Trespassing with permission?

[Tom_in_CA]

...... I was a cop for over 6 years and understand where yall are coming from and where they are coming from. You (cop) try to do your best in pleasing everyone and in the end the Lookie-Lou is the one tht usually comes out on top because they are the one that called in and they are the one who will report back to your patrol sgt or shift supervisor and say you did or didn't do your job......

Thanx for chiming in CW-22. And our hats off to you for doing such a stressful unthankful job for those 6 yrs. That's a job that most of us wouldn't want to have !

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[civil_war22]

Thanx for chiming in CW-22. And our hats off to you for doing such a stressful unthankful job for those 6 yrs. That's a job that most of us wouldn't want to have !

Thanks Tom I am honestly hoping and praying to get back into it after the new year. I loved that job and helping out others. It's a stressful job but in the end it's worth it for just one person to say thank you at the end of the day

 

[civil_war22]

Most city codes pertain to city parks. Parks and recreation call the police and the police justify any wrong doing unless it's a private park or federal park. Most public parks I've had calls to basically throw their hands up and say your call your problem. Most are too scared to run you off. I did have a superintendent of parks come up to me once while I was bent over detecting and he started snarling and acting like a jerk till I ask him the annotated city code in which state no metal detecting allowed and he said I don't know of a code but we mow the grass and don't want potholes everywhere. I showed him the plug I was digging and my recovery method and also stated I am the one who gets called here once a month or so to fend off the guys with a Geiger Counter that the old man across the street sees

 

[Nugs Bunny]

nugs, ok, let's leave "lookie-lous" out of this, for the moment, for sake of discussion.

It won't be so much a matter of "pleasing the lookie-lou", as it is .......... THEIR THINKING ABOUT IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. So forget, for the moment, of who's pleasing who. What I mean is, like kemper says is that even in Ohio, if that very same cop were to happen to be passing by the park, and sees you, perhaps it "doesn't register" as something he thinks about, or wonders "is this legal" or "what are the implications/end-results", etc..... HOWEVER, if that exact same cop is called out on a complaint, then .......... he's now actively thinking "what does this involve?" , "What laws cover this?" and so forth.

Hence I think you're getting caught up in the "lookie-lou" and "pleasing" part. All we're trying to tell you, is: What factor PUTS IT ON THEIR RADAR, to begin with. Because in actual life reality, often-time it's a matter of whether or not a person is tasked with thinking about something. Not what technicalities actually say about said-subject-at-hand.

Most of the cops here are good 'ol boys, there are a few that are somewhat "militarized" but for the most part they are good natured guys.

I know cops personally and one comes to my house on the regular to hang out.

The problem we are having Tom is not a lack of examples... the problem is tunnel vision. There is a HUGE difference between the people of CA and OH, it appears that factor is being overlooked. People in Ohio (including the police) have a COMPLETELY different mindset.

It's an Appalachian thing... us Hillbillies are a breed unto our own!

The unspoken rules of Appalachia are;

1. Never mess with another man's woman.
2. Never mess with another man's dog.
3. Never mess with another man's truck.
4. If you fight one... you fight the entire family.
5. Stay on your own damn property!
6. Nobody likes a tattle tale... Snitches get stitches.
7. "Stock" is for old ladies... Get a "REAL" truck!


I shot this video on my way home from a hunt, it was around an abandoned house in the woods, I was accosted by a goose if that counts. I'm posting it to give you an idea of what it's like where I live.






My F-150, rebuilt the motor beefed it up a little added some performance parts, beefed up the tranny, factory posi, installed F-250 HD springs and 30" BFG's. Raised her up 3" in the process and it's only 2WD... that's Appalachia for ya!



This was when it was stock and wimpy.



This is after I increased the testicular fortitude.





This is my Chevy, I have two of these, a '75 and the '76 pictured below.






In California, this would be considered an arsenal, in Appalachia it's considered a good start!

 

[cudamark]

As highlighted I think is a good point. To me it kind of goes to the point of "the fewer people involved, the easier to keep everyone happy " If you received a call about someone detecting at the park and had to investigate , a "no dig " reference could become an issue, if park authority felt that they would let people detect if no one complained. It may be up to park authority to determine the meaning of wording in a code as they would know the intent of that wording.

I don't know of ANY park that doesn't have a "no dig" clause there somewhere. If you hunt the area at off hours and leave no trace, no lookie lous, no cops, no complaints, no problems. That's the way to to get the fewest people involved.

 

[cudamark]

The "no digging" was put in the books long ago, before detecting. They were meant to keep people from stealing the flora to landscape their own property, not to prevent us from making a recovery. The problem is, it can be used (abused?) to persecute us as well if "people in authority" get the notion. Let's not encourage them to do so!

 

[Nugs Bunny]

I don't know of ANY park that doesn't have a "no dig" clause there somewhere. If you hunt the area at off hours and leave no trace, no lookie lous, no cops, no complaints, no problems. That's the way to to get the fewest people involved.

In California... I wouldn't doubt every park has a "no dig" policy. What isn't illegal there?

Have you ever looked up car parts? There are two categories... California and EXCEPT California. Doesn't that tell you ANYTHING?

If a park has a "no dig" clause and you violate it by digging... that IS breaking the law.

"If you hunt the area at off hours and leave no trace, no lookie lous, no cops, no complaints, no problems." Sounds like great advice... for a burglar!

Ohio does not suffer from the "environmental hysteria" that California does... The Cuyahoga River caught on fire... not once... not twice... it caught on fire ELEVEN times before Ohio decided to do something about it.

Here are the regulations for Ohio State Parks, "Any area disturbed by the activity shall immediately be returned to a condition as close to undisturbed as possible."

Hardly sounds like a "no dig" policy now does it?

Lawriter - OAC - 1501:41-7-08 Metal detectors prohibited.
1501:41-7-08 Metal detectors prohibited.
No person shall use or offer for use any device for the purpose of locating or removing any metallic objects or any other objects of value from any lands or waters of the division without first having obtained written permission from the area manager, except that sand beaches shall be exempt from the prohibition.

(A) No person shall use or offer for use any device for the purpose of locating or removing any metallic objects or any other objects of value from any lands or waters of the division without first having obtained written permission from the area manager.

(B) Not withstanding paragraph (A) of this rule, metal detecting is permitted without written permission on sand beach area and mowed areas, except mowed areas associated with a golf course, rental facility, or campground. Any area disturbed by the activity shall immediately be returned to a condition as close to undisturbed as possible.

Effective: 12/15/2014
Promulgated Under: 119.03
Statutory Authority: 1541.01
Rule Amplifies: 1541.01 , 1541.03 , 1541.09
Prior Effective Dates: 6/14/75

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Missouri,like Ohio,has a no dig policy (which they interpret as no metal detecting) for State Parks except certain areas such as beaches. I get a permit yearly and stay off the no dig areas.

Please point out where the words "no digging" appear in the Ohio Revised Code for metal detecting in STATE parks!

It clearly states no permit is needed for the sandy beaches and mowed areas, one ONLY needs a permit to detect OUTSIDE of those areas.

It never mentions digging, it states any areas disturbed by the activity shall be returned to a condition as close to undisturbed as possible.

Lawriter - OAC - 1501:41-7-08 Metal detectors prohibited.
1501:41-7-08 Metal detectors prohibited.
No person shall use or offer for use any device for the purpose of locating or removing any metallic objects or any other objects of value from any lands or waters of the division without first having obtained written permission from the area manager, except that sand beaches shall be exempt from the prohibition.

(A) No person shall use or offer for use any device for the purpose of locating or removing any metallic objects or any other objects of value from any lands or waters of the division without first having obtained written permission from the area manager.

(B) Not withstanding paragraph (A) of this rule, metal detecting is permitted without written permission on sand beach area and mowed areas, except mowed areas associated with a golf course, rental facility, or campground. Any area disturbed by the activity shall immediately be returned to a condition as close to undisturbed as possible.

The regulations in Missouri are not the same as Ohio. One needs a permit to detect anywhere in the parks, in Ohio the beaches and mowed areas are exempt from the restriction.

Metal Detecting | Missouri State Parks
Metal Detecting
For those seeking to discover a hidden treasure, metal detecting is allowed with a permit in certain areas in 13 state parks. The activity is allowed only on specific sand beaches at these state parks.

A permit is required and authorizes the user to operate a metal detector on the beaches at the listed parks. The permit is valid for the current calendar year. State parks and historic sites protect our natural and cultural history so no object of historical or archaeological value or interest may be removed from a state park. If you find such an object while using a metal detector, please immediately notify park staff.

Metal detecting permits may be obtained free of charge by writing to the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Facility and Visitor Services Program, P.O. Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102 or by e-mail to moparks@dnr.mo.gov. Please include your name and postal mailing address.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

.... If a park has a "no dig" clause and you violate it by digging... that IS breaking the law.

"If you hunt the area at off hours and leave no trace, no lookie lous, no cops, no complaints, no problems." Sounds like great advice... for a burglar! ....

Nugs, I love your posts. You're a good writer and I enjoy your input here on T'net.

To address what you're saying above: Yes, technically, you would be correct. But forget for a moment whether or not it had the exact word "dig". Let's assume you got lucky somewhere, and ... after looking up a city's muni codes, you didn't see that exact word. Ok ? But why stop there? What if the word "alter" appears? How about the word "deface" ? Have you noticed that any of such type words are ALSO "present tense verbs". Yes we md'rs can justify it (in our minds) by rationalizing that a "reasonable" person knows that if you leave no trace, then you haven't defacED or alterED anything. Right? But technically speaking, that doesn't fly. Because just like "dig", all those words are present tense verb.

Therefore, forget for the moment any varieties of the various words. Because I can gaurantee you right now, that you are sunk. You might as well stay out of all parks everywhere. Because in some form or fashion, you will find those words.

Oh sure, you can trot down to city halls wherever you come to , looking to pre-empt that by getting permission . But you know darned well where that could go!

So let's just cut to the chase and forget all the semantics and verbage that technically applies. Instead, why don't you just go by the judgement criteria of whether or not anyone cares ? So for example, if you move to a certain city, and join their md'ing club. Once there, you bump into long time locals who invite you along with them to the nearby lake, park, school forest, etc... where they've all hunted for the past 30+ years with no problem. In a case like that, you'll notice that you didn't go down and find something that "forbids disturbing". Instead, you went by the REALITY OF THE SITUATION.

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Nugs, I love your posts. You're a good writer and I enjoy your input here on T'net.

To address what you're saying above: Yes, technically, you would be correct. But forget for a moment whether or not it had the exact word "dig". Let's assume you got lucky somewhere, and ... after looking up a city's muni codes, you didn't see that exact word. Ok ? But why stop there? What if the word "alter" appears? How about the word "deface" ? Have you noticed that any of such type words are ALSO "present tense verbs". Yes we md'rs can justify it (in our minds) by rationalizing that a "reasonable" person knows that if you leave no trace, then you haven't defacED or alterED anything. Right? But technically speaking, that doesn't fly. Because just like "dig", all those words are present tense verb.

Therefore, forget for the moment any varieties of the various words. Because I can gaurantee you right now, that you are sunk. You might as well stay out of all parks everywhere. Because in some form or fashion, you will find those words.

Oh sure, you can trot down to city halls wherever you come to , looking to pre-empt that by getting permission . But you know darned well where that could go!

So let's just cut to the chase and forget all the semantics and verbage that technically applies. Instead, why don't you just go by the judgement criteria of whether or not anyone cares ? So for example, if you move to a certain city, and join their md'ing club. Once there, you bump into long time locals who invite you along with them to the nearby lake, park, school forest, etc... where they've all hunted for the past 30+ years with no problem. In a case like that, you'll notice that you didn't go down and find something that "forbids disturbing". Instead, you went by the REALITY OF THE SITUATION.

Thanks Tom.

In Ohio the law is pretty clear, detecting is allowed on the beaches and mowed areas, if one wishes to detect other areas they need a permit.

This code only applies to State Parks NOT City Parks.

Lawriter - OAC - 1501:41-7-08 Metal detectors prohibited.
1501:41-7-08 Metal detectors prohibited.
No person shall use or offer for use any device for the purpose of locating or removing any metallic objects or any other objects of value from any lands or waters of the division without first having obtained written permission from the area manager, except that sand beaches shall be exempt from the prohibition.
(A) No person shall use or offer for use any device for the purpose of locating or removing any metallic objects or any other objects of value from any lands or waters of the division without first having obtained written permission from the area manager.
(B) Not withstanding paragraph (A) of this rule, metal detecting is permitted without written permission on sand beach area and mowed areas, except mowed areas associated with a golf course, rental facility, or campground. Any area disturbed by the activity shall immediately be returned to a condition as close to undisturbed as possible.

Lawriter - OAC - 1501:41-3-10 Plants.
1501:41-3-10 Plants.
Except by permit issued for scientific or educational purpose by the chief of the division, no person shall willfully or negligently pick, dig up, cut, mutilate, destroy, injure, disturb, move, molest, alter, treat, burn, or carry away any tree or plant or portion thereof, including but not limited to leaf mold, flowers, foliage, berries, fruit, grass, turf, humus, shrubs, cones, and dead wood, except in a specific area where the chief has authorized and has posted at the headquarters of such area notification of such authorization to take berries, gather mushrooms, pine cones or wood or except in an area that the chief has designated as a nature study area. Such taking may be done for personal use only and not for commercial purposes.

Lawriter - OAC - 1501:41-3-11 Geological features.
1501:41-3-11 Geological features.
No person shall destroy, disturb, deface, mutilate, or remove earth, sand, gravel, shoreline of a lake, oil, minerals, stone, rocks, ice, or features of caves in any area administered by the division, except in specific areas when authorization by the chief to collect fossils or other geological materials is posted at the headquarters of the area to which the authorization applies or except where the chief has designated a nature study area.

Lawriter - OAC - 1501:41-3-12 Archaeological and historical features.
1501:41-3-12 Archaeological and historical features.
No person shall remove from, injure, disfigure, deface, or destroy any object of paleontological, archaeological, or historical interest or value in any area administered by the Division without a permit issued by the Chief of the Division.

At first glance ORC allows for metal detecting in State parks yet also seem to prevent it with a no dig policy.

This clause in ORC 1501:41-7-08 "Any area disturbed by the activity shall immediately be returned to a condition as close to undisturbed as possible." is an exemption to ORC 1501:41-3-10, 1501:41-3-11, 1501:41-3-12 in designated areas (sand beach area and mowed areas, except mowed areas associated with a golf course, rental facility, or campground)

Parks with a no dig policy that have no provisions for metal detecting are off limits. The no dig policy in Ohio State parks applies to those not detecting, or those detecting in unauthorized areas. Those detecting in an authorized area are exempt to the no dig policies.

Now let's take for example the laws on collecting...

Lawriter - OAC - 1501:41-3-27 Collecting prohibited without permit.
1501:41-3-27 Collecting prohibited without permit.
(A) No person shall collect plants or animals from any area administered by the division without first having obtained a collector's permit from the chief of the division in addition to any other required permits. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall restrict a licensed hunter or fisherman who is legally hunting or fishing in the taking of game or fish or prohibit the collecting of plants and animals in an area designated by the chief as a nature study area, and so posted in accordance with rule 1501:41-3-01 of the Administrative Code. The special instructions posted for use of the nature study area shall prevail where inconsistent with the rules herein.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Nugs, I'm still going to fall back on my theory that "dig" has no more applicability than "alter" or "deface" or "damage" etc.... In each and every case, every one of them has what implicit meaning ? THE END RESULT. Have you "destroyed" anything ? No.

Yes I agree that not everyone will agree with those semantics. Fine! Detect at night and avoid such kill-joys then !

Let's put your citations of law to the test, for a "real life" test: Everything you've cited there that forbids "removing", "disturbing historical", "altering", and "defacing" (and maybe even the word "dig" too) are in the State of CA park's dept wording. However, I gaurantee you, that you can detect state-of-CA beaches till you're blue in the face. And (gasp) "dig" for your coins. And (gasp) if you find a merc or barber, no one will care. And if you (gasp) took it home (aka "removed" it), no one would blink twice. How can that be, if the law is so crystal clear? Are hundreds of CA hunters lawless miscreants? We're talking beaches that have been detected since the 1960s !

However, I have no doubt, that if someone were to go to Sacramento, and ask enough archies and top park dept. brass: "Can I detect for old historical coins, and take them from state parks, for my own fun and enjoyment to sell on ebay?". What do you think they would say ? They would most certainly fish out verbage just like you've posted, and say "no". Ok, why then do state of CA beaches get routinely detected? Their state beaches are administered by the very same park's dept that administers the in-land parks. So technically, there's no reason why the ocean beaches are any different (or exempt or whatever) from their land parks .

So I have no doubt that you and I can find things that .... technically.... forbid us from doing a LOT of things (spitting on sidewalks, etc...). But the question is: does anyone really care ?

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Nugs, I'm still going to fall back on my theory that "dig" has no more applicability than "alter" or "deface" or "damage" etc.... In each and every case, every one of them has what implicit meaning ? THE END RESULT. Have you "destroyed" anything ? No.

Yes I agree that not everyone will agree with those semantics. Fine! Detect at night and avoid such kill-joys then !

Let's put your citations of law to the test, for a "real life" test: Everything you've cited there that forbids "removing", "disturbing historical", "altering", and "defacing" (and maybe even the word "dig" too) are in the State of CA park's dept wording. However, I gaurantee you, that you can detect state-of-CA beaches till you're blue in the face. And (gasp) "dig" for your coins. And (gasp) if you find a merc or barber, no one will care. And if you (gasp) took it home (aka "removed" it), no one would blink twice. How can that be, if the law is so crystal clear? Are hundreds of CA hunters lawless miscreants? We're talking beaches that have been detected since the 1960s !

However, I have no doubt, that if someone were to go to Sacramento, and ask enough archies and top park dept. brass: "Can I detect for old historical coins, and take them from state parks, for my own fun and enjoyment to sell on ebay?". What do you think they would say ? They would most certainly fish out verbage just like you've posted, and say "no". Ok, why then do state of CA beaches get routinely detected? Their state beaches are administered by the very same park's dept that administers the in-land parks. So technically, there's no reason why the ocean beaches are any different (or exempt or whatever) from their land parks .

So I have no doubt that you and I can find things that .... technically.... forbid us from doing a LOT of things (spitting on sidewalks, etc...). But the question is: does anyone really care ?

Tom, outside of California things are different, those words hold far less power here in the East.

Alter, deface, damage COULD apply to metal detecting, but most no dig policies use wording that WOULD apply.

For example if one takes great care in recovering targets, then one has not altered defaced or damaged anything. On the other hand if one is careless and leaves a mess behind, then one has altered defaced and damaged. In my opinion, I think discretion would be based upon whether or not one left visible damage, not perceived damage.

Protection of plants poses more of a problem than protection of geological features. Those ordinances use words like injure, disturb, move, molest in reference to plants and trees, but also include mold, flowers, foliage, grass, turf, and humus.

The act of digging a hole will most definitely "disturb" humus. Cutting a plug would most likely "injure" and "move" grass, turf and/or wildflowers.

I'm not saying I disagree with your opinion, I'm saying it's different in Ohio.

From a legal standpoint, digging a hole violates a no dig policy... no matter how nicely one fills them back in.

From a who cares standpoint, if the park authorities are ok with it, then it's still law, just not an enforced one.

It's against State Law to set off fireworks in Ohio, yet it's legal to possess them, however the law has never really ever been enforced. Fireworks bill extinguished on last day of Ohio legislative session | cleveland.com

Like I said this is comparing apples and oranges... I'm surprised you're even allowed to own a metal detector in California!

 

[kristof.wanderer]

Consider this, she may have been dispatched to the area to make contact with you if someone called in on you. Her unsolicited attitude with you is the issue in my opinion and bear in mind that she may have just dealt with some horrific crime. I know it sounds like I'm completely defending her, and I am up to the point of her attitude because as an officer myself (in Texas) I am ever aware of the ugliness we see day to day. I'm sure I wasn't as friendly as I should have been after seeing a 6 month old baby that was beaten to death in a kitchen sink by her mother (whom I also had to deal with) or after notifying a mother of her 17 year old son's death. We all have bad days, police included and yes we can become cynical suspecting everyone is up to no good because we work with criminals all day everyday. I strive to remember 97% of people are good, honest, hard working folks, but we are in contact with that 3% that are turds 99% of the time!

In my opinion, you should speak with her supervisor about her attitude as it may not be her first attitudinal incident and if she's having issues processing (mentally and emotionally) a scene or victim, she's needs counseling. I agree with the other post recommending that you obtain written consent from the air port manager as a CYA measure...it just avoids another headache. And, also bear in mind that if an ordinance exists prohibiting metal detecting on municipal property the airport manager may not be aware of the ordinance which would cause you to violate said ordinance unknowingly...something to inquire about from a different officer, such as her supervisor if/when you make contact.

I doubt this rely helps much, but I simply wanted to give you a different perspective because I too wear a badge and know the score (both sides.)

Stay safe out there, happy hunting, and a great big hello from The Lone Star State!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.....then it's still law, just not an enforced one. .....

Kemper, then we know, that you ...... being a law-abiding citizen ........ would not detect in those circumstances. Because the fact that a) it's not enforced, and b) no one cares, is STILL not proper moral justification for breaking laws. Just making sure I understand you correctly

 

[Nugs Bunny]

Yeah ,I was quoting Nugs there in the first part of my comment. I'm saying that if it says " No metal detecting " in the code or on a sign then that means it is off limits. As for the other wording ,different parks such as mine do not consider metal detecting to be a damaging thing and they do allow it. If a person would not do it properly then they would probably get told that they can't do it. In that situation I would suggest they obey that and would be detecting illegally if they continued. What it boils down to here is that they don't care if a person detects without tearing up the park. They may have other things they care about such as a couple detectorists waltzing through the park loaded for bear and it would be at their discretion to do what they feel is best for the appearance of the park and perhaps the "appearance" of what may happen.

If a person were wanting to argue the legality of being able to detect in a park where they were told they couldn't they would probably lose that argument. As you've said before there is most likely something in that code that would keep a person from detecting if authority did not want the detectorist there. I suggest a person detect low key if they are detecting a park where they are likely to be seen. My position is that ,as I have found out, you may not be doing anything illegal if you are detecting a park with vague wording that one could interpret to mean metal detecting is forbidden. You would be breaking the law if the "interpreter" said a person couldn't detect and a person would continue. This does allow people that detect properly to detect and can keep those that don't detect properly from doing so. It is up to the authority over the park as to how they regulate it.

Two things....

1. No matter how careful one is there is no way to recover a target without violating this code. "no person shall willfully or negligently pick, dig up, cut, mutilate, destroy, injure, disturb, move, molest, alter, treat, burn, or carry away any tree or plant or portion thereof, including but not limited to leaf mold, flowers, foliage, berries, fruit, grass, turf, humus, shrubs, cones, and dead wood,"

2. Ohio confirms disturbance is caused by the activity, however minimal disturbance is permissible in authorized areas. "metal detecting is permitted without written permission on sand beach area and mowed areas... Any area disturbed by the activity shall immediately be returned to a condition as close to undisturbed as possible."

Minimal Disturbance... those are the key words.

If a park has a no dig policy (such as the example above) and they only allow metal detecting in specific areas... detecting outside of those areas is a violation.

The problem with the "nobody cares" perspective is somebody always cares... they just haven't caught you yet!

However laws that are NOT enforced are another story and it's important to not blur the line between the two.

There is nothing wrong with violating a law that is ignored by the authorities and the public, but one can still get hemmed up, it's a common occurrence across America.

Take for instance speeding, we all know we can get away with going ten miles over the speed limit on the interstate. But on a County road you never know, I've been cited for going 56mph in a 55mph zone. I have been busted by aircraft on the interstate too, no cops anywhere in sight, they had a patrol car waiting on me a few exits ahead. You never know who is watching...

 

[Nugs Bunny]

1. No matter how careful one is there is no way to recover a target without violating this code. "no person shall willfully or negligently pick, dig up, cut, mutilate, destroy, injure, disturb, move, molest, alter, treat, burn, or carry away any tree or plant or portion thereof, including but not limited to leaf mold, flowers, foliage, berries, fruit, grass, turf, humus, shrubs, cones, and dead wood,"

How can a person walk into the park without moving the grass ?

Why do you insist on taking things out of context?

It's very clear what is meant... walking on grass does not "move" the grass within the context of the law.

Considering you claim Grand Theft Auto is a misdemeanor your interpretation of the law appears to be somewhat flawed.

more serious misdemeanors likeburglary and grand theft might be punishable by some jail time.

 

[kayakpat]

If you don't own it, you have no rights , as you are just a guest and and subject to assigned local authority and the whims of the owner

 

[kayakpat]

nice 4 wheeling, where in ohio is big wheeling creek?

 

[Nugs Bunny]

nice 4 wheeling, where in ohio is big wheeling creek?

That was actually in West Virginia, I live right on the border, there is creek named Wheeling Creek in Ohio but it's not as nice.

Here is some cool history about the name and the creek.

"Wheeling is an English corruption of the Delaware word “Weel-lunk,” which literally means “Place of the Skull” in the Delaware language."

"John Brittle, who was captured by the Delaware Indians in 1791 and who lived with them for five years tells the story of how Wheeling got its name. Chief Hainguypooshies, which means "Big Cat," told him that the first white explorers were beheaded and their skulls placed on stakes at the mouth of the Wheeling Creek to warn off others. The spot became known as Weel lung."

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

.... walking on grass does not "move" the grass within the context of the law....

Nugs. I agree. No one in authority is going to try to say that walking on the grass (even with cleats !) "damages" or "moves" the grass. Agreed. However, I also maintain that ... IN THE SAME WAY: Nor does m'ding constitute a violation of those codes, "within the context of law".

I consider retrieving during the course of detecting, to be equally as innocuous and harmless as walking on the grass. So I guess, in a way, we agree