Find's Treasure Forums

Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!

You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.

Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.

Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.

Click here to register!



Need Support Help?

Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you

Boundaries of Treasure Coast water leases

tvr

Well-known member
Did some google searches and am not turning up where the southern end of the holding company's leases are. I've found references to the northern end being just north of Sebastion. I found some references to Jupiter being within the the boundary.

Is Juno Beach and south OK to hunt the water? Palm Beach and south?
Thanks in advance all!
Cheers,
tvr
 
Thank you very much!

My wife hopes to plan a trip south every year. She normally finds a couple places she thinks are nice and asks me to look. I like to hunt in the water, if possible, when on these trips, even if not much is turning up. The information will help us with planning and staying legal.
Thanks again!
tvr
 
Fl. has pasted some new laws on least lands in the water,Leased land can only start 1500 yards off shore. They did this because to many People with MD's couldn't hunt in knee deep water.The People with Lease were getting to Greed. the new laws have been pass some time in the passed 6 month. More info later.
 
junklord3139 said:
Fl. has pasted some new laws on least lands in the water,Leased land can only start 1500 yards off shore. They did this because to many People with MD's couldn't hunt in knee deep water.The People with Lease were getting to Greed. the new laws have been pass some time in the passed 6 month. More info later.

Can you cite a source for this new law? I've never heard of it before, or heard of others talking about it.
 
Florida Division of Historical Resources, Chapter 1A-31 http://flheritage.com/preservation/laws/ . Leased land in Florida is for oil recovery only. You need a permit for a shipwrecks. A permit is only good for 3 years and covers only 3 square miles, and you have to find a shipwreck first before you can get a permit.
 
I don't understand how that changes things? I tried to read it but I'm just a layman not a freikin atty... I guess you could try and tell um it's a new fangled oil detector...
 
Not an attorney either, but it says it exempts any agreements made before the 2009 law changes were made. It has provisions for a permit to explore and if exploration found something, then a permit to excavate (or recover). It has penalties for exploring without a permit. Also indicates that what is found is turned over to the state for determination of what the permit holder will be allowed to keep. Because it exempts deals made before the law was revised, it does not appear to substantially change anything except to make you get a permit to explore for ship wrecks if you did not have an existing agreement. It does not appear to void the existing leases nor does it appear to further restrict casual beach hunting and wading as long as you are not diving towards a wreck with a detector in hand without a permit to explore.

Thanks for adding another piece of information!
tvr
 
"It does not appear to void the existing leases nor does it appear to further restrict casual beach hunting and wading as long as you are not diving towards a wreck with a detector in hand without a permit to explore."


They key word there is "appear". I bet if someone were to "ask enough questions", of enough desk-bound bureaucrats, they could indeed find someone to say that it also applies to casual beach detecting (even though that was, obviously, never the intent, and that it was for underwater mel fisher type stuff). So if casual beach detecting, above and out of the water, has not historically been bothered with, then best to keep it that way. I think all too often, we md'rs can be our own worst enemy, and asking way too many questions, when way too few people would even care. Then we end up getting "no's", in places where no one ever cared before (till you asked).

Not saying this is necessarily one such example (perhaps someone really does care). But if it's true that someone really does care, or go out there to roust beach md'rs, I bet if you were to research it back far enough, you'd probably find that the root of the reason for this concern, was probably people years ago, who went asking. And then old-timers are left scratching their heads at new-found "clarifications", asking themselves "since when?" :shrug::angry:
 
Top