Hordfest, welcome to the forum and hobby. As you can probably tell, my post was tongue-in-cheek. Not meant as a personal insult. Nor did you intend to go ask them about Indian bones, etc...
You ask several questions, so let's take one at a time:
.... pretty cynical about the authorities when it comes to metal detecting. Could I ask why?....
No. I'm not pretty cynical about authorities. I'm pretty cynical about
asking authority's permission . Where permission wasn't needed. Ie.: if there's not an express "no md'ing" law or rule, then presto, it's not prohibited.
So then asking permission risks being met with "safe answers" to "pressing questions". When the truth be told: Those authorities might have cared less, nor ever given the matter a moment's thought. Until someone is in front of them asking permission . As if the act-of-md'ing is somehow wrong or evil, that it needed sanctions and permission.
Authorities are simply doing their job. Nothing cynical about that. If you ask them "can I do such & such?", they will merely answer your question. And in doing so, then like all human beings, their minds will tend to think-through-the-ramifications. Ie.: you might dig and leave holes. You might "take things", etc....
I have seen this happen first-hand: Locations and authorities who could have cared less. Yup: They pass you by, and ignore you. Until the day came when someone took it upon themselves to ask permission or seek clarifications. And .... the whimsical "no" came out. Or worse yet: A law or rule written to "address the pressing issue".
Not cynical at all. It's just human nature doing what human nature does. You ask them a question, they're going to give you an answer. Nothing wrong or cycnical about that.
.... Seems to me that building a good relationship with your local park districts and officials is a smart thing to do....
Huh ? How is it building a
"bad" relationship, for a person to look up the laws for himself ? How is that a bad thing ? What could be more law-abiding than that ?
And if you're alluding to "grey area laws" (ie.: what constitutes "mowed" turf, etc....), ok, then: Let's assume that, yes, it has a degree of ambiguity. Then isn't it up to the legislating entity to be clear ?
Sort of like "blocking sidewalks laws" or laws that forbid "annoyances". Yes: They're ambiguous & vague. BUT no one thinks for a moment that .... In order to stop on the sidewalk that they "need permission" or should "seek clarification" to make sure that doesn't violate laws that forbid blocking sidewalks. Right ? On the contrary, if someone thinks you are 'blocking the sidewalk' or 'being an annoyance', they're welcome to tell you, eh ?
.... Why risk getting your detector or finds confiscated by an overzealous park ranger? ...
Hordfest, do you have any examples of any md'r getting his "finds" or "detector" confiscated, for failing to meet this grey area ambiguity of "mowed" versus "un-mowed" ? If so, please show us the link.
The only links that are ever forthcoming (when supposed fears of "arrests" and "tickets" and "confiscations" are rolled out), are always someone who is A) night sneaking obvious historic sensitive monuments, or B) someone who couldn't take a warning. If you have any links to the contrary (benign normal park turf, sand boxes, beaches, etc....) I'd like to see them.
....You seem to be more in the it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission camp. Why is that?
This question is "very telling". It implies your starting premise. That md'ing is "wrong". Lest why else would anyone "seek forgiveness" if they weren't doing something wrong in the first place ?
If we start with that premise that md'ing is "wrong", then yes: Everything else you're saying does indeed logically follow.
But why start with that premise ? Unless there is an express explicit "no md'ing" rule , then ... nothing to "seek forgiveness" for, in the first place. Eh ?
