Muni Codes Search Terms?

Chaznsc

Full Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2010
Messages
229
So I was doing a search on a local municipal code, and silly me, I searched on METAL DETECTING, obviously without results. Tried metal, detecting….. notta. Tried DIGGING and got a hit.

What are some terms you use in your permissions search? Might make a good sticky?
 
....Tried DIGGING and got a hit.....

And I assume that was to prohibit "digging". Right ? And do you take that to mean : "No md'ing" ? If so, here's some other key words you can use :

alter, deface, molest, destroy, disturb, remove, cut, damage, harvest, steal, annoy, etc....

You will eventually preclude yourself from every speck of public land in the entire USA.
 
You won't go to prison. Very unlikely you'll get a ticket. If you do, at most a fine

I'm waiting to get a no trespassing charge, I doubt I ever will because I'm such a smooth talker in person. But, if I get one, I'll look at it as a badge of honor.

And, if you hire an attorney, good chances they can get a little charge like that dismissed.
 
So I was doing a search on a local municipal code, and silly me, I searched on METAL DETECTING, obviously without results. Tried metal, detecting….. notta. Tried DIGGING and got a hit.

What are some terms you use in your permissions search? Might make a good sticky?

Not so obvious as you may think Chaznsc…”metal detecting” and/or “metal detector” do come up every now and then in a search of municipal code. I travel a lot for work, and I’ll often take my detector with me when I think I might have some time to hunt a park or two. I always do a quick search of the codified regulations for the town I’m visiting, just to make sure I don’t accidentally run afoul of a rule in an unfamiliar location. But “metal detecting” and “metal detector” are the only terms I look for - unless metal detecting is specifically mentioned and prohibited, I’m good to go, no “permission” required just like I wouldn’t ask permission to have a picnic. Very occasionally you run across municipalities that specifically prohibit metal detecting in parks or have other specific requirements such as permits, and I respect those regulations when I find them. I’ve never experienced an issue anywhere using this technique.

As Tom alluded to, every municipality in the land has language such as “shall not alter, damage, cut, deface, dig, etc”, intended to deter folks from cutting down trees for firewood, stealing park benches, and the like. I’ve detected countless parks with this type of verbiage with absolutely no issues from law enforcement or park personnel.
 
... if you hire an attorney, good chances they can get a little charge like that dismissed.

MITW, for the horror of the word "dig", can you cite ANY incident, of an md'r getting a "fine", and "having to hire an attorney" to get the "fine dismissed" ?

Can you cite any such incident ever happening, in the entire USA ? :?:


All such wording IMPLICITLY applies to the end result. For example: If you leave no trace of your presence (cover, stomp, fluff up), then presto: You haven't alterED or defacED anything. Now have you ? And yes: I apply that to dIg vs dUg too.

Will every last person on earth agree with those semantics ? Of course not. But can you show me a single md'r who's ever faced a "fine" (or jail or arrest or confiscation, etc....) specifically hinging on the word "dig" ? Please, by all means, show us the link.
 
....Very occasionally you run across municipalities that specifically prohibit metal detecting in parks....

couple of observations :

1) Yes, it's extremely rare that any city in the USA ever dreams up a specific "No MD'ing" law or rule for their parks. That's not to say that they can't say "scram" based on ancillary verbiage, but just saying that: Relatively few cities have dreamed up the need for something specific.

2) And when you DO find the rare certain cities that do have it, I have a sneaking suspicion of how-that-came-to-be. Care to take a guess as to the genesis of those ?
 
Well, not the responses I thought I would receive. If all you are looking for is the term "metal detecting", then I doubt you would find that on a regular basis, or if you did, it could be any variation of detecting, detector, relic hunting, etc.

I also dont see a reference to MOONSHINE in the code, so I guess my still is safe?

Here is what I found in my search mentioned in the opening thread:

It shall be unlawful for any person to break, dig holes or trenches in or cause excavation of any kind to be made in any of the streets, parks, squares or sidewalks of the city for the purpose of placing any poles, rails, cables or wires of any kind, or for laying water, sewer, gas or other pipes, or for any other purpose, except with a written permit from the public works engineer.

Since this is the research and permission section, I was hoping this would be a more helpful topic. My error.
 
Well, not the responses I thought I would receive. If all you are looking for is the term "metal detecting", then I doubt you would find that on a regular basis, or if you did, it could be any variation of detecting, detector, relic hunting, etc.

I also dont see a reference to MOONSHINE in the code, so I guess my still is safe?

Here is what I found in my search mentioned in the opening thread:

It shall be unlawful for any person to break, dig holes or trenches in or cause excavation of any kind to be made in any of the streets, parks, squares or sidewalks of the city for the purpose of placing any poles, rails, cables or wires of any kind, or for laying water, sewer, gas or other pipes, or for any other purpose, except with a written permit from the public works engineer.

Since this is the research and permission section, I was hoping this would be a more helpful topic. My error.

There are laws out there they can bust anyone on, if they dig enough. It's called selective prosecution. Unless you act like a jerk, they are not going to charge you with anything.

If you keep your moonshine hidden, and don't become obnoxious, I doubt they will bust you for that either.

We promise to visit you if you land in the pokey!
 
.... Here is what I found in my search mentioned in the opening thread: ...

Chaznsc, no one is disputing that this is what you found. And no one is disputing that boiler plate obligatory minutia like this couldn't be applied to our hobby. No dispute there.

All we're saying is that you're going to find similar verbiage (aka "alter", "deface", etc....) in every single park, beach, forest, desert, etc... fine-print. Across the entire USA. Yup: Every speck of public land.

But take a quick look at the show & tell pages here: Notice that there's no shortage of guys showing off what we found at a park, a school, the beach, the forest, etc... How can that be ? :?: Are they/we all lawless miscreants ?

If you opt to use the test you're putting on this, then sure : Go ahead and forget any speck of public land anywhere. I can save you the time, and you don't need to do key word searches, of any variation. Because I can guarantee you that you can find something in there.

I don't dispute that various things can be said to "technically" apply to our actions. But the key word in play here is "technically". Not "realistically".
 
....I also dont see a reference to MOONSHINE in the code, so I guess my still is safe?...

I had to chuckle at this example. Because one time, when this issue came up before on a thread, someone likewise took issue : They gave the example of : "Well gee, there's nothing in the muni code that *specifically* forbids pooping in the swim pool, so I guess that means it's ok ?" :roll:

Here's my answer to all such examples : Notice the implicit inference going on, whenever someone gives any such example : They are implicitly comparing the gravity-of-the-sample-act, with metal detecting.

So for example : Pooping in the pool (or manufacturing moonshine in the park) is on the same level as metal detecting. Well if that premise were true, then sure : The syllogism would hold true.

But since when is that a given ? Since when is that a default premise ? If we start with the premise that md'ing = harmful, damaging, and dangerous, THEN SURE ! The example does indeed hold merit.

Most of us (and 99.9% of passerbys) consider md'ing to be benign, harmless, innocuous, healthy, etc...... As opposed to the moonshine still and pooping in the pool. So you see: It depends on your starting definitions.
 
Well, not the responses I thought I would receive. If all you are looking for is the term "metal detecting", then I doubt you would find that on a regular basis, or if you did, it could be any variation of detecting, detector, relic hunting, etc.

I also dont see a reference to MOONSHINE in the code, so I guess my still is safe?

Here is what I found in my search mentioned in the opening thread:

It shall be unlawful for any person to break, dig holes or trenches in or cause excavation of any kind to be made in any of the streets, parks, squares or sidewalks of the city for the purpose of placing any poles, rails, cables or wires of any kind, or for laying water, sewer, gas or other pipes, or for any other purpose, except with a written permit from the public works engineer.

Since this is the research and permission section, I was hoping this would be a more helpful topic. My error.

I’m sorry you feel my response was unhelpful…I was genuinely trying to provide you with useful food for thought on a topic that has been covered on this forum ad nauseum. Yes, I understand that you found specific mention that “it shall be unlawful for any person to dig holes for any purpose”. As Tom and I have both said, literally every municipality in the US includes nearly the exact same language when it comes to parks and public spaces.

So you basically have two choices: don’t detect public parks because of that verbiage, or detect them anyway on the assumption that those rules are geared more towards dissuading folks from truly disrupting the area, unless detecting is mentioned specifically. For example, they don’t want kids digging a WWI style trench in the park to play “Army”. Granted, if you are an extremely messy detectorist, digging ugly plugs or worse, leaving them open, then yes, those boilerplate rules will possibly be used against you if you get caught doing it. Yes, as Tom mentioned, you might also get a “scram” - that hasn’t ever happened with me personally at a park in 5 years of active detecting, but you occasionally see other members post about it. I’m not trying to tell you what to do, or what’s right for your moral values, I’m just telling you what I do in answer to the question you posed.

Anyway, here’s an interesting example from the codified regulations of Mountain Home, Idaho, Chapter 4: Parks, Section 3-4-6, Inappropriate Park Conduct and Prohibited Activities:

https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/mountainhomeid/latest/mountainhome_id/0-0-0-8074

Notice that their regulations include all of the boilerplate verbiage about digging, cutting, defacing, removing, etc. But it also mentions metal detecting specifically - get a free permit, and suddenly you can metal detect. But I guess we still can’t recover targets because of the other “no digging” rules? That’s ludicrous, and I highly doubt that’s the case.
 
Last edited:
.... dissuading folks from truly disrupting the area.....

An example of this is one of the city beaches, in southern CA, that actually enacted a "no digging holes" statute for their beach. You might be thinking "HUH ?? On a BEACH ?"

But there's a backstory :

Some young boys had been digging "sand tunnels". A tunnel caved in on one of the boys. The other boys were too young and naive to understand what was going on. By the time anyone responded, to dig the kid out, it was too late. So how did the city respond to this tragic incident ? To make a rule forbidding digging.


But what is strange, is that some md'rs happen-chanced on to that verbiage. And deduced "Oh no, we can no longer metal detect at such & such beach !!" After all, it's pretty hard to argue with a rule that forbids digging. Right ?

Ok, let's take a show of hands here : How many people think that this rule was never meant for md'rs divots? OF COURSE the rule has nothing to do with md'ing and our-type-beach holes. :roll:

Yes I agree that holes in nice-manicured turf carries a different ... uh .... "connotation". Ok, fine : Go at lower traffic times and avoid such killjoys. :roll:
 
I apologize for the framing of my response. I appreciate your input. My expectations are my problem, not yours. :cool:

No worries at all - in hindsight, you got at least one pretty ridiculous response, so I get why you might have framed things the way you did. And I apologize too - it looks like I misunderstood what you were saying…you weren’t actually calling the responses unhelpful, just not what you were expecting. Sorry for the misinterpretation! :cool3:


…I also dont see a reference to MOONSHINE in the code, so I guess my still is safe? …

Fair question. I know, it sounds very much like I’m just being selective about the rules/regulations for parks, but there’s a method to the perceived madness. Of course, it doesn’t mean that it’s ok to set up a still in the middle of the park just because it isn’t specifically mentioned in the town code. If we take it to a further extreme, I think most of us would agree that it wouldn’t be ok to murder someone in the park either, even though it isn’t specifically mentioned. The things those two “activities” have in common is that they are already covered by other state and/or federal laws, and they are generally considered universally “bad” or “evil”…we know they aren’t allowed, because they already aren’t allowed generally and/or are morally reprehensible. And here’s where Tom_in_CA’s influence on how I think about detecting in parks really shows…I start on the assumption that metal detecting is not evil - it’s a wholesome activity not much different than fishing. Along that lines, if I wanted to see if fishing was allowed at the park, I would search the regs for “fishing” and nothing else. I do no different for metal detecting.

Yes, “digging” is a part of detecting, but like I said in earlier posts, I honestly don’t believe the regulations are intended to cover the type of “digging” we do, assuming we are responsible detectorists who know how to retrieve a target and leave little to no trace. I know, that sounds selective again - but from my perspective, it’s a matter of degree. Where do we draw the line? If I wear cleats while playing football or baseball in one of the park’s fields, I will be “digging” up small bits of dirt, and “damaging” the grass. If I put up a badminton net to play with friends during a picnic, I’m driving several stakes into the ground, leaving small holes and disturbing the grass. Don’t even get me started on the squirrels with their acorns :lol: Regardless, none of us would think twice seeing any of those things happening at a park. I honestly think of metal detecting as equivalent to those same activities. No permission needs to be asked, but common courtesy dictates a brief review of the rules to make sure those activities aren’t specifically prohibited (who knows, maybe the town council hates badminton…:lol:) It’s just my opinion and what has worked hassle free for me for years - others certainly can and do disagree to varying degrees.
 
.... Where do we draw the line? ...

Your activity qualifies as a parade. So you'll need the city's parade permit.

And killing animals (aka fishing) qualifies as "hunting". So you'll need to apply for a hunting permit.

And playing frisbee qualifies as "throwing dangerous projectiles". So you'll need to get an insurance waiver (in case you poked someone's eye out).

And yes: Your cleats qualify as altering, defacing, and digging.

If you sat too long in one spot , that qualifies as illegal camping, and/or "annoyances".

Any other questions ? :?: :laughing:
 
Back
Top Bottom