Meeting with Cook County Forest preserve to address detecting ban.. Tuesday July 30th

Chicago Ron

Hero Member
Apr 12, 2005
607
172
In the Lake in Chicago
🏆 Honorable Mentions:
3
Detector(s) used
Minelab Explorer SE, E-trac, Excaliber II, GPX-5000
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Well it has been a work in progress for quite some time. Pat Anderson president of the Chicago club sent an email to the president of the Cook County forest preserve in Oct 2012 asking for a meeting to address the ban on detecting in Cook County preserves. He also included a plan for training and a permit system to regulate when and where hunting was allowed. No response was received until June 14th of 2013. That response from the district was merely a thank you for writing, these are the rules for detecting.
The Task Force has hired an attorney, Anne Shaw, to help with their situation, and a letter from the attorney went out the other day to the Forest Preserve District of Cook County.
This is the districts reply.
Hello Everyone:
This is to advise you that the General Superintendent of the Forest Preserve District of Cook County recently has received several requests to meet with various individuals for the purpose of discussing the Forest Preserve District’s current prohibition regarding metal detecting activities in the Forest Preserves. In response, he has scheduled a meeting, to which you are hereby invited to attend, for Tuesday, July 30, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. at 536 North Harlem Avenue in River Forest, Illinois to discuss this issue further.
At your earliest convenience, please contact me, Beverly Buckley, at[email protected] to confirm your attendance at this meeting.
Thank you for contacting the Forest Preserve District of Cook County regarding this matter. We look forward to seeing you on Tuesday.
We need attendance.
Any detectorist or supporter able to attend should send an email to Beverly Buckley reserving a spot. We need everyone attending to be respectful and show detecting in the best possible light. If anyone has letters from returned items please bring copy’s to present. Also some bags of dug items to show how much garbage we remove from the environment.
Any other Ideas please post here and I will share them.
Thanks
Ron Guinazzo
Chicago Ron
Link to my blog where you can post ideas or comments.
Meeting with Cook County Forest Preserve to address ban on detecting. | Chicago Ron
 

diggummup

Gold Member
Jul 15, 2004
17,815
10,120
Somewhere in the woods
Detector(s) used
Whites M6
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Isn't it a shame that an attorney had to be hired before you could get a legitimate response from an elected official such as Arnold Randall. I hope you can get a large group of supporters together, it will definitely help. Good luck in your quest, I think your gonna need it.
 

TheRingFinder

Bronze Member
May 22, 2013
2,223
1,991
Minnesota
🏆 Honorable Mentions:
3
Detector(s) used
Minelab - E-Trac / Excalibur
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Keep on the pressure, good luck !
 

Citiboy289

Hero Member
Aug 9, 2012
651
512
North Georgia
Detector(s) used
Various depends on the need at the moment
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
WHAT IS THE MATTER UP THERE ? They have the highest murder rate in the country , The county debt has again been downgraded , They sold their highways ect to private industry , closed schools , fired teachers AND THEY ARE WORRIED ABOUT METAL DETECTING YOU CANT MAKE THIS STUFF UP
 

Tom_in_CA

Gold Member
Mar 23, 2007
13,837
10,360
Salinas, CA
🥇 Banner finds
2
Detector(s) used
Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
Chicago Ron, very interesting. Thanx for posting. Wish I wasn't so far away, or I'd be there :)

For anyone who is able to go, can you sleuth around (if any Q&A comes up with the brain-childs of their law/rule) to ask this: How did they ever implement such a thing in the first place? How did such a thing ever get on their radar as something they figured "needed regulation" IN THE FIRST PLACE?

Certainly not "holes" (since we're talking un-improved forest, swamps, trails, etc... NOT TURF). So I can't help but wonder, .... how did this start? And if they answer: "archaeological resources", then press them further: Ok then, what caused someone there to all of the sudden think "oh no, md'rs might harm archaeological sites"? In other words: whatever the reason they cite as the reason, bring it back to the genesis of EVEN THAT to discern when and how those notions even occured to them .... to begin with.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Top