Wreck protocols on artifacts

A recent unrelated thread included some references to differing regions of the world having differing attitudes toward relic removal on wrecks. For example, on the northeast coast of the U.S., relic removal is pretty much accepted (or so I am told--I have no personal experience), and hammers, chisels, crowbars, and wrenches are common diving tools. In contrast, in Chuuk, removing even a single bullet from a wreck can get you a HUGE fine.

That thread got me curious about how things are around the world. My own wreck diving experience is relatively limited in comparison to many others, but I have never dived a wreck where relic removal was considered acceptable, and I don't personally know anyone who thinks it is.

So, I was wondering if people reading this from around the world can report on their own experiences with regional attitudes toward relic retrieval from wrecks.

Peter Hess is a wreck diver and attorney who litigates on behalf of divers' rights to recover artifacts from US wrecks.

WRECKING DIVING

In the Great Lakes the move it towards "conservation in place". Besides being against state law, wreck artifacts in the Great Lakes last a lot longer that those in most ocean environments. The argument that an artifact will decay away if not removed is mostly a moot point.

War wrecks in the NE or Mid-Atlantic are technically "protected" but no one enforces the law.
The dive operators are the biggest offenders. So between the natural deterioration and
everyone wanting a piece of it, the wrecks are slowly disappearing.

I have mixed feelings on this....NJ within reason you can take what you want. I recovered some interesting pieces of history and shared/inspired others to open a book and read about all the history just off our coast. Items that otherwise would have been forgotten and ruined over time. It's the folks that recover items and don't restore them properly get me upset. So long story short in Jersey you pretty much can take anything within reason.

boulderjohn:

So, I was wondering if people reading this from around the world can report on their own experiences with regional attitudes toward relic retrieval from wrecks.

Click to expand...

Well.... one thing to keep in mind is that, without going into a lot of detail, a wreck isn't always a derelict and both the ship itself and the cargo can have owners and those owners have rights. Ships in a given country's territorial waters can be subjected to certain rules even if they have been abandoned by their previous owners and some ships have special status for historical, archaeological (or tourist industry) reasons. War wrecks can fall under a special class and can have the status of "graves", which can make it protected from looting as well.

That aside, there are quite a few wrecks with no owner and which are true derelicts.

In that case, my attitude is "who cares". Truly derelict wrecks often don't get a lot of divers on them and even if a diver takes something, then it would be next to impossible for divers to pick a wreck apart to the point where there is nothing left to see..... in other words, I don't see why so many people get all hypersensitive about it.

And that attitude is the predominant attitude among most hard core wreck divers I know.

I personally don't understand some people's facination with collecting junk from wrecks to put in a box in their garage (which is where most of it ends up). For some people it's a hobby, for me it would be a pointless waste of bottom time. To each his/her own.

R..

I don't see any harm in removing artifacts if they are going to be restored and placed where others can enjoy them, in the oceans many of these artifacts will just corrode away so I don't understand what exactly is being achieved by not allowing salvage of artifacts.

TechBlue:

I don't see any harm in removing artifacts if they are going to be restored and placed where others can enjoy them, in the oceans many of these artifacts will just corrode away so I don't understand what exactly is being achieved by not allowing salvage of artifacts.

Click to expand...

Have you been to places like Truk Lagoon? How boring would it be if all the artifacts had been "removed and restored and placed where others can enjoy them"?

In places like that, even if it wasn't "the law" I would still take the approach of leaving everything in place for the next diver to enjoy.

Here in NJ, I'm sort of the same way. I'm a NJ wreck diver at heart, but not a "hammer and crowbar" type. I will pick up a bottle or a plate if I come across it, but I'm not one to hack-saw off any piece of brass I come across.

Artifact regulations and laws are all over the place.

In the US they range from The Great Lakes where in State Waters, anything over 50 years old is considered to be State property, NY has the same regulations. Then across Long Island Sound CT has no specific wreck regulations but does say that anything “embedded in State Lands, is State Property. The bottom of all of the Great Lakes under US control and all of Long Island Sound is considered to be State Lands.

Seaward, State lands are either 3 miles for most of the US with the exception of the Gulf of Mexico where it is 9 miles.

So, startting at the Low Water Line:
State Waters: 0-3 or 9 as above
Federal Territorial Waters: from State Waters out to 12 Miles
Federal Continuous Zone: 12 miles to 24 miles
Exclusive Economic Zone: 24 miles to 200 miles

The US has no laws on wreck preservation beyond State Waters. Even within State waters if you can show ownership of a wreck, say by buying the rights of the wreck from an insurance company, then State waters are void – see the “Brother Jonathan” Case.

Outside of 200 miles are international waters and is an open game

Strict reading of the UN Law of the Sea has wrecks from 12 miles out as unprotected but some countries use 24 or even 200 miles. Within these zones the laws range from what Greece used to have which was no scuba anywhere unless specifically allowed, which was usually in resort areas only, to the US where you can dive just about anywhere outside of a specifically secure area. There is a new UN UNESCO treaty that is inforce for those countries that have signed it that tries to protect all wrecks no matter where located. The countries that have signed the treaty are:
Albania
Barbados
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Cambodia
Croatia
Cuba
Ecuador
Gabon
Grenada
Haiti
Iran
Italy
Jordan
Lebanon
Libyan
Lithuania
Mexico
Montenegro
Nigeria
Panama
Paraguay
Portugal
Romania
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Slovenia
Spain
Tunisia
Ukraine

You will notice that the major modern maritime nations have not signed, and most likely will not sign, it.

It also really helps when the wrecks in question are in an area where long term preservation is possible. In the Great Lakes and the Baltic the fresh water preserves the wrecks just about indefinably by human terms. So a wreck 100-200-500+ years old is seen as a wreck. In Truk, the coral growth and location in a protected lagoon protects the steel wrecks. But, off the Atlantic Coast, there is not growth protection like in Truk, the wrecks get broken up quickly by storms, many were wire dragged if shallower then 100feet, and almost from before the 1960’s have seen some commercial salvage at the time of sinking. In other words, Atlantic wrecks look a lot more like junk piles then a Hollywood wreck.

Last, the actual real protection of a wreck site has a direct relationship to the locals attitude to the wrecks. In many cases, Truk included, it was a fairly free recover zone until the locals found that an artifact on the bottom could be sold only once to a collector, or every day of the year to a divers with a camera. The artifacts are just worth more to the locals on the bottom then on a mantel piece. The same thing happened in the Great Lakes with the addition of the Zebra mussels. Before the Zebras, you just couldn’t see a thing and hardly anyone went there, so to get divers recovery was allowed. Then after the Zebras the water cleared, you could see things, divers started coming, wrecks with artifacts on them increased in value, and they were protected.

Thanks, Pete, that was very helpful.