On state park land
Permission needed
A permit is needed to disturb an archaeological site on state land or a designated preserve. Connecticut counts anything fifty years or older as archaeological.
1. The rule, in full
Connecticut – Conn. Gen. Stat. chapter 184a
Read from the consolidated chapter at cga.ct.gov (Connecticut General Assembly).
Operative text, 10-386(a):
"No person may conduct an archaeological investigation on state lands or on a state archaeological preserve without a permit from the Department of Economic and Community Development."
And 10-390(a):
"No person shall excavate, damage or otherwise alter or deface any archaeological or sacred site on state lands or within a state archaeological preserve unless such activity is in accordance with the terms and conditions of a permit issued under section 10-386 or in the case of an emergency."
Scope, 10-381(7):
"'State lands' mean lands owned, leased, or administered by the state or in the custody or control of any state agency, department or instrumentality of the state."
Determination: state lands and designated state archaeological preserves only. Does NOT reach municipal parks. The words "municipal", "city", "town" and "political subdivision" appear nowhere in the operative provisions, which was checked directly rather than assumed – after Massachusetts, that check is mandatory for every New England state.
Connecticut is NOT in the New England definitional family, and that is the point of this entry. Its defined term requires actual disturbance:
10-381(4): "'Archaeological investigation' means any subsurface tests or excavation or other activity resulting in the disturbance or removal of artifacts or data from an archaeological site."
No intent clause, no "going on a site". Four of the six New England states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Hampshire) use the "going-on-a-site-with-that-intent" formula. Connecticut and Maine do not. Connecticut sits with the find/site states despite its neighbours.
A genuine fifty-year threshold, for the ARPA explainer's list, 10-381(2):
"'Archaeological site' means a location where there exists material evidence that is not less than fifty years old of the past life and culture of human beings in the state."
This is a real fifty-year rule in a real statute, and it is the kind of thing that gets mistaken for ARPA. So is 10-381(3), which applies the same fifty-year figure to "archaeological artifact". The explainer should cite Connecticut and Arizona as examples of genuine fifty-year state thresholds, precisely so the hundred-year ARPA figure stops being blamed for them.
Preserve designation, 10-384, requires written consent from a private owner and written notice to "the state agency with custody or control of any public land" – again contemplating only state and private ownership, the same gap Vermont has. Connecticut's gap matters less, because its baseline permit requirement is already state-land only.
Source: cga.ct.gov chapter 184a, sections 10-381, 10-384, 10-385, 10-386 and 10-390. Checked 20 Sep 2026.
2. Cities in Connecticut that publish a rule
Awaiting review. None of the city or county rows publishes until its status is set and its quotation chosen by hand.
3. County rules
Awaiting review. None of the city or county rows publishes until its status is set and its quotation chosen by hand.
4. Cities checked — no published rule
Awaiting review. None of the city or county rows publishes until its status is set and its quotation chosen by hand.