City parks and beaurocrats

[Tom_in_CA]

..... i have been meticulously researching my city ordinances and the pekin park district and i have found nothing except the removal of trees and shrubs, alcoholic beverages, and park hours.
so im in the clear eh? .....

Technically, yes. If there's no laws or rules specifically forbidding an activity, then it is therefore not "dis-allowed". But two key words in this statement are: "technically" and "specifically".

a) "technically....": ANYONE can gripe, even if "technically" you are defensibly in-the-clear. I mean, ... heck, someone can come up and gripe to you that you "shouldn't be flying frisbees in the public park" (d/t you might poke someone's eye out). So when I say "technically", this is not to be understood as meaning that you can therefore go waltzing over people's beach blankets, etc....

b) "specifically...": ANYONE can say (after you point out to them that detectors are not specifically dis-allowed), that ..... you have run afoul of other verbage they morph to apply to your activity. I mean, heck, they can say you are "collecting" (which might be referenced in park codes, to forbid people from taking the swing sets home, harvesting the tan-bark, etc...). Or say that the rules that forbid "annoyances" apply to you (because you are "annoying" the earthworms). Or say that you are breaking the "alterations" clauses. etc.... And sure, you can try to debate them on these semantics. But the bottom line is: You are in an odd-ball hobby that admittedly "has connotations" and draws the stares of the curious.

So .......... like nose-picking (which is not technically illegal), yet ....... you tend to use a little "discretion" in your timing. Because while legal, it could "offend" people, who'll say you're annoying them, etc... So go at low traffic times, when such lookie-lou kill-joys are not present. It's gotten to where I only hunt parks after 5pm, or even night now. So peacefull ....... so serene .........

Thus, no, you will not find park codes that specifically allow an activity like ours, or that are "gauranteed" to have no loopholes that someone can "claim" you fall underneath. If this bothers someone (that not everyone will love them & their chosen hobby), then I fear they have chosen the wrong hobby. Sometimes you have to give lip service and avoid such kill-joys.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[joecherry]

Well said tom in ca.
I just go to the more secluded sections of the parks (i agree you dont just waltz across the soccer field shovel in hand) and wave and smile when i see somebody, carry a bag with me and pick up other peoples trash, and dig as clean of a plug as i can. Of course there is always a little stray dirt in the nice grass, but if you do your best to be respectful to the parks property people usually notice. That being said i haven't had a problem yet

 

[CWnut]

the better detectorist come in, reap the rewards, cover their holes, barely get noticed, get gone, keep their mouths shut and in the end....NOBODY CARES

 

[Digs68]

You know, I never thought of all of this before. I always made it a point to ask, but have never been told "no" when it came to city parks. If it came down to a situation where I couldn't ask (I.E. during a weekend when city hall is closed & I happen upon a park that looks promising in another town.), I just went & crossed my fingers.
I did talk myself into, then back out of, permission before. I still kick myself over that one! It was at a local public school grounds. The school is very old. I called the Superintendent and asked permission to metal detect on the grounds. "Sure! I don't see a problem with it." was the answer. I was stoked. But then I opened my big mouth. I went on to inform her that I would be extremely careful to refill my holes and replace the sod, as if no one had ever been there. "You're going to be digging holes?" she asked. "Of course, Ma'am. have to retrieve whatever I detect.". "Well, in that case, I don't think we want someone digging up the yard, so I'm going to have to say no.". I tried to politely reason with her, but to no avail. I knew I had blown it by continuing to run my mouth. I haven't (and won't) make that mistake again! As soon as someone says yes, then it's "Thank you! Goodbye!"

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

You know, I never thought of all of this before. I always made it a point to ask, but have never been told "no" when it came to city parks. If it came down to a situation where I couldn't ask (I.E. during a weekend when city hall is closed & I happen upon a park that looks promising in another town.), I just went & crossed my fingers.
I did talk myself into, then back out of, permission before. I still kick myself over that one! It was at a local public school grounds. The school is very old. I called the Superintendent and asked permission to metal detect on the grounds. "Sure! I don't see a problem with it." was the answer. I was stoked. But then I opened my big mouth. I went on to inform her that I would be extremely careful to refill my holes and replace the sod, as if no one had ever been there. "You're going to be digging holes?" she asked. "Of course, Ma'am. have to retrieve whatever I detect.". "Well, in that case, I don't think we want someone digging up the yard, so I'm going to have to say no.". I tried to politely reason with her, but to no avail. I knew I had blown it by continuing to run my mouth. I haven't (and won't) make that mistake again! As soon as someone says yes, then it's "Thank you! Goodbye!"

digs68, Let me ask you this: In all those various times you've gotten "yes's", have you ever been "carded" in field? Ie.: ever had to produce the name of the permission giver to someone trying to boot you ? If not, then ... perhaps you'd have gotten the same result (ie.: nothing happens), if you'd simply gone (after looking up the rules for yourself, and seeing no specific prohibitions, that is).

Why not be "forthcoming" with the fact that you'll have to dig? I mean, for those who feel it's their duty to ask permission, in order to be "honest" and "law-abiding", why not lay it all out their for them to consider? (lest they not understand the full implications). Of COURSE you and I would never do that, lest we end up getting a "no", right?

Actually, your story reminds me of persons who did exactly what you're saying: Used euphamisms (said "metal detecting" and left off any mention of digging). And so they got a "yes". Then in the field, they were accosted by a gardener or cop. The md'r proudly whips out their "permission". The irate cop or gardener simply gets on their cell-phone, calls city hall, and says "....but he's tearing the place up!". Then guess what happens to their "permission" ? I suppose the "permission" might hush up *some* busy-bodies. But I'd just be afraid of getting a "no", in places where perhaps I could probably have just gone, and no one would ever have cared.

I've also heard of person who carefully used the euphamism "metal detecting" (and left off any mention of "digging"). The desk clerk answers something like "yes but you can't dig" (even though the md'r made NO mention of "digging"). So you see, sometimes that's just the knee-jerk image that the clerk has, even though you never mentioned it. Glad that hasn't been the case, so far, for you.

 

[Digs68]

I don't recall if I've ever had to answer to anyone asking if i had permission.... I did have a Lion's Club member stop at our local fairgrounds while I was detecting & ask what I was doing. I told him & he just asked if I found anything interesting (I hadn't. Just a bunch of clad), so I showed him. Most folks I run into are just curious (as others have mentioned) or just kids wanting to watch. I get the impression from a lot of people that they just think it's odd or weird (I get the same reaction when I'm hunting arrowheads) until their curiosity is piqued, then they seem truly fascinated in learning about some of the history you may have uncovered, etc.
With all of my years of arrowhead hunting, I'm just used to asking permission, being mindful of others property, etc. Most of them just tell me to come back any time want. The only "no's" I get are generally from people who like to hunt themselves, or occasionally from a church or school due to having bad experiences with detectors in the past. Even have had decent rapport with law enforcement. They usually are just curious like everyone else.

 

[Digs68]

I take that back. There was one time I was detecting around an old church when A snooty woman came trouncing around the corner. "Can I help you?" she hissed. I didn't like her attitude, so i said, "No Ma'am! I'm doing just fine!". I could tell she didn't like that too much. Haha!
She pulled the "20 questions" routine, but I had permission from the priest, so i didn't waver. Once she realized I had permission to be there, & her brow-beating had no effect on me, she left. I've been back there several times. The priest is very friendly & likes to see what I've found. He said to come on back whenever I like.

 

[cudamark]

Jodsterag, here's the answer to this question: All such verbage, that disallows "alterations", "defacement", "vandalism", "cutting", "damaging", etc.. etc... blah blah blah... ALL distinctly and inherently refer to the END result. Do they not? So if you leave your area exactly as you found it (covering back, fluffing up, leaving no marks, etc...), the you have not "altered" "defaced", "vandalized" "cut", or "damaged" anything, now have you??

Sure, someone may "take issue" with the temporary evil interum process of retrieval, and debate your semantics. Pick a low traffic time and AVOID such kill-joy lookie-lous.

Oh, if only it were that logical and simple. Even though I agree with you totally, unfortunately it's not up to us when it comes to a complaint. Busybody A calls Police B to complain about metal detectorist C. B wants A off his back so he tells C to quit what he's doing and will use any obscure ordinance to back up his demands. C asks for the chapter and verse in the code and B complies with the above mentioned "don't step on the grass" BS. B may sympathize with C but to get A off his back, C loses out. I've literally had cops drive up on the grass in their police car (leaving some pretty good ruts) to tell me that I can probe only or I'll be cited for vandalism....and with a straight face! But yet, a group of people can play soccer until there is no grass left and that's ok. I guess we'll have to run for office and change things Tom!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

Oh, if only it were that logical and simple. Even though I agree with you totally, unfortunately it's not up to us when it comes to a complaint. Busybody A calls Police B to complain about metal detectorist C. B wants A off his back so he tells C to quit what he's doing and will use any obscure ordinance to back up his demands. C asks for the chapter and verse in the code and B complies with the above mentioned "don't step on the grass" BS. B may sympathize with C but to get A off his back, C loses out. I've literally had cops drive up on the grass in their police car (leaving some pretty good ruts) to tell me that I can probe only or I'll be cited for vandalism....and with a straight face! But yet, a group of people can play soccer until there is no grass left and that's ok. I guess we'll have to run for office and change things Tom!

cudamark, I totally agree. Yes, anyone can gripe, whether or not you "got permission", or didn't. And as you can see, I acknkowledged that persons can come up and still "...take issue...." and " ... debate the semantics ...." of the interpretation of "alterations" "defacement" and so forth.

But this STILL does not mean that .......... ergo ...... we should all go asking permission, for this of which there is no *specific* prohibition. The fact that someone *could* morph something else to apply, doesn't mean we should go head that off at the pass (so to speak). Because to do so, only puts you in a position to get a possible "no", where .... quite frankly ..... no one might ever have cared or noticed (till you asked).

So yes, the possibility of gardeners or cops coming up to "satisfy A" is a real possibility. But this does not mean it's better to try to pre-empt that, lest you get even LESS areas to hunt. To me it means: 1) to give lip service and comply to the authority at the time, and 2) to SIMPLY AVOID "A" in the future.

I have been booted from parks in the past, and it could very well be just as you say: a cop simply having received a call from miss-lookie-lou. The cop personally might never have paid a second glance, but ..... you know the drill: he has to satisfy the call, and .... so forth and so on. So he tells you that you need a parade permit, or whatever nonsense. We all know that drill. In those cases I've given lip service and leave. And quite often, give it 6 months rest, and just go back again at a better time. For example: if that booting occured in the AM, just go in the afternoon next time, when it's not likely to be that same cop's shift. And if you got booted from the east side (so miss lookie-lous window is perhaps on that side of the park), then hunt the west side.

For example: One time my buddy and I got booted from a particular park in my state, several hours from my city. It's a park I always make a note of hitting whenever I'm passing through that part of the state, since it holds old silver. But this one time, after 15 or 20 yrs. of having hit it un-bothered, we got the boot from a lady-cop. As it turns out, we were just wrapping it up for that hunt anyhow, so we just gave lip service and moved on. Shortly after that, I became acquainted, through a web-forum, with a hunter in that particular city. I related to him the booting we'd gotten, and he was quite surprised. Because he too had hit that park, all the time, and no on ever cared. And his wife was friends with someone on city counsel, so he was absolutely certain there was no specific rules against md'ing (barring something you could "morph"). So he was tempted to have his wife's friend "go to bat for us" and "get this clarified", etc.... But my advice to him was to not do that, lest we merely get a rule "written", to "address this pressing issue", etc... (afterall, you can't remove the connotations of our hobby). So he and I "let it rest" and did nothing. 6 months later, when passing through, I hit the park again. Making sure to hit it at a lower-traffic time (the time before we'd gone in the middle of a sunny mid-week day). No problems. This went on, every time I'd pass through there, and never again did I ever have a problem. I've hit it 20 or so times since then over the years, and never heard "boo" again. We've even had cop cars pass us by, slow down and look (since it's after dusk), to look at us. And they just speed back up and keep going (we make sure we're not in the middle of deep-retrievals, of course, when passerbys are there watching).

 

[billn1956]

Some thing else to keep in mind.Alot of our parks in town is land that was donated to the city or what ever for a park with restritions that the land is for every bodys use and enjoyment.Hobbies or sport and if not being used for that purpose it referts back to the donaters family.So look it up and they will some times back down for fear of losing the land.

 

[cudamark]

We're on the same page Tom. I'm in full agreement on our version of "don't ask, don't tell". I do the same thing when confronted....give it a rest at that park and come back another time when the cop may have moved on to another beat or is off his shift. Maybe the busybody is somewhere else too! In the same police department, I've had cops that wanted to cuff me and haul me off to the station, and others that wish they were off duty and could help me dig. Now, as for that park with the silver, PM me the location! :-)