meth head, grave robbers.If your really concerned with getting the laws changed it has to start at home,in your local community and with contacting your state representatives,email them and let them know how you feel!!!


----------



## speedcop (Jul 27, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> I agree that that is the law.  Now for the question.  You are on corps property and see a perfect grooved axe head in shallow water.  What should one do?



one should rescue it from impending doom


----------



## GLS (Jul 27, 2012)

Georgia:  "Arrive on vacation, leave on probation".  Courtesy of the Georgia Tourism Commission.


----------



## Nicodemus (Jul 27, 2012)

It might be changed now, but at one time the law in Alabama was that anything layin` on the ground 50 years old or older, was considered an artifact and could not be disturbed. 

Glad I didn`t ever stagger and fall out over there.


----------



## GLS (Jul 27, 2012)

It's  understandable about restricting digging on public land or as some have done using a mud hog to hydraulically sluice land for artificats, but surface or river finds have little if any archaeological significance because they aren't in an identifiable strata.  I suppose the bright line of zero tolerance prevents close questions and rule beating, but arresting someone for picking up a point on a firebreak on state lands???


----------



## Rocket101 (Jul 27, 2012)

Nicodemus said:


> It might be changed now, but at one time the law in Alabama was that anything layin` on the ground 50 years old or older, was considered an artifact and could not be disturbed.
> 
> Glad I didn`t ever stagger and fall out over there.



Not that is funny right there!


----------



## dalton257 (Jul 27, 2012)

man that is one sweet hog leg pointpuller. I like the insitu. 

Thought I would add that navigable waters are controlled by the corp of engineers and are illegal to hunt. For example the Flint below Albany is navigable and off limits to artifact hunting however you can look for fossils


----------



## fish hawk (Jul 27, 2012)

dalton257 said:


> man that is one sweet hog leg pointpuller. I like the insitu.
> 
> Thought I would add that navigable waters are controlled by the corp of engineers and are illegal to hunt. For example the Flint below Albany is navigable and off limits to artifact hunting however you can look for fossils


I think the navigable waters thing is fuzzy when it comes to some smaller creeks.It's a grey area that hasn't been well defined!!!


----------



## JustUs4All (Jul 28, 2012)

It is very well defined.  Inland from the coast there are very few navigable waters.


----------



## fish hawk (Jul 28, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> It is very well defined.  Inland from the coast there are very few navigable waters.


So this means that those of us who canoe and kayak Georgians many inland streams and rivers are trespassing if the adjacent land is owned by one landowner on both sides.


----------



## shakey gizzard (Jul 28, 2012)

fish hawk said:


> So this means that those of us who canoe and kayak Georgians many inland streams and rivers are trespassing if the adjacent land is owned by one landowner on both sides.



Unless your in a "barge" , yes!


----------



## dalton257 (Jul 28, 2012)

DNR told me your tresspassing when your out of the boat and if a land owner owns both sides of a non navigable waterway he can put a fence across it if he wants


----------



## fish hawk (Jul 28, 2012)

dalton257 said:


> DNR told me your tresspassing when your out of the boat and if a land owner owns both sides of a non navigable waterway he can put a fence across it if he wants



Yea they own the stream bed but not the water.


----------



## Cpt Sniper (Jul 30, 2012)

Nicodemus said:


> It might be changed now, but at one time the law in Alabama was that anything layin` on the ground 50 years old or older, was considered an artifact and could not be disturbed.
> 
> Glad I didn`t ever stagger and fall out over there.



I wish someone would tell my wife. She always has something for me to do when i'm napping in the back yard


----------



## dmedd (Aug 1, 2012)

dalton257 said:


> DNR told me your tresspassing when your out of the boat and if a land owner owns both sides of a non navigable waterway he can put a fence across it if he wants



I know of a place where this has been done. The Little Ocmulgee River has a gate across it just up from where it empties into the Ocmulgee River. It did the last time I was up that way.


----------



## JustUs4All (Aug 2, 2012)

fish hawk said:


> Yea they own the stream bed but not the water.



They do own the right to keep you off that water.


----------



## Forest Grump (Aug 2, 2012)

http://nsglc.olemiss.edu/SandBar/SandBar3/3.1comment.htm

This has legal definition of navigable stream laws in GA, explanation of what they entail, comparison & alternative solutions to potentially remedy it to make the law more adapted to the current way we use rivers & streams. (not a lot of barge traffic or timber floatin' done these days, & when the laws were passed it seems mostly only injuns canoed & kayaks were sealskin transports for Eskimos).


----------



## fish hawk (Aug 2, 2012)

dmedd said:


> I know of a place where this has been done. The Little Ocmulgee River has a gate across it just up from where it empties into the Ocmulgee River. It did the last time I was up that way.


Some will do it...there's a well known trout stream in N. Ga. thats had some issues also


JustUs4All said:


> They do own the right to keep you off that water.


They can if they own both sides


Forest Grump said:


> http://nsglc.olemiss.edu/SandBar/SandBar3/3.1comment.htm
> 
> This has legal definition of navigable stream laws in GA, explanation of what they entail, comparison & alternative solutions to potentially remedy it to make the law more adapted to the current way we use rivers & streams. (not a lot of barge traffic or timber floatin' done these days, & when the laws were passed it seems mostly only injuns canoed & kayaks were sealskin transports for Eskimos).


Georgia has some of the most restrictive laws in the country when it comes to this.


----------

