Agree with Flint, fields are my domain. Creeks seem intimidating. Rivers could be another story. Closest to us, Wabash River. Ugh, would immediately start glancing sandy rises. Its in the blood.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Creeks vs fields vs digging
Collapse
X
-
To each his or hers own, but digging....... i'll leave for funded research to EDUCATE in our state. If its legal in your state, have at it, personally just not a fan. If this helps understand where im coming from im not a buyer or seller either. Again, to each his own. Good post pacman
- Likes 3
Comment
-
It believe it has to be your area !
My county in SW Georgia is rich in Creek culture and back to Paleo. If you find a camp so has everyone else . Your lucky to come out with some woodland pottery and points .
But then a plowed field yields the past but apparently from me asking permission people line up in the dark .
That’s not happening not getting on the hate list this is a fun hobby .
Creeks in my area are sandy and I have never found one yet . But then again the one I did find with stones had a hammer stone in it so that might be promising .
A member here digs his property and weekly has just epic finds .
For me 75 % surface finds
Digging in the yard for power lines etc work have found nice artifacts .
Bottom line I believe if you know your counties history it’s more helpful . Knowing where settlements were hot spots .
Best point ever found were hunt trails next to water .
They hunted where we do now .
High ridges water on the bottom ... perfect
- Likes 2
Comment
-
I'm currently on the longest dry spell of my life while living overseas.
Going on 40 years of collecting-
55% surface finds (field, desert, beach)- Almost exclusively stone & shell items.
30% digs- Almost all of my personal found pottery & bone tools.
5% Water- Mostly creeks & gravel bars, but some underwater & sifting underwater.
10% Purchases
Hong Kong, but from Indiana/Florida
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment