Archaeologists catch looter !! haha please

Welcome to our Antique Bottle community

Be a part of something great, join today!

westernglassaddict

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
88
Reaction score
0
Points
0
In Oregon, it is absolutely, positively illegal to dig, excavate, or remove ANY artifact over 75 years old. EVEN WITH the landowner's permission. The original intent of this administrative rule was to protect native American burial sites. Unfortunately it extends to virtually any antique item dug up...even while digging a fence post hole, or drainage ditch in your back yard. This is simply the reality of desecrating Mother Earth in Oregon.
I have had digging partners who were close to age 75. I quit digging with them as they are considered an "artifact" and once in the hole, I legally could not remove the old coots from the hole without a permit.These guys needed to get home for dinner and take their meds so the risk was too great. Because of Oregon's "law", I have had to dig in other states or in local antique shops. WGA.
 

MINNESOTA DIGGER

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
1,115
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Location
minneapolis minn
the law is a joke . total joke i guess nothing i would ever dig in oregon would ever be older then 75 years old . how do you dig out a stump that is older the 75 years old . it would be against the law to pick up a rock and throw a skipper in the water . or walk on a gravel road and pick up an agate . or have a old house and do any maintainece to an old home near ground level . . how do they build any new buildings in oregon what a ***king joke . the law is to broad and needs to be redefined . . spend money on busting outhouse pit diggers and let the criminals deal the drugs . and all sorts of other nonsense this law is purely stupid . common sense there isn't any in this law WHAT A JOKE and it is not funny !
 

diggerdirect

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
500
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
New York State
I have had digging partners who were close to age 75. I quit digging with them as they are considered an "artifact" and once in the hole, I legally could not remove the old coots from the hole without a permit.These guys needed to get home for dinner and take their meds so the risk was too great.

[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]
 

mtfdfire22

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
788
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Location
munger MI
A friend of mine and fellow bottle digger who is an archaeologist is just the opposite of these people. He is an avid collector and supports the hobby at his archaeological meetings. Their are many times he has stuck up for privy diggers saying "Archaeologists are never going to get everything out of the ground so the privy diggers are actually doing something to get the history". He will be the first to tell you that most bottles from an archaeological dig are stuck in boxes or drawers in basements of museums and historical societies.
 

Btl_Dvr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Wilmington, NC
You think this is bad. Try dealing w/ Marine Archeologists. They are probably even more underfunded than land arch's and have to wait for someone to find a wreck then claim it, (submerged cultural resources), they call them. Between them and UNEXO, beware.
Jay
 

Bottles r LEET

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2011
Messages
1,746
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
New Hampshire
Try dealing w/ Marine Archeologists. They are probably even more underfunded than land arch's and have to wait for someone to find a wreck then claim it, (submerged cultural resources), they call them. Between them and UNEXO, beware.

What about in international waters?
 

mctaggart67

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
661
Reaction score
69
Points
28
I wish I could find my copy of the Ontario Archaeological Society's journal in which a wonderfully funny contradiction was printed, so I could scan it and post it, but here goes a description anyhow . . .

Back in the late 1980s, I researched and published two books for the bottle collecting world up here in Canada, entitled (verbosely, I admit), "The Ontario Soda Water and Brewers Gazetteer and Directory (1851-1930)" and "The Ontario Drug Store and Druggist List (1851-1930)." These books list known historical soda water works, breweries and pharmacies and their respective dates of operation during the span of years covered. This raw data is useful for dating bottles, identifying bottles to places in the case of bottles not marked with place names, such as primitive ginger beers and early druggists, etc. A bottle-collector sympathetic archaeologist and educator graciously gave my books a very nice combined review, which turned out to be good for sales to archaeologists, as one might expect. The very same edition of the journal contained an editorial or a letter to the editor (I can't remember exactly), in which the author condemned bottle collectors for such amateur horrors as: 1) digging significant sites without gridding them according to academically accepted process, 2) destroying the layers of deposited trash by which professionals could date dug artifacts, 3) not generally respecting the law that addressed archaeology, and so on -- the usual diatribes that just serve to divide people. But what really struck me as ironically way off the mark was the statement that bottle collectors never contribute anything towards our greater understanding of the past, and, in particular, that we never wrote books useful for documenting old bottles!
 

splante

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
2,049
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Location
RI
I think having permission could of saved a lot of BS, and these dam digger shows are not helping..along with the tree huggers..lol
 

Members online

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
83,220
Messages
742,916
Members
24,237
Latest member
Fancy2cu
Top