Cook County bans Metal Detecting

[gerryk]

Try this link. Ot is on the cook county forest preserve web site not the county web site. It alao will not come up in a search and is listed on the link i gave under rules and regulations.
http://fpdcc.com/preserves-and-trails/rules-and-regulations/
I dont understand why people from out of state are questioning those that live here about metal detecting being banned.
The rules clearly say no metal detecting on their web site. Of course no government agency is going to asnwer the question of why they created such an ordinance.

No one will ever know why the ordinance was creted not even the elected officials because they were tood by the employees that it w needed. Employees said that out of ignorance of what was going on out there. They blamed metal detectorists when it is other people like mountain bikers digging holes for dirt for ramps and burms.

They also dont state on their web site that they purchased some of this property well over 50 years ago and thte only management they have done on it is to let it sit. Unfortunately land that sits like that eropdes and washes away into the waterways. What was once farmlands is now small patches of forested ares with creeks running through them and massive erosion to the point their are ravines and large washed out areas.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[lastleg]

So the property in question has stood unattended for 50 years and just now gone out of bounds. Dont' you
think maybe it was detected to death prior to all this? That happens to be the age of our hobby and it is naive
to think of it as virgin unless all the property was enclosed by razor wire.

 

[G.I.B.]

This is only the cook county forest preserves.

Tom,
This is why I asked to be able to read it for myself. It appeared by the OP's post that the entire state had been banned. It was not, just the preserves.

I know they won't explain why, and I don't expect that. But by reading the ordinance for myself I can draw an opinion or course of action based on facts. Too many people read something on the internet without doing any research at all then start to act on it. I hadn't drawn an opinion or conclusion yet, as I'd not read the facts, just a bunch of loose opinions, which are dangerous when mixed with perception.

When people start using opinions as facts you end up with a 24 hour major news network. (pick one, they all do it)

 

[gerryk]

I have read the ordinance but havent had time to dig it up to post it.

 

[pat-tekker-cat]

Why not ask for the minutes to that particular meeting and/or do the record their meetings on video tape?

 

[gerryk]

Why not ask for the minutes to that particular meeting and/or do the record their meetings on video tape?

Trying to get a question answered or get transcripts from one of their meetings would not be easy. Cook county may nothave invented red tape but they perfected it.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Why not ask for the minutes to that particular meeting and/or do the record their meetings on video tape?

pat-tekker, you're probably right, that "minutes" of public meetings are probably available, for public viewing, by law (the open meeting "Brown Act" laws that exist, etc...). But as gerryk says, I'm sure bureaucracy would mean you'd have to jump through hurdles, to find them

I would love to get the nascent beginnings minutes, of the very first committee meeting, where such a thing began to evolve there in Cook county. Because yes, it may have even included introductions as to why this issue was "on their table" for discussion, to begin with. Eg.: "we have a letter from Mr. so & so inquiring about the rules/laws for detecting in our forests. The letter was forwarded to our historic preservation committee by the front desk clerk who had received it, because she felt our dept. was most related to such an inquiry."

Who knows?? If someone can get those minutes, and find the reason for this to have even been something for them to have "invented a rule" for, I will personally buy them a 24 pack of their favorite dark beer, and have it delivered with a singing telegram lady to their home!

Now it's entirely possible that such a thing may not even be in their minutes. Eg.: the minutes might open with "we were asked to look into such & such...." (with no back-ground info as to why it got to THAT point). Who knows.

But I betcha it all started with someone trying to do the "right thing" and going and asking for permission. And thus getting a rule to "address this pressing issue". Doh!

 

[Dick Stout]

Stout Standards | Just another WordPress.com site

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Stout Standards | Just another WordPress.com site

Thanx Barnum. Bummer that the site just sort of starts where it "is now". Ie.: the record of the back-&-forth between md'rs and cook county, as it is *now*. Nothing there (that I see) telling how cook county got this bee-in-their-bonnet to start with.

Perhaps some quotes or opinions or documents will come up from archie-type preservation people, to justify this. In which case, the md'rs knee-jerk reaction will be to say "durned those archies". Or if something is said about "holes", md'rs knee-jerk reaction will be "durned those people who left holes", etc... But I bet those type things are only the "go-to" answers. For example: I have heard of parks say "no metal detectors", and when you ask them "why?", they'll simply say "because we don't want people digging". Such an answer usually causes us to think "gee, then someone must've left holes". But this is not necessarily the case. It's often time someone who went and asked "can I?", and "holes" is merely the connotation and image the responding party has. So when they give you their princely "no", they just say "because of holes". It doesn't necessarily mean there was ever a case of that (that would have been the sole cause or reason of a new rule anyhow).

 

[Dick Stout]

Here is the ordinance.... AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MISCELLANEOUS MISCONDUCT CHAPTER OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT OF COOK COUNTY

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Thanx Barnum. Again, reading through it entirely, nothing there about the origins of how it got to this.

Contrast to something I read one time, handed down from the head of Utah's state parks, was a memo passed down to rank and file rangers for their state parks. It was a "policy statement" or something to that effect, to "clarify" the park's dept. position on the use of metal detectors in the Utah State parks. What made that particular letter interesting, was that it did indeed contain a statement as to the origin of that. The opening lines of this policy letter started with something to this effect:

"The dept. receives numerous inquiries each year regarding the use of metal detectors in our state parks. The following will serve to clarify this issue....."

And it went on to spell out dire things against metal detectors (cultural heritage, "taking and harvesting", clauses etc...) . So did you catch that? Do you see? People did enough asking, then presto, someone needs to address the "pressing issue".

The cook county link unfortunately doesn't go into detail (probably un-important to them). But I'll bet if they did, if someone could follow it back to its nacent beginnings, I'll bet it's the same song-&-dance.

 

[gerryk]

My son asked someone from the forest preserve why the ban and the guy said because people with metal detectors dig holes.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

My son asked someone from the forest preserve why the ban and the guy said because people with metal detectors dig holes.

Gerry, read what I write above, in this thread. Those type answers are often the "go to" answer. Just the mental implications persons often connect to the subject, and doesn't necessarily mean that "person from the forest preserve" actually has such an example of such an incident (or would have given it a moment's thought anyhow, till someone makes it a "pressing issue in need of an answer"). I mean, what did you expect some city or county person to say?? "Because I said so, and I feel like giving a whimsical and arbitrary rule". No, of course not. They will always cite something like "holes" or "cultural heritage", etc... But that STILL doesn't answer the question of how this got on their plate as something they needed to approve or (or deny) TO BEGIN WITH. It's just "go to" reasons to justify the answer of "why?" for the rule they just invented. It doesn't always mean they ever saw a hole, etc... Or that anyone would have thought to make such a rule. I'm still betting someone went in and asked "can I?".

 

[gerryk]

Tom I know what you mean i do t need to be told to read something again. If you saw the ordinance it was brought up b the board president completely out of e blue. No committee work, no investigation nothing just brought up voted on and banned.

 

[Citiboy289]

Cook county illinois. The ban happened last april. No detecting allowed and even posessing a detector is a ticketable offense. Thats why it is called crook county. We have some beautiful forest preserves here butcant metal detect in them.

Yes they are afraid that someone might find Voting machines

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... it was brought up b the board president completely out of e blue. No committee work, no investigation nothing just brought up ....... .

Perhaps "the ordinance" didn't say the evolution source, but ...... no, nothing like this just "comes up out of the blue". Something or someone had to have brought it on their radar.

 

[Dick Stout]

Apparently they found holes in a golf course, and assumed....

 

[gerryk]

Could also be at every county surroundingus has had a ban on it for a while. One county has a permit system with one club, you have to be a memebrr of that club and only in certain forest preservescan you detect then only certain spots on ose preserves.

 

[kwkstar]

"I will never come to your area for anything. And I have told other people and requested that they go other places. YES I am badmouthing you. Because of your banning of the recreational hobby of metal detecting!!" This is what I sent to their contacts.

 

[Davers]

This country is becoming / has become a country of stupid LAWS ,way the way of fribbles law suites, those in power ,who want to stay ,from the top down to the leader of local Home owners asso,s & selfish stupid people. Il .sucks as a state Ca as well [ sorry Tom]. Soon we will have a bunch of people [ the elite] like M.B loomberg telling us how to live , becaouse we arent smart enough to make the 'RIGHT' decisions. Could go on and on / but only type 5-8 words a min..Bewares this Country is FALLING FAST...