Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Jim, Thanks for your response. You may want to post it to the techdiver group to give your side of the story to my statements (I have a copy of it and can post it for you if you didn't keep a copy. I don't meam to sound so negative but I get riled up sometimes at the way some government officials treat us. I erred in criticizing "the government" and lumping all archaeologists in with the bad ones working for the government. I was in the military and I know it annoyed me when people said things like "the military" thinks this or does that. As for the National Park Service, they have an excellent record of allowing public access to even deep wrecks in the Great Lakes. This is because the Park Service was established with the express purpose of providing public access while protecting the Parks for future generations. >All of these areas are evaluated first before development occurs on the land. >It doesn not always mean that development is stopped or prevented, in most >cases it does not. I don't have a problem with this as long as the land owner is compensated for the destruction of the value of his property by the government. Eminent Domain laws have allowed property to be taken for centuries but the owner is compensated. Too often these days people's property is essentially seized by government without payment by claims of the public good. If it is that important to the public then the government should buy the property at fair market value, just like they do for a highway. >Back onto shipwrecks, the Federal Guidelines, called the Abandoned >shipwreck act applies to shipwrecks in US or state waters. It does not >apply to international waters, as the government has no juristiction >there. Yes, but the National Marine Sanctuary act DOES cover such areas. The USS Monitor NMS was the first such sanctuary established and it is miles outside the 12 mile limit. >So we are talking about state property or land, which is in essence public >land. No, we are not. This is the crux of the issue. Just because land lies within the territorial boundaries of a state or the US does not mean it is state or US property. The land my house is on is within the boundaries of my state but it is not state property. The Abandoned Shipwreck Act essentially usurped all land under the water within the 12 mile limit for the government. They seized ownership of EVERYTHING resting on the bottom under those waters too, including shipwrecks. This is unprecedented. Maritime law has held for centuries that a shipwreck is the owners until abandoned. Then the first salvager to recover any part of the wreck had salvage rights. Now, the government has seized ownership of all of those wrecks discovered or not. >> The bottom line is that if the "pro's" can't get a Jacques Cousteau or National >> Geographic special out of the deal or at least publish a paper on it they >> aren't interested. >Not the case at all. Very little of what we study ends up in these "specials". In the case of the USS Monitor Cousteau's group got a permit from NOAA to dive and photograph the site on air in less than 30 days. Gary Gentile spent nearly 10 years in court before NOAA was forced to issue a permit. In court they lied about issuing Cousteau a permit to dive on air. After Gentile's group got the permit, a National Marine Fisheries (part of NOAA) speedboat ignored their diver down flag and alpha flag and made two high speed passes over the divers decompressing at 20 feet. This was very dangerous because the divers were breathing O2 from hoses lowered from the surface vessel. After that, the NMF boat rammed their dive boat and an NMF agent flashing a gun boarded their boat. He said he had a "tipoff" that they were diving the Monitor. They had a valid permit and a NOAA observer on board. The NOAA observer refused to get involved. The expedition had been on TV and in the papers for days. They even filed a notice to mariners with the Coast Guard to let people know what they were doing to avoid conflicts which could have become safety problems (a trawler going through the area while they were down, etc.). They filed charges with the Coast Guard against the NMF boat crew. The Coast Guard can't even approach a boat flying the diver down flag without asking the captain for permission via radio. They had the whole incident on video tape. The Coast Guard has no jurisdiction over other Federal agencies so they referred the case back to, you guessed it, NOAA where it was never acted on. >the Monitor is considered to be a war grave (similar situation to >Arizona). A very historic ship, first of its kind, etc. and represents a >very important part of US history. A site worthy of protection. >Protection does not mean denial though. I have nothing against >"visiting" this site just like you visit other museums and parks, etc. >Safety concerns, and other issues like that need to be addressed, and >that is different. >> >> They would allow no private groups the right to even look, yet they themselves >> wouldn't do the needed work. So the wreck just sits there being destroyed for >> all time. > >there has been considerable work done on the Monitor by the government. At the time that Gary Gentile dove the Monitor NOAA had not allowed or conducted an expedition in over two years. NOAA spent 1000 times more money on their expedition for approximately the same result, if you don't consider 10 years worth of time and legal fees Gentile spent to get the permit. Considerable deterioration had occurred in that time. Gentile offered his video and photos to NOAA so that they could compare the state of the wreck at the two time periods. They wouldn't accept it. The Monitor site had been known as a fish haven for years before anybody knew the wreck was there. Gentile pleaded with them to mark the site with a buoy so that trawlers wouldn't snag it and fishing boats wouldn't drop anchor on it. It is illegal to trawl or drop anchor in the Santuary but this was unenforcable because NOAA kept the location of the Sanctuary a secret! They were afraid divers would dive on the site. Consequently, Gentile noticed severe damage to the wreck compared to its state on the expedition two years earlier. Evidently, an anchor or trawl had caught on it and ripped it up. Anyway, my point is that all government officials aren't as enlightened as Jim. When they nearly run divers down in the water, commit perjury in court, and allow that which they are supposed to protect to be destroyed for no other reason than arrogance and ego, then I don't want them protecting my interests. I just want them to leave me alone. Rick
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]