Thoughts on Taking Wreck Artifacts

[The Horn]

As of 1978 the Fukeda Salvage company owns the wreck and they probably still do.

so taking things from this wreck unless permission is granted from the salvage company is illegal, don't do it.

Several schools of thought:

War graves: ya ok what ever, depends on what is lost, Brits, US you name it will penetrate, destroy, scuttle, bomb, obliterate any site, grave, war sinking, or not that threatens the nations security, or if there is enough $$$ on the vessel to warrent salvage. hundreds of merchant ships that were sank during the wars were also split open and the raw materials salvaged with no care to loss of life that occured or preservation.

Historical finds: iffy topic, ya found it and it has valuable things on board....scr*w you, report it and the government takes it all and declares rights etc Or they kick you off the site, some scientist weenie takes credit for the find..they excavate, document, take items then they burry the vessel "back to as it was found" citing that "future generations can explore" then they also ban all diving at the site...what a crock!! you may even be prosecuted for touching something the goverment did not know existed.......Hmmm

Case 3 the ol don't take it. Titanic was a big eye opener. Originally found preserved but over the years is decaying rapidly....paint (protective coating) is gone. Rust rust rust....take the stuff if you want if for it will be gone soon!

The worst is the guy who went down and took loads of stuff from the wreck and then goes to the government and sites "history" and the government then bans taking items and preserves the wreck. Then idiot tries to sell the stuff he took....(Empress of Ireland....... ring a bell)

If the wreck is common knowledge, people dive it, remnants are pretty much junk but neat to look at.................don't take it..................Why? find a virgin wreck.....different story

 

[bubblemonkey]

leave it there for other people to enjoy, I would much rather dive a wreck and see something of interest than nothing.

Imagine the Thistlegorm if everyone had been able to help themselves, it would be just another WW2 Wreck.

 

[Drewski]

For years, I've "taken" artifacts and love to dig. That said, here's my opinion:

"Protected" wrecks: I think protected wrecks are a GREAT idea provided a few things occur. First, it MUST be "protected." This means that the diving, fishing, and marine "community" in the area MUST have the mind set of "look" but don't "touch" or "take." I think certain areas of the Great Lakes and obviously Truk are excellent examples of this policy. It also means that if someone sees a diver "take" something, they REPORT it and QUICK action is taken by local authorities. This can work, but it takes involvement and cooperation. If the "protected" concept is ignored or un-enforced or, worse yet, only enforced for "non-locals," it WON'T work. Second, accessibility must be guaranteed and uncomplicated. In Truk, you don't need to go through an "application" and "review" process to dive wrecks. On the Monitor, you do. I'm cool with sending in an "application," maybe even paying a nominal fee to dive the Monitor, but beyond that is just BS. If NOAA is serious about limiting access, put it on the charter boats. "Certify" charter boats for visiting the Monitor and set up the rules. Track who goes, when they go, etc. And, don't tell me that "diving" the wreck "damages" it. I suppose pulling off plating, removing the turret and covering/uncovering the wreck doesn't "damage" it? Even in the name of "underwater archeology?" Have you looked at pictures of the Monitor lately? Yeah right....

"Unprotected" wrecks: If a salvor was granted a license by the government to "salvage" a wreck, the gloves are off. Obviously, regardless of why they granted a license or if the wreck is a "war" wreck, it wasn't important enough to the government to matter. They KNOW if war dead are on a wreck and when they still allow salvage to go ahead, they just set policy. If you've ever dived a "salvaged" wreck, you know the bottom ends up looking like a trash heap. Stuff gets moved, "expendables" (like spent BROCO rods) get left. It completely changes the "character" of the wreck. Now, "divers" (i.e., the "public") are supposed to "respect" and "conserve" this afterward? Yes, I wouldn't disturb or photograph human remains, but stay "off" the wreck after salvaged? Wrong answer.

"Underwater Archeologists:" I've had the pleasure of diving with a number of archeologists on "projects," including the Yorktown Shipwreck Project in Virginia (a British Merchant from the 1780s) and I think many of them do a FINE job. If a shipwreck has been identified for conservation and they are "actively" working it for artifact recovery, more power to them. BUT, offer the local community access in the form of "volunteer" diving, some minimal training, participation, etc. John Broadwater on the Yorktown project did this with great success and I commend him for it. Involving recreational divers in these projects will undoubtedly increase the project’s profile and public access. Isn't that the point of "exhibiting" history? Unfortunately, some UAs are more about "name building" and "recognition." When a Discovery or History Channel program introduces an UA by calling him "famous" or "great" before every show, it's all about EGO. These guys are more about themselves than history. It's the SHIPWRECK that's news, NOT them. Many of these guys defend their work and policy of "no access" because "divers destroy wrecks." RIGHT. Look at the Titanic. It sat on the bottom almost 75 years without being touched. Then, the "famous" guy from WH "discovered" it, along with other "scientific" groups. Even salvors who "visited" it had UAs with them, observing their work. As the other poster noted, look at the condition of the wreck NOW. How many "recreational divers" have been on it? Give me a break...

Anyway, I'll post some more on this thread later; this topic REALLY fires me up. Pardon my RANT...

Thanks for listening...

 

[DivePartner1]

Lots of countries have laws against taking things off wrecks. . . .
In addition to that war wrecks are quite often protected under higher acts again. The wrecks in the UK divers have ignored or pillaged that are war related have been protected and eventually diving is banned on some.
Divers then moan about not being allowed to dive it when in reality they have only themselves to blame.

These are good points. Simply because a government licenses (full or partial) salvage rights, this may not extinguish the wreck's protection as a war grave or protected antiquity.

I doubt that anyone here is qualifed to answer this question under Japanese law. I certainly am not. Aside from moral issues, no one here can say that you will not be in violation to any Japanese laws protecting antiquities or war graves -- and you run the risk of prosecution, not the rest of us.

Given potential for criminal penalties that typically attach to such laws, a safe approach might be to contact wreck diving groups, marine archaelogy associations, or the coast guard for their views. Or, of course, a maritime lawyer qualified to practice in Japan.

 

[Ontwreckdiver]

Anyone who takes anything off any wreck is thoughtless and selfish. I'm just glad that it is illegal to remove anything from any wreck for any reson in Canada. If you survive the beating and the swim back to shore, hopefully it's the MNR instead of the police waiting for you because they are police, judge, jury and repo man on the spot.