The latest covid regulation guidance

[Easylife]

Has anyone actually asked DCMS why they choose to differentiate so much between public and private land? It's all just land so why would it matter who owns it? It just seems completely ridiculous and no judge would tolerate such nonsense, yet we are expected to it seems!

[Blackadder43]

I think it was due to all the rallies being held on the first lockdown, which did cause a few police visits, some were shut down and folk sent home, and others flouted all the rules
So by stopping the private permission things it put a stop to all the rally people from massing lots of people in one spot, potentially upsetting local folk and causing unnecessary police presence

Just my opinion

[Easylife]

I think it was due to all the rallies being held on the first lockdown, which did cause a few police visits, some were shut down and folk sent home, and others flouted all the rules
So by stopping the private permission things it put a stop to all the rally people from massing lots of people in one spot, potentially upsetting local folk and causing unnecessary police presence

Just my opinion

Well it seems quite a gung ho solution without much thought! If they're not to knowledgeable about detecting then maybe they should have consulted NCMD?

[Blackadder43]

Sadly easylife, as we both know any government body is not really into thinking things through properly
It was only my opinion though based on what we all saw through the first lockdown
In times when decisions and rules have been made quickly, its not always turned out to be the best one.

[Easylife]

Actually angling and other fishing on private land is subject to exactly the same rules as detecting. The Angling Trust glosses over the detail but even their guidance still says ‘in public outdoor places’. They have chosen not to highlight the fact that on private land you are not permitted, according to the law, to fish on private land with others in tier 3, or at all in tier 4.

It is well flawed if I can fish on a river on public land but not where it crosses private land as there is no difference at all. It would seem that DCMS have taken the lazy approach of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut as with detecting!

[DaveP]

Well Christmas is nearly over - hoorah!

If you want to split hairs I think there is a way to detect on private land : -

"Metal detecting can take place in an outdoor public place. You must have the permission of the landowner to detect on the land and should contact your local council or district councils......"

"You cannot detect on private land, even if you have permission from the owner...."

I think footpaths are classed as outdoor public spaces Personally, I think people who dig up footpaths should store their detectors where the sun don't shine but you could argue you are digging in an outdoor public space with the permission of the landowner.

To paraphrase the DCMS - you can't please all of the people all of the time.

[Oxgirl]

Well Christmas is nearly over - hoorah!

If you want to split hairs I think there is a way to detect on private land : -

"Metal detecting can take place in an outdoor public place. You must have the permission of the landowner to detect on the land and should contact your local council or district councils......"

"You cannot detect on private land, even if you have permission from the owner...."

I think footpaths are classed as outdoor public spaces Personally, I think people who dig up footpaths should store their detectors where the sun don't shine but you could argue you are digging in an outdoor public space with the permission of the landowner.

To paraphrase the DCMS - you can't please all of the people all of the time.

Dave go pour yourself a port and relax your brain There are no loop holes, sadly a life of DIY and thumb twiddling beckons for a few weeks for most of us.

[DaveP]

Dave go pour yourself a port and relax your brain

Can't even do that this Christmas - and that's the best of it so tells you how bad it's been!

[Oxgirl]

Can't even do that this Christmas - and that's the best of it so tells you how bad it's been!

Oh no Hope you are okay

[Easylife]

As I've said before, most casual detectorists are completely unaware of DCMS so will just go by general Gov exercise rules. But let's just hope that common sense prevails soon! I can't wait for the cops to bring a prosecution against a solitary detectorist in the middle of nowhere. It would cause a public outrage and is just never going to happen! And yes, I would gladly volunteer to be that one even though I can still detect according to DCMS rules. It all just seems very silly but just part of the crazy Covid roller-coaster ride!
The world has gone mad!

[Pete E]

Sadly easylife, as we both know any government body is not really into thinking things through properly
It was only my opinion though based on what we all saw through the first lockdown
In times when decisions and rules have been made quickly, its not always turned out to be the best one.

The reasoning may not be just down to metal detecting...it could be used to prevent any large scale outdoor gathering on private land...I seem to recall during the first lockdown a large wedding with hundreds of people was being held in a marquee on private farm land...also various outdoor "parties" were broken up as well...

[Kenleyboy]

I did see someone metal detecting in the last lockdown , maybe they were one of the numbers who are unaware of the rules and are indeed using that time for their personal exercise , and that to me makes sense . The Farmer on my permission could not believe those rules were in place and was totally unaware that both he and I would both be breaking the law if seen and reported . No matter how daft the rules are its best to just play the game no matter how frustrating it all is .

[Pete E]

It is well flawed if I can fish on a river on public land but not where it crosses private land as there is no difference at all. It would seem that DCMS have taken the lazy approach of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut as with detecting!

If you like pondering "What if's???" I wonder what the legal situation is if you have permission to detect on ground covered by the CROW Act???

[Steve RC]

Yes there seems to be some confusion. The DCMS are perhaps being advised by third parties on the detecting terms and conditions who have an agenda to follow.

However there may be genuine reasons such as what to do if a detectorists locates a hoard that requires excavation of the findspot and to avoid putting FLO's or other archaeological staff at risk to do this. The issue of rallies would be relevant simply because a number of events have been operated and run in an irresponsible manner putting lives at risk and attracting the attention of the authorites just to make money.

In the final analysis all the DCMS had to specify was that detecting is ok if carried out by an individual on private land with the permission of the landowner and that all group and club searching is not allowed.

The failure to provide a simple statement such as the above makes people wonder if there is another motive behind the DCMS thinking on the issue.

[Oxgirl]

Yes there seems to be some confusion. The DCMS are perhaps being advised by third parties on the detecting terms and conditions who have an agenda to follow.

However there may be genuine reasons such as what to do if a detectorists locates a hoard that requires excavation of the findspot and to avoid putting FLO's or other archaeological staff at risk to do this. The issue of rallies would be relevant simply because a number of events have been operated and run in an irresponsible manner putting lives at risk and attracting the attention of the authorites just to make money.

In the final analysis all the DCMS had to specify was that detecting is ok if carried out by an individual on private land with the permission of the landowner and that all group and club searching is not allowed.

The failure to provide a simple statement such as the above makes people wonder if there is another motive behind the DCMS thinking on the issue.

But they are using the same guidance for all general sports and leisure - there doesn’t appear to be any specific singling out of detecting as a special case for more stringent rules