reply
George MN, and G.I.B, if you do find the details of the supposed law, and if it did give their rationale for the law, it's still not going to take-you-back to the genesis of this. I mean, for example, it might say something like: "to protect our cultural heritage history" (in which case, we md'rs say "durned those archies"). Or it might say: "because holes are a liability" (in which case we md'rs say "durned those guys who must've left holes"). And so forth.
But as I say, those "Go - To" reasons of theirs, are just their justification (things they had to think long and hard as reasons to say "no" to), for the law they just invented. It STILL does not answer the question of, how did it ever get on their plates, as something to consider, BEFORE that. And as I say, probably because someone(s) went in asking "can I detect?" questions. And once that's done, then let's face it: What's the inherent connotations of metal detectors? If they pass this "pressing question" past the county archies, well of course his ears will bristle and the mention of detectors, and he'll say "make a law" (since, of course, most archies are against md'ing). Or just in general, the "average joe", when he thinks of detectors, will of course have a mental image of "digging", afterall (whether or not there ever actually was any holes left there, or that they'd have ever given the matter thought, etc...).
So even if you found reference to the formulation of the law, it's not going to say something like "We instituted this because a person(s) came in asking permission".
However, with that said, I HAVE seen some rules, laws, etc.... in reference to the subject, that do indeed give as their basis (background talk), things to the effect of ".... Due to the numerous inquiries our parks dept receives each year, the following will serve to clarify the park's dept's stance on the subject of metal detectors in our parks....." (and then it goes on to spell dire sounding restrictions or no's). So reading that closely, you see the "d/t the inquiries" parts pretty much sums it up. Ie.: apparently *before* that, it was simply silent on the subject, un-addressed, etc... But most of the time, you see no such back-ground start-up momentum. Simply that, for whatever reason, the topic is "on the floor".
)
