New Heritage Laws for Victoria.

This has been put up on the PMAV face book page and  is in regards to relic finds.


PMAV
Published by Olly Oleszek · 46 mins · 
We had a worthwhile meeting with Heritage Victoria to discuss a Memorandum of Understanding in relation to chance finds of old items while prospecting for gold.
Readers may recall that under the old Heritage Act it was illegal to disturb and remove a man made object over 50 years old. The new legislation has changed this to 75 years.
It is not illegal for a prospector to pick up a relic/artefact that is uncovered, but it is illegal to remove it without the permission of the landowner.
Common law would indicate items found on Crown land belong to the Crown, however this MOU would change this so the finder can remove and keep the item.
This important MOU will need to be negotiated with DELWP and Parks Victoria as they are deemed to be the owners of Public Land.
Heritage Victoria are supportive of the MOU and have agreed to set the process in motion.
This MOU will be between the Government and the PMAV so will only apply to PMAV members.
Yet another reason to be a member of this great organisation.
Thanks to VP Tony Vawser, Rita Bentley and Peter Maffey for making up the PMAV team
Cheers Olly Oleszek 
President

Now this is some of the questions and reply's on this subject. I will put more up when they come to hand :- 

 Mark Bourke Does this mean you will be able to take the relics?

Manage



LikeShow more reactions
 · Reply · Message · 53m

PMAV When this MOU is in force if you are a PMAV member the answer is yes

1

Manage



LikeShow more reactions
 · Reply · Commented on by Olly Oleszek · 51m

Mark Bourke What will be the benefits apart from peoples private collections?

Manage



LikeShow more reactions
 · Reply · Message · 49m

Josh Palmer Will we need to declare / value things like other countries are required (UK)?

Manage



LikeShow more reactions
 · Reply · Message · 37m

PMAV Josh Palmer no

Manage



LikeShow more reactions
 · Reply · Commented on by Olly Oleszek · 36m

PMAV Josh Palmer no

Manage



LikeShow more reactions
 · Reply · Commented on by Olly Oleszek · 36m

Darren Sutton What this does mean is that if the item is pre 1943 at this time it must not be taken without permission. So all those early gold rush items such as chinese coins, buttons, old pick heads etc, must be left in place.

1

Manage



Like
 · Reply · Message · 30m

Mark Bourke Thanks Darren Sutton i was thinking along the wrong lines

Manage



Like
 · Reply · Message · 

Dumb, dumb and dumber...........

These people have nothing better to do with tax payers money.
What a waste of tax payers money.

does this mean you can just be a member of the PMAV and not have a prospectors licences

Old Hand wrote:does this mean you can just be a member of the PMAV and not have a prospectors licences

"No" Old hand you still have to have a licences. The Licences allows you to look for minerals only, not relics. Under the proposed MOU, being a PMAV member will give you the right to remove any relic that you may find while prospecting. The thing you must remember though is, if you find a few items of importance in a very small area then this could be deemed as Heritage and then classified as a Heritage site.  You still can not prospect or detect around an known Heritage site, being a PMAV member or not. This new proposed rule is mainly for single items, like coins, buttons, belt buckles. ext.
wombat 

This was also brought up with Heritage. And I think this would be a great idea for any un-wanted item.
wombat 

Yesterday we also spoke to Heritage regarding a Heritage register where people can send in a photo, place of discovery and date.
This will be so people who have found artifacts and no longer want them or when they fall off the perch and the family doesn’t want these items they can be donated to Heritage rather than go to the tip as a lot of things do when kids or relatives don’t want them.
Heritage would have first choice for their archives and remaining items would be given to various small museums around the goldfields, therefore these historical items would not be lost forever.
OLLY Oleszek 
President

Well we are members of the PMAV, but this piece of regulation is just plain and simply nonsense, if you detect in an area for gold and there is a bit of rubbish around and you dig up a gold sovereign or old silver pre 1943, and your gunna leave it in the ground and what rebury it, FFS, and even one of the old brass buttons that we all like to collect has to be left, what BS is this. And I nearly forgot those old musket balls and old lead bullets and millions of old decaying lead shot pellets, they also will need to be left behind. This is totally crap, and whoever thought it up needs a mental health check.

I'm inclined to agree with Dave and here as a comparison are the rules they have to abide by in the UK.

What is the definition of ‘treasure’?

The Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) summarises the definition of treasure as set out in the Treasure Act 1996 as:
any metallic object, other than a coin, provided that at least 10 per cent by weight of the metal is precious metal (that is, gold or silver) and that it is at least 300 years old when found. If the object is of prehistoric date, it will be Treasure provided any part of it is precious metal;
any group of two or more metallic objects, of any composition, of prehistoric date, that come from the same find (see below);
two or more coins from the same find provided they are at least 300 years old when found and contain 10 per cent gold or silver (if the coins contain less than 10 per cent of gold or silver there must be at least 10 of them). Only the following groups of coins will normally be regarded as coming from the same find: Hoards that have been deliberately hidden; Smaller groups of coins, such as the contents of purses, that may been dropped or lost; Votive or ritual deposits;
any object, whatever it is made of, that is found in the same place as, or had previously been together with, another object that is Treasure.

What about finds that aren’t ‘treasure’?

It’s up to you what you do with anything that’s not claimed by the Crown, or isn’t deemed to be treasure. You may wish to donate the find to a local museum or sell items to a private dealer. The proceeds from the sale should then be distributed as agreed between the landowner and finder.

davsgold wrote:Well we are members of the PMAV, but this piece of regulation is just plain and simply nonsense, if you detect in an area for gold and there is a bit of rubbish around and you dig up a gold sovereign or old silver pre 1943, and your gunna leave it in the ground and what rebury it, FFS, and even one of the old brass buttons that we all like to collect has to be left, what BS is this.  And I nearly forgot those old musket balls and old lead bullets and millions of old decaying lead shot pellets, they also will need to be left behind.  This is totally crap, and whoever thought it up needs a mental health check.

Davsgold if you read the article again you will see that it states :-  Common law would indicate items found on Crown land belong to the Crown, however this MOU would change this so the finder can remove and keep the item.
This important MOU will need to be negotiated with DELWP and Parks Victoria as they are deemed to be the owners of Public Land.
That means when this new MOU come through, you can then take these items that you have mentioned as long as you are a PMAV member. Were before you had to leave them in the ground.
wombat 

Jims Gold if you look at the question that Josh Palmer put up :-Will we need to declare / value things like other countries are required (UK)?

The answer is "No". So that means we are not going down the same lines as the UK.
wombat 

Wombat wrote:Jims Gold if you look at the question that Josh Palmer put up :-Will we need to declare / value things like other countries are required (UK)?

The answer is "No". So that means we are not going down the same lines as the UK.
wombat 

The point is that I put that up only as a comparison to show how ridiculous the local rules are.

Hell I find stuff that's younger than me and I have to have special permission to remove it. Crazy.

Jims Gold wrote:

Wombat wrote:Jims Gold if you look at the question that Josh Palmer put up :-Will we need to declare / value things like other countries are required (UK)?

The answer is "No". So that means we are not going down the same lines as the UK.
wombat 

The point is that I put that up only as a comparison to show how ridiculous the local rules are.

Hell I find stuff that's younger than me and I have to have special permission to remove it.  Crazy.

Jim anything over 75 years old you will have to get permission to remove it. Olny if you do not belong to the PMAV. If you are a member you do not need permission. This will start if the new MOU comes into effect. Under the old law we could not remove anything older than 50 years.
wombat 

WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY.

WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY

WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY

Wombat, don't get sucked in to these useless, good for nothing thinkers. They are a waste of energy and time,
A distraction.

Hi Wombat.

Thank you for keeping us informed on the latest trivia these Depart-mental wan. Thought police are dreaming up for us all.

But I take exception to them thinking they are deemed to be the “Owners of all Public Crown land”.     This Public Land surely belongs to the public, and that’s us.

Managers they may well be, but never the Owners.

Yet, I suppose they have to shuffle the paperwork around now and again, to make it look like they are doing something to keep their positions.

Cheers ozgold.

Jim anything over 75 years old you will have to get permission to remove it. Olny if you do not belong to the PMAV. If you are a member you do not need permission. This will start if the new MOU comes into effect. Under the old law we could not remove anything older than 50 years.
wombat  [/quote]

75 years is nothing (1940's) how can that be heritage, and how are they going to know who is a member of the PMAV or not, it's illogical.

Wombat wrote:

davsgold wrote:Well we are members of the PMAV, but this piece of regulation is just plain and simply nonsense, if you detect in an area for gold and there is a bit of rubbish around and you dig up a gold sovereign or old silver pre 1943, and your gunna leave it in the ground and what rebury it, FFS, and even one of the old brass buttons that we all like to collect has to be left, what BS is this.  And I nearly forgot those old musket balls and old lead bullets and millions of old decaying lead shot pellets, they also will need to be left behind.  This is totally crap, and whoever thought it up needs a mental health check.

Davsgold if you read the article again you will see that it states :-  Common law would indicate items found on Crown land belong to the Crown, however this MOU would change this so the finder can remove and keep the item.
This important MOU will need to be negotiated with DELWP and Parks Victoria as they are deemed to be the owners of Public Land.
That means when this new MOU come through, you can then take these items that you have mentioned as long as you are a PMAV member. Were before you had to leave them in the ground.
wombat 

Absolute rubbish, I MOU is a gentlemans agreement between 2 parties, it does not change any rules or regulations that are currently legislated.

UNCLE BOB wrote:WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY.

WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY

WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY

Wombat, don't get sucked in to these useless, good for nothing thinkers. They are a waste of energy and time,
A distraction.

Jims Gold wrote:

Jim anything over 75 years old you will have to get permission to remove it. Olny if you do not belong to the PMAV. If you are a member you do not need permission. This will start if the new MOU comes into effect. Under the old law we could not remove anything older than 50 years.
wombat 

75 years is nothing (1940's) how can that be heritage, and how are they going to know who is a member of the PMAV or not, it's illogical.
[/quote]

Spot on Jim

ozgold 041 wrote:Hi Wombat.

Thank you for keeping us informed on the latest trivia these Depart-mental wan.                    Thought police are dreaming up for us all.

But I take exception to them thinking they are deemed to be the “Owners of all Public Crown land”.     This Public Land surely belongs to the public, and that’s us.

Managers they may well be, but never the Owners.

Yet, I suppose they have to shuffle the paperwork around now and again, to make it look like they are doing something to keep their positions.

Cheers ozgold.

I totally agree oz gold

Fellows, the law is the law.  You or I don't make it. But we still have to follow the law even if we don't think it is right. But this new possible MOU is one step closer in changing the Heritage laws. It will be a lot better than how it stands now.

Jims Gold to answer your question :-and how are they going to know who is a member of the PMAV or not, it's illogical.

Probably by asking you to show them your membership card.
wombat 

UNCLE BOB wrote:WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY.

WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY

WHAT A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY

Wombat, don't get sucked in to these useless, good for nothing thinkers. They are a waste of energy and time,
A distraction.

Uncle Bob, Sorry that you think that this is a waist of time and of Tax payers money. The PMAV is trying to work with Heritage Victoria to give you and others a better chance of keeping your finds legally. If we did nothing, and just say that Heritage Victoria decided to turn the whole of the Golden Triangle into a World Heritage Park. What would you say then. "don't get sucked in to these useless, good for nothing thinkers. they are a waste of energy and time. A Distraction. Or would you profere the PMAV to work with them now and try to get a better deal for the prospector.
wombat 

Hi Bill, I think you are right on the right track. It is unfortunate that we have to do all this chit-chat and paperwork but if we don't then we will all suffer the concequences of our inaction. keep up the good fight.
Sparrowfart.

With due respect Wombat, your heading for the topic should then be changed from "New Heritage Laws for Victoria" to New Heritage Laws for PMAV members.

As you say, other than that, nothing has changed? So let me get this straight, in another context, a pay raise for Union members would only be paid to Union members? As a general rule everyone gets it, so to say it's only PMAV members that get to benefit from this "NEW" deal is somehow a bit onesided.

cheers dave

Sparrowfart wrote:Hi Bill, I think you are right on the right track. It is unfortunate that we have to do all this chit-chat and paperwork but if we don't then we will all suffer the concequences of our inaction. keep up the good fight.
Sparrowfart.

I agree, we sure need to keep up the pressure/fight or we will just get walked over by the ones that want everything turned into parks where nobody gets to go or do anything they enjoy.

My main point is that, sure the PMAV, APLA and NAPFA for the various states they represent are doing the fighting for us, but I reject the idea that if your not a member then the benefit they get for us all is only for the members.

cheers dave

Davsgold this deal proves that the PMAV is now starting to be more recognised by the Victorian Government and to Heritage than ever before and that they represent a great deal of people that prospect. Also their code of conduct is also recognised by these institutions. This is probably why it states:- This MOU will be between the Government and the PMAV so will only apply to PMAV members.

So why is it so hard for prospectors not to join the PMAV, even when they represent them, and fight for their rights. 
Is it right for those same people to benefit from the same spoils as those that have paid their membership fees, to help them in their representation. ??????? 
What the PMAV have possibly achieved now could flow onto NSW and all other States. This is why we join the PMAV, APLA and NAPFA so they can represent us.
wombat

Bill I will never join the PMAV I was a member many years ago and had issues with them in the past regards john

Old Hand wrote:Bill I will never join the PMAV I was a member many years ago and had issues with them in the past regards john

John you did mentioned that to me a few years back. But there's others that have never been members but still benefit from the work that the PMAV have done for them. But in this case the MOU will only apply to PMAV members.
wombat 

Permission

Fellas, I stand with Bill on this one.  A measly $50 a year, for having a voice that stands up for our hobby/prospecting rights, is more than a reasonable price to pay, in order to keep whatever little prospecting grounds we have, open to detecting.  We simply cannot afford to sit back & let the few paying members stand/fight for the rights of the many, who are not payed members, but happen to receive/enjoy all the same benefits, arising from the work that the PMAV, NAPFA, or APLA do.  As for politicians making up the rules as they go, without ever experiencing what a small time prospector/miner goes through, is what they're good at. Paid time for rhetoric paperwork.  In times of great diversity, the rule of "united we stand, divided we fall" has to be understood/recognised & or, taken into consideration by all who participate, or intend to participate, in the prospecting of precious minerals/metals.

Cheers Kon.

Yes I understand what your saying Kon and Bill, and like I said we have memberships to PMAV for (VIC), NAPFA for (NSW), and APLA for (West Aus), and they do a great job.

What I am saying is we also have a VIC miners right and a WA miners right, and on the whole where a member of these associations can go so can a person with a miners right, I also realize these association memberships may in some circumstances open a few more doors to get on more ground.

I also think if you make a different rule for some members only to go on certain ground, which is not the case anyway, as anyone can go there now and before and after, it is only a rule that says you can or can't take something from the ground that you have dug up, and this is not including gold, because you can take it anyway with your miners right, it's only for relics of a certain prior age. PMAV stands for "Prospectors and Miners Association Victoria" I don't see relics in that anywhere, and as far as I know you don't even need a miners right to go coin and relic hunting, although you may be splitting hairs when the ranger pulls you up.

cheers dave