A word to the wise, and the ethical--don't loot wrecks:

[Akimbo]

I've taken my share of brass — mostly from wrecks that are rarely, if ever, seen by divers. IMO, archeology on most post-1900 metal wrecks is nonsense. Tons of construction plans and photographs exist, we understand everything about their use and construction, and the great majority have no historical significance. I also don't accept that somehow a wreck “belongs” to all divers. They are deteriorating piles of scrap metal with a short time above the mud-line.

Observing local and admiralty laws in addition to respecting war graves is another matter.

 

[nolatom]

I like wrecks because I like ships, boats, and artifacts, and the unique history and lasting effect from each, and for good measure the habitat they provide in an otherwise "sand desert".

To me, "real" wrecks are special, more so if I remember or know something about the event. The CHESTER POLING hull-split and sinking off Gloucester almost 40 years ago in a severe January storm, happened while I was a (desk-driving) member of the Coast Guard in Boston, and knew some of the rescuers who came very close to not making it home themselves, while saving 6 of the 7 crew. Diving her and seeing where the deck drops off to sand, and the bottom plating that fractured first, is cool (so's the water, even in August). I read the Coast Guard Board of Investigation report before the dive, and gave my photocopy of it to the captain of the CAPE ANN DIVER, who was interested in reading about it, and some of the inspection reforms that resulted (hull thicknesses were on the sketchy side on this age 40 lake/river turned (unwisely?) coastal tanker). As an old CG marine inspector and investigator, I was taught, "all the marine safety regulations are written in blood", and out of this casualty and the S/S MARINE ELECTRIC a few years later, came the requirement for survival suits, and better hull/hatch corrosion inspections.

And the "Russian Freighter" off Pensacola is intersting because you just don't see WWI-era scotch boilers any more. Those "machinery museums" are pretty much all underwater. Same for the hull remnants USS MASSACHUSETTS just off the Pensacola channel.

So my interest is in the drama that brought them to that end, and what did we learn--not in taking something away.

 

[scagrotto]

the gross overreaching of regulators makes the whole concept suspect.

Perhaps you should gain lawful possession simply by [-]finding something[/-] being the first person to recover something from property you don't own?

It might be better stated that if you're walking through your own backyard and find General Lee's pistol, it's yours.

That is better stated, but still not quite right. For most of us, sometime after we get out of 3rd grade we figure out that "finders keepers" isn't always how the world works. If his heirs are still looking they may still own it.

If somebody abandons something then others can lay fair claim to it, though the rights of the finder often depend on where the item was found. Items that were lost or misplaced are an entirely different matter. A person who loses or misplaces an item doesn't automatically lose ownership, and somebody finding any object with a value beyond some usually small amount doesn't gain ownership simply by finding it. The specifics vary with local law, but in general finding any object worth more than perhaps $10 requires that the finder report it to authorities or make some legitimate effort to locate the owner. The finder only becomes entitled to it after meeting the legal requirements and waiting some period of time.

Laws regarding sunken vessels complicate things even more, so finding a wallet that fell overboard may be different than finding a wallet that went down with the ship. There are exceptions in inland waters where navigable waterways may be privately owned, but anything found in navigable marine waters has probably been found on government property.

I'm not positive about the location, but believe that in Portland, Maine (and probably other places) the municipality shares in any good fortune of those who find valuable items to the tune of 50%. I can only assume that people who are aware of this are much more likely to find things just outside the municipal boundary than inside.

 

[tomfcrist]

I understand the concept of protecting the artifacts for future generations, however take the monitor project for example....the federal government went down and tore up a damn gravesite (bodies included) for their "archeological research" project, and displays "some of the artifacts" in a museum. There is also a boatload of artifacts from that site that are being improperly preserved and stored in a warehouse that the public will likely never see. So why would they be against a private entity recovering objects(without desecrating the bodies of fallen sailors) and properly preserving them so that others can enjoy them forever (many of these items have been on display in almost every dive shop for decades)? Quite frankly the citizens of almost every country have historically been better at preserving artifacts for future generations than the governments have.

 

[Wookie]

I'm not positive about the location, but believe that in Portland, Maine (and probably other places) the municipality shares in any good fortune of those who find valuable items to the tune of 50%. I can only assume that people who are aware of this are much more likely to find things just outside the municipal boundary than inside.

And in the State of Florida, after all of the work the Fisher family has done to find the Atocha and Santa Margarita, the State of Florida gets to share 25% of the booty without lifting a finger.

 

[Laurie S.]

I'm a professional archaeologist, and yes, I have Dr. in my name. As said earlier, it's not so much what's on the wreck, but the relationship of things to other things. When you see an archaeological site (not dive site) looted by pothunters, it's heartbreaking to view the destruction and potential loss of information. I have seen four-foot-walls pushed over by backhoes so these "people" could dig up pots. I feel the same way about important wrecks. Granted, not every wreck is going to be of interest to archaeologists, but many are. In addition, one of the reasons we never fully excavate a site is because we are leaving something for future archaeologists who likely will have better methods, equipment, and resources to study the sites.

 

[dlofting]

I understand the concept of protecting the artifacts for future generations, however take the monitor project for example....the federal government went down and tore up a damn gravesite (bodies included) for their "archeological research" project, and displays "some of the artifacts" in a museum. There is also a boatload of artifacts from that site that are being improperly preserved and stored in a warehouse that the public will likely never see. So why would they be against a private entity recovering objects(without desecrating the bodies of fallen sailors) and properly preserving them so that others can enjoy them forever (many of these items have been on display in almost every dive shop for decades)? Quite frankly the citizens of almost every country have historically been better at preserving artifacts for future generations than the governments have.

This post prompted me to search through a Civil War Board that I frequent to see if there was any information on the salvage and conservation of the Monitor artifacts. Here's what I was able to find out.

The salvage was conducted by the "government" represented by the US Navy and The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The salvaged artifacts were (and are) housed with the Mariners’ Museum in Newport News and conservation is ongoing. According to the Mariners Museum website the Monitor's screw propeller, anchor, and hundreds of other unique artifacts are on display. The revolving gun turret, steam engine, Dahlgren guns and carriages are still being conserved but are visible from a viewing platform. Conservation of some of the artifacts, particularly those made of iron, may take years or even decades.

For more information on conservation of the Monitor artifacts see http://www.marinersmuseum.org/uss-monitor-center/conservation.

The museum staff working on the Monitor project are reportedly amazed at the level of craftsmanship and detail that went into the copper and copper alloy artifacts. This is particularly amazing as the original Monitor was a war time project and built on a fast track.

As mentioned in the quoted post the salvaged turret contained the skeletal remains of two of the Monitor's sailors. They were buried in Arlington National Cemetery with appropriate military honours.

 

[Wingy]

Personally, I don't care. I can't see learning anything from a vessel for which plans are readily available, or which was obviously an armed merchantman in recent (later than 1500 or so) history. We know what they ate, we know what they drank, we know they had poor dental care and scurvy. But that's just me.

Actually we know a lot more than that. I crew on a tall ship regarded as the most authentic replica in the world. How did we build it so accurately? because of maritime archeology - people from around the world shared knowledge and for the main part items that had been salvaged. If not for the wreck of the Vasa being discovered and respected we would not have known how sails were sewn. We would not have known about the collarbone breakers (ive forgotten the dutch word for them). We would not have known about day to day life in the 1500s and 1600s without people handing over old ships logs. We would not have known which animals were kept onboard.

The archeologists working on the chinese 1100s mother ship found in the Philippines where the ship was so big crops were grown onboard will give us a whole heap of new information that will likely turn what we know so far about maritime history on its head.

 

[NAM001]

Ill probably get bashed here, but everyone is talking about how this is the property of some ins co or owner. Comparisons to a car on the road side were used also. Well i can tell you that if you leave your car on the road side. some agency will find it and notify you to do someting about it or forfiet rights to it. You leave a car on the road side and someone gets hurt its the owners fault. I dont hear of this kind of accountability being put on the wreck owners. I am not trying to suggest everything should be a free for all, however at some point the ins and owners should have to abandon rights to the vessel. Patents become public domain after a specified period of non use or inprovement. but yet a ship goes down, the owners get paid for the ship and contents by the ins company. The ins company gives up or never tries to locate the ship and 50 years later some schmuck finds a coin or a relic on a dive. Later he finds a ship and the race is on to take the find away from him by those who never cared enough to find it themselves. These companies depend on the joe schmiucks to find their losses so they dont have to pay to do it them selves. So i understand why people loot these things in the light of finders keepers. Again i am not condoning these actions, just saying i understand the actions. Then there are the vessels that were sunk for reef and sport diving. On those i think it is dispicable to dismantle them or take from them for personal gain. For those who dive these wrecks for pleasure and sight seeing i am sure they would aree with this setiment. For those scavengers i think they look at it in a different way. I think they look at it as an abandoned ship. I dont agree with that. If society is using it as an attraction I cant see how it can be considered abandoned. Any ship with a permanite down line is certainly owned/used/maintained by someone, and access it is is a conditional benifit and not an entitlement. Just my thoughts.

 

[Ste Wart]

I see it in two ways:

Firstly how many people actively take souvenirs of car/plane crashes? Next to none, so why are ship wrecks any different?

Secondly: Don't **** with my dive. Maybe I would have like to seen that Bell/Cannon/porthole on my own dive and even taken a photo of it. I don't want to have to go round to your garage to see it.





But maybe wrecks are far too stimulating. Lets clean all the wrecks from the ocean so we have nothing interesting to look, that way we could concentrate on honing our dive skills