5 ms·

Who Owns Buried Treasure?

41 points by mud_dauber 8y ago

skilled 8y ago
All I can say is that this article is making me wonder how many times I buried something as a kid and forgot about it. I definitely remember burying a few things, but not all of them I can recall.
lucb1e 8y ago
Summary: in the USA, the person who found it absent whoever put it there. If you can prove you put it there, you can have it back, but otherwise it seems to be the finder's. There doesn't seem to be any law about it, just case law.
- atrilumen 8y ago
  Seriously, hope someone is willing to tackle this hypothetical scenario: Land owners are unaware of a buried cache of gold that was robbed from an armored car in the prohibition era... And it has to be dug up. The spot is marked with a stack of large rocks. The previous owners were ostensibly always deterred by the threat of blasting caps being buried on top of it. What would you do about that? Anything? Edit: Offer to split it with the land owners, and call the excavators? (and the bomb squad?)
jedberg 8y ago
> The Danielson brothers’ claim to possession of buried treasure was also echoed in a 2013 case, when a couple walking their dog found $10 million in gold coins buried on their property in rural Northern California. Anyone know more about this case? Who brought the suit if they found the money on their own property? Was it the government so that they could get the tax money?
- jaclaz 8y ago
  See here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10668081/Couple-who-found-10-million-in-gold-coins-may-have-to-pay-half-to-taxman.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/...
- maxerickson 8y ago
  It's got an official website: http://saddleridgehoard.com/ http://saddleridgehoard.com/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddle_Ridge_Hoard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddle_Ridge_Hoard I think the blag might be using "case" to mean "incident" there rather than referring to a lawsuit.
sametmax 8y ago
In france, I think if it's above 1m, it's yours, if it's below, it belong to the state.
- benj111 8y ago
  That sounds backwards? That broach (or just rubbish?) I found that's probably worthless I have to hand over. The priceless historical/cultural artifact? The state isn't interested. The only benefit I can see is encouraging people to declare larger finds, rather than splitting them up.
  - freddie_mercury 8y ago
    m probably means meter here. It sounds like you are reading it as million. But it is a great example of why using abbreviations is almost always a bad idea on the Internet. It saves the one author a few tenths of a second but wastes time for thousands of readers when ambiguity strikes.
    - sametmax 8y ago
      Yep. I forgot NH is mostly american, and they don't use the metric system. 1m in Europe would obviously be one metter, but 1M one million, and 1min one minute. I'll avoid saving a few keystrokes next time, it's not worth it.
      - benj111 8y ago
        Ok thanks, I'm British for what its worth (so we have metres and miles!). So if something is found buried deeper than a metre it belongs to the state? That makes some sense.
        sametmax 8y ago
        Yes, if I recall well, it's not even about treasures, it's just that above 1m, the land is private, and below, it's public.
jsmith99 8y ago
In the UK, any hidden gold and silver more than 300 years old is generally assumed to be treasure and belongs to the Crown (although the finder is usually compensated). A lot of the ancient items in museums have been found by amateurs and claimed by the state in this way. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_trove https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_trove
- est31 8y ago
  TBH this makes most sense. This way they are available to researchers and are preserved for future generations. Otherwise those goods might disappear and be melted or similar.
  - Mirioron 8y ago
    It doesn't make sense at all, because this encourages people to destroy these kinds of things whenever they find them on their land. If you find treasure on your land and you report it then the government comes in and basically takes over your land for a while. They want to let archaeologists investigate, but you usually don't get much compensation. If you rely on that land to make ends meet then it's a bad idea to report it. I think the rewards need to be high enough that people want to report these. Edit: there was that case in France where a farmer found a rare mastodon skull and didn't want to bring attention to it because he didn't want amateur paleontologists on his farm: https://www.livescience.com/63060-farmer-finds-mastodon-skull.html https://www.livescience.com/63060-farmer-finds-mastodon-skul...
    - jabberthemutt 8y ago
      "At all" is a very strong wording. Do you really not think that appropriate compensation is all that's needed for this approach to make perfect sense?
      - Mirioron 8y ago
        Sure, but we already have compensation that is supposed to be appropriate, but people clearly don't think it's enough.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
zw123456 8y ago
I have an uncle that is one of those "gold guys" who thinks economic collapse is around the corner (shrug; who knows he may end up being right someday). He says he has buried $500K in gold on his 200 acre place and says he is the only one that knows where it is. I have told my Dad (it's his brother) we should go out there at night with a metal locator. I sent the link to both of them :)
- trevyn 8y ago
  Can we do airborne ground-penetrating radar yet?
slack3r 8y ago
IMO : If it's on private property, whoever owns the property. If it's on public property then the government.

41 points by mud_dauber 8y ago

All I can say is that this article is making me wonder how many times I buried something as a kid and forgot about it. I definitely remember burying a few things, but not all of them I can recall.

lucb1e 8y ago

Summary: in the USA, the person who found it absent whoever put it there. If you can prove you put it there, you can have it back, but otherwise it seems to be the finder's. There doesn't seem to be any law about it, just case law.

atrilumen 8y ago
Seriously, hope someone is willing to tackle this hypothetical scenario: Land owners are unaware of a buried cache of gold that was robbed from an armored car in the prohibition era... And it has to be dug up. The spot is marked with a stack of large rocks. The previous owners were ostensibly always deterred by the threat of blasting caps being buried on top of it. What would you do about that? Anything? Edit: Offer to split it with the land owners, and call the excavators? (and the bomb squad?)

jedberg 8y ago

> The Danielson brothers’ claim to possession of buried treasure was also echoed in a 2013 case, when a couple walking their dog found $10 million in gold coins buried on their property in rural Northern California. Anyone know more about this case? Who brought the suit if they found the money on their own property? Was it the government so that they could get the tax money?

jaclaz 8y ago
See here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10668081/Couple-who-found-10-million-in-gold-coins-may-have-to-pay-half-to-taxman.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/...
maxerickson 8y ago
It's got an official website: http://saddleridgehoard.com/ http://saddleridgehoard.com/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddle_Ridge_Hoard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddle_Ridge_Hoard I think the blag might be using "case" to mean "incident" there rather than referring to a lawsuit.

sametmax 8y ago

In france, I think if it's above 1m, it's yours, if it's below, it belong to the state.

benj111 8y ago
That sounds backwards? That broach (or just rubbish?) I found that's probably worthless I have to hand over. The priceless historical/cultural artifact? The state isn't interested. The only benefit I can see is encouraging people to declare larger finds, rather than splitting them up.
- freddie_mercury 8y ago
  m probably means meter here. It sounds like you are reading it as million. But it is a great example of why using abbreviations is almost always a bad idea on the Internet. It saves the one author a few tenths of a second but wastes time for thousands of readers when ambiguity strikes.
  - sametmax 8y ago
    Yep. I forgot NH is mostly american, and they don't use the metric system. 1m in Europe would obviously be one metter, but 1M one million, and 1min one minute. I'll avoid saving a few keystrokes next time, it's not worth it.
    - benj111 8y ago
      Ok thanks, I'm British for what its worth (so we have metres and miles!). So if something is found buried deeper than a metre it belongs to the state? That makes some sense.
      - sametmax 8y ago
        Yes, if I recall well, it's not even about treasures, it's just that above 1m, the land is private, and below, it's public.

jsmith99 8y ago

In the UK, any hidden gold and silver more than 300 years old is generally assumed to be treasure and belongs to the Crown (although the finder is usually compensated). A lot of the ancient items in museums have been found by amateurs and claimed by the state in this way. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_trove https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_trove

est31 8y ago
TBH this makes most sense. This way they are available to researchers and are preserved for future generations. Otherwise those goods might disappear and be melted or similar.
- Mirioron 8y ago
  It doesn't make sense at all, because this encourages people to destroy these kinds of things whenever they find them on their land. If you find treasure on your land and you report it then the government comes in and basically takes over your land for a while. They want to let archaeologists investigate, but you usually don't get much compensation. If you rely on that land to make ends meet then it's a bad idea to report it. I think the rewards need to be high enough that people want to report these. Edit: there was that case in France where a farmer found a rare mastodon skull and didn't want to bring attention to it because he didn't want amateur paleontologists on his farm: https://www.livescience.com/63060-farmer-finds-mastodon-skull.html https://www.livescience.com/63060-farmer-finds-mastodon-skul...
  - jabberthemutt 8y ago
    "At all" is a very strong wording. Do you really not think that appropriate compensation is all that's needed for this approach to make perfect sense?
    - Mirioron 8y ago
      Sure, but we already have compensation that is supposed to be appropriate, but people clearly don't think it's enough.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

zw123456 8y ago

I have an uncle that is one of those "gold guys" who thinks economic collapse is around the corner (shrug; who knows he may end up being right someday). He says he has buried $500K in gold on his 200 acre place and says he is the only one that knows where it is. I have told my Dad (it's his brother) we should go out there at night with a metal locator. I sent the link to both of them :)

trevyn 8y ago
Can we do airborne ground-penetrating radar yet?

slack3r 8y ago

IMO : If it's on private property, whoever owns the property. If it's on public property then the government.