last minute news on shipwreck conference

[piratediver]

I just found out about this conference this morning, it starts today in D.C.!

Pirate Diver



Keeping the Lid on Davy Jones' Locker: The Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage from Titanic to Today



REGISTER NOW


8:30 AM - 9:00 AM Registration
A continental breakfast will be provided.
9:00 AM - 9:15 AM Welcome and Introductions

Diane Penneys Edelman, President, Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation; Director of International Programs and Professor of Legal Writing, Villanova University School of Law

Paul Edmondson, Vice President and General Counsel, National Trust for Historic Preservation

9:15 AM - 10:45 AM The Importance of Underwater Cultural Heritage and the Threats Facing It

The first panel will introduce "underwater cultural heritage" (UCH). What is it? Why should we care about it? What are the manmade threats facing it, ranging from commercial salvage, to shoddy excavation, to outright looting? And how can we work together to best preserve it? This panel will also present case studies of cooperation in protecting and managing UCH, including the Nuestra Señora de las Mercedes, also referred to as the "Black Swan" by Odyssey Marine Exploration in its admiralty claim.


Richard Leventhal, Director, Penn Cultural Heritage Center (Moderator)


Elizabeth Greene, Associate Professor, Brock University


Caroline Blanco, Assistant General Counsel, National Science Foundation


James Goold, Of Counsel, Covington and Burling


Carla Mattix, Attorney, National Park Service


David Conlin, Chief of Submerged Resources Unit, National Park Service

10:45 AM - 11:00 AM Break

11:00 AM - 12:30 PM The 10th Anniversary of the 2001 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage: Is It Working?

The second panel will tell the story of the 2001 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage. The panelists will discuss its creation and implementation over the last decade. They will also address how party and non-party states can cooperate to preserve UCH in a matter consistent with both international customary law, as well as international agreements, such as the Law of the Sea Convention.




Ole Varmer, Attorney, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Moderator)


James Nafziger, Professor, Willamette University College of Law


Ulrike Guerin, Secretariat of the 2001 UNESCO Convention


Guillermo Corral, Cultural Counselor, Embassy of Spain


Joel Gilman, Solicitor, Heritage Council of Western Australia


Mary Lou Doyle, Manager of Government Relations and Legislation, Parks Canada


Sarah Dromgoole, Professor, University of Nottingham
12:30 PM - 1:00 PM Break

A boxed meal will be provided for the luncheon address.
1:00 PM - 2:00 PM Titanic Exploration, Recovery, and Research: Past, Present, and Future

The 100th anniversary of Titanic is an appropriate time to review what has happened to the wreck since its 1985 discovery. It is also an ideal time to explore recent initiatives to better understand the wreck as an archaeological, historical, and memorial site, as well as to discuss how to manage and protect the site in the future. Dr. Delgado has been involved with Titanic since 1986 in various aspects of his career as an archaeologist, museum director, and Federal official, participating in a 2000 dive to Titanic and serving as chief scientist for the 2010 scientific mapping expedition. He was also one of the authors of the Titanic Treaty. In this presentation, he will specifically address a plan of action for Titanic that addresses the needs of the public, private enterprise, and the preservation community.


James P. Delgado, Director, Maritime Heritage Program, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration


2:00 PM - 3:30 PM Titanic at 100: A Case Study of Cooperation on Salvage in a Manner Consistent with the 2001 UNESCO Convention and the Law of the Sea

Using Titanic as a case study, the third panel will examine the controversy surrounding the recovery of underwater cultural heritage. Can UCH be commercially salvaged in accordance with scientific standards and international law? If so, how? The panelists will also investigate the legal implications of the Titanic's 100th anniversary, which will bring it under the protection of the 2001 UNESCO Convention, and the recent court award of the Titanic Collection to salvors. Finally, they will address the application of existing U.S. law as a deterrent for the looting, unwanted salvage, and trafficking of UCH like that from Titanic.
Caroline Blanco, Assistant General Counsel, National Science Foundation (Moderator)


Ole Varmer, Attorney, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration


Mariano Aznar Gómez, Chair of Public International Law, University Jaume I


David Bederman, Professor, Emory School of Law

Laura Gongaware, Tulane Law School

Michael Marous, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Department of Justice

Bonnie Magness-Gardiner, Program Manager, Art Theft Program, Federal Bureau of Investigation


3:30 PM - 3:45 PM Break


3:45 PM - 5:15 PM Moving Forward

During the last panel --- a moderated discussion including open questions from the audience --- the day's panelists will address other challenges facing underwater cultural heritage and then suggest recommendations for moving forward.
Ole Varmer, Attorney, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Moderator)
5:15 PM - 6:00 PM Closing Reception

LCCHP welcomes all panelists and attendees to join us for a closing reception.




RETURN TO THE MAIN CONFERENCE PAGE AND REGISTER
Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation © 2000-2010. All rights reserved.

1785 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20036-2117


Site Map • Terms of Use • Contact Us
Sign up for Citations, our free e-newsletter, to receive the latest information on our organization, legal developments, upcoming events, and more.

Sign Up Here

Powered by Wild Apricot membership software - website software for non profit, club and association management
Includes website builder, membership management, event registration, online fundraising & membership website

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Fascinating, and just who would have 'even' looked for the Titanic in the first place?? the Archaeologist society? Or for 'La flote de plata' off of the US mainland?

Almost all advances for underwater search & recovery abilities have been done by the private sector.

It is precisely this attempt to regulate everything that has led to the present world situation. Tomorrow most of the archaeologists may find them selves out of a job and be back to flipping hamburgers, as they say.

Another thing, why are sailors remains regarded much more highly than a soldiers remains on the main land ? If a ship must remain untouchable, why isn't the land where a soldier died treated the same way ?? I am curious on the logic..

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[scubaozzy]

Fascinating, and just who would have 'even' looked for the Titanic in the first place?? the Archaeologist society? Or for 'La flote de plata' off of the US mainland?

Almost all advances for underwater search & recovery abilities have been done by the private sector.

It is precisely this attempt to regulate everything that has led to the present world situation. Tomorrow most of the archaeologists may find them selves out of a job and be back to flipping hamburgers, as they say.

Another thing, why are sailors remains regarded much more highly than a soldiers remains on the main land ? If a ship must remain untouchable, why isn't the land where a soldier died treated the same way ?? I am curious on the logic..

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[trinidad]

Does anybody knows if there will be some papers of this meeting?

 

[GulfDiver]

Fascinating, and just who would have 'even' looked for the Titanic in the first place?? the Archaeologist society? Or for 'La flote de plata' off of the US mainland?

Almost all advances for underwater search & recovery abilities have been done by the private sector.

It is precisely this attempt to regulate everything that has led to the present world situation. Tomorrow most of the archaeologists may find them selves out of a job and be back to flipping hamburgers, as they say.

Another thing, why are sailors remains regarded much more highly than a soldiers remains on the main land ? If a ship must remain untouchable, why isn't the land where a soldier died treated the same way ?? I am curious on the logic..

Don Jose de La Mancha

Didn't Bob Ballard and a bunch of oceanographers (i.e. scientists) find Titanic?

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

G'morning gulf diver: Ya cotten pickin right Ballard did, but as a offhand thingie from the Navy after he had found the two subs. Sabres at dawn? hehehhe

Seriously, what I was trying 'incorrectly' to show was that the operation was not a deliberately financed project to find the Titanic.

Don Jose de La Mancha ( el santito with a bit of tarnish on his halo)

 

[capt dom]

Here we have a clear case "interest group manipulation" - attempting to
sway public opinion in only one direction, toward increasing bureaucratic control over the
private sector by "painting a picture" of the private sector
involvement in salvage and undersea
exploration being nothing but nothing
but opportunists, scoundrels, thieves
and grave robbers....

The rats are guarding the cheese...

Make no mistake
and it is our fault because we, as a private sector interest
group don't get together and support a common
voice to attend these meetings and represent
our views....

Most all of the attendees of this shame will be
"on the public payroll" and actually being paid
and supported to attend this conference
to create future job secutiy for themselves
under the guise of protecting
the public trust...

Shame upon all of them!
But also shame on us for only
knowing about this or discussing
this conference on the day it is
to begin!

 

[Vox veritas]

Mariano Aznar is the person who defends the interests of Spain in this case of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea

http://www.itlos.org/index.php?id=147

(Case # 18)

This case is the same that led the charge against me, which for now, there is already a claim against Spain with this case and probably may be many more.

Cheers VV

 

[capt dom]

Peter Hess did attend this conference.
Below are his comments:

and, like I keep stating... "the rats are guarding the cheese"

Subject: "Keeping the Lid On Davey Jones' Locker": Volume I


I attended the full day seminar, Keeping the Lid On Davey Jones' Locker ("KLO") in Washington DC at the National Trust for Historic Preservation ("NTHP") on Thursday, Nov 3, 2011 on behalf of the Professional Marine Explorers Society ("ProMES"). The event was sponsored by the Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation, a not-for-profit entity which informed me that the event was entirely privately funded: ie, no federal money (according to the Committee) was spent on the seminar. [I find that hard to believe: certainly several of the speakers' travel and lodging expenses were borne by their respective taxpayers. Ole Varmer, the lead organizer among the federal employees, however, indicated that he had to take a vacation day in order to appear. He also paid his own travel expenses all the way in to town from the DC suburbs where he lives.]

With a single exception--Emory Law Professor David Bederman, Counsel to both RMS Titanic, Inc. and Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc., who appeared by phone to discuss the TITANIC covenants--all of the speakers at KLO were federal bureaucrats, their international counterparts, or academics sympathetic to their avowed goal: the eradication of profit-oriented underwater shipwreck exploration and recovery. The purpose of the seminar was to discuss and share strategies by which governments can assert or advance regulations and prohibitions against "treasure hunting" and "looting", the pejorative terms that they continue to use to describe shipwreck salvage and/or wreck diving. It was made quite clear by several different speakers on repeated occasions that they adhere to their (tired) mantra that archaeology and profit can never go hand in hand: treasure hunters "will only recover the shiny stuff" and there will never be sufficient or quality archaeological work performed so long as (gasp!) profit is the motive.

It was readily evident that the presentations were geared to a governmental audience and focused on strategies for creating additional legal hurdles to historic shipwreck exploration and recovery, even in international waters (what's left of the so-called "High Seas" that belong to no nation). Federal and international prosecutorial tactics against the treasure hunters who are looting the world's oceans was another focus. At one point the audience was even admonished by UNESCO's 2001 International Convention for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage (hereinafter "UNESCO Con") Secretariat Ulrike Guerin against ever reading any pirate treasure stories to their children as this sends the wrong message to impressionable youth!

While I took 23 pages of notes over the course of the day, I provide herein only a summary of some of the day's more important revelations. I will track my notes and highlight the various speakers' comments in the order they appeared yesterday.

The General Counsel to the NTHP, greeting the 60 attendees, set the tone early on when he declared that "TITANIC should be protected as a monument, not a mine for salvors." An antiquities professor promptly followed with the observation that the "commercial exploitation" of UCH was "a new colonialism" by the developed world where "commercial gain trumps cultural gain".

Up next was Caroline Blanco, Asst. General Counsel to the National Science Foundation--an agency which sets federal policy over a broad range of scientific endeavors, including underwater archaeology. Not good news for us. Caroline has been opposing counsel on behalf of the federal government on several of my own shipwreck access (ie MONITOR) and salvage (ie JUNO & LA GALGA off Assateague Island National Seashore, VA) cases. Her presentation was more or less a history of the various federal laws used against treasure hunters. Blanco opined that "the law of salvage and finds really should apply only to recent maritime casualties and is not appropriate for historic shipwrecks."

She mentioned the Abandoned Shipwreck Act [but neglected to note that an unanimous 1998 US Supreme Court decision, California v. Deep Sea Research, Inc., over the ownership and salvage rights to the 1865 California Gold Rush shipwreck BROTHER JONATHAN had emasculated that law which purports to give "abandoned" shipwrecks to the states in whose waters they are found.] Instead, Blanco focused on their most recent legislative success, the 2004 Sunken Military Craft Act ("SMCA").

Blanco claimed that the unauthorized disturbance of military wrecks--both ships and aircraft--threatens the sanctity of gravesites, which is why the issue was taken so seriously by Congress. [Left unmentioned was the stealthy means by which the SCMA was inserted at the last minute into the 2005 Defense Appropriations Act so that it was enacted without ever being discussed or reviewed by any Congressional committee in either the House or Senate.]

Nevertheless, SMCA is a formidible piece of legislation: prohibiting unauthorized activities "directed at" SMC's. Thus, a wreck diver's intentional recovery of an aircraft engine gauge is grounds for prosecution, but a trawler's unitentional, but utter destruction of that same aircraft is OK: it was incidental, not "directed at" the particular SMC.

The trade in illegally obtained artifacts is banned. SMCs can never be deemed abandoned or the subject of an admiralty arrest by a salvor seeking to recover the wreck or its contents. And the Naval Historical Center , a civilian entity appended to the Navy, is authorized to issue permits for "activities directed at foreign SMC's". That's right folks: coming soon to a shipwreck near you: a Navy permit will be required to dive on a Spanish treasure galleon!

It was noted that the particulars are the subject of the long-awaited regulations giving (additional) teeth to the SMCA. Reference was made to the fact that these regulations have been delayed but they will eventually be posted. [At that point in time there will be one or more public hearings addressing the proposed regulations. This is a critical event that we must all remain aware of and be prepared to attend the hearing(s) and provide expert testimony from those of us who actually visit these sites.]

Following Blanco was James Goold, the American attorney who is making a career out of representing the King of Spain in his zeal to swipe treasure and artifacts from the salvors who have found and salvaged the King's long-lost (but, according to Goold, not abandoned) property. I trust that by now you are getting a proper picture of the rogue's gallery running the KLO conference. Goold lauded the judges in the recent Odyssey case over the 1804 Spanish shipwreck MERCEDES, which he characterized as "a US company staging clandestine operations to strip a foreign gravesite in order to sell coins to collectors". Goold showed photo of Odyssey President Greg Stemm "fondling" samples of the MERCEDES silver, eliciting widespread snickers from the audience.

Several aspects of the case were discussed in detail; the case has thus far been decided based upon the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which Goold characterizes as meaning that "neither Spain nor its vessel can be subjected to the indignity of being forced to litigate in a US court". Nine Supreme Court Justices in Deep Sea Research said otherwise, which is where I expect the Odyssey case to end up. So I'll leave the legal intricies out for now....

The National Park Service took the podium next, with an archaeologist and attorney speaking in tandem. They described in detail their new initiative to work on behalf of other nations to manage "foreign-owned" resources in NPS waters. Discussed in detail was the 1752 British shipwreck HMS FOWEY, found by a lobster diver in what was then Key Biscayne National Seashore (now a part of the sprawling Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary). That diver, Gerald Klein, sought to arrest the shipwreck but was stymied because--as the US District Court ruled in the 1980's--it was abandoned property found in federal waters, and hence, owned by the US . The NPS speakers tried to characterize the Klein case as supporting the proposition that warships can never be abandoned but in fact--as pointed out by yours truly--it recognized just the opposite. Lamentably, under either theory, the diver who found the shipwreck lost out.

A new weapon in the federal anti-diver arsenal is the designation of a National Historic Landmark ("NHL"). This is going to be done imminently to "protect"--ie, give federal ownership to--the 1592 Manila galleon shipwreck SAN AGUSTIN, lost (but as of yet, never found!) in Drake's Bay north of San Francisco . Since its location is unknown, it is unclear if SAN AGUSTIN is in federal (NOAA's Gulf of the Farallones NMS) or California waters. Or if Spain or Mexico have an ownership claim. But what is clear is that the shipwreck can be saved from those evil treasure hunters like Robert Marx, who arrested the site in the 1980's. According to the NPS, "no one has an issue with this goal (ie, declaring a NHL before actually finding the shipwreck itself!). The SAN AGUSTIN will be a very dangerous and vexacious precedent if allowed to be declared federal property without ever being discovered. Imagine what will happen to all of the remaining undiscovered shipwrecks lying off our shores. ProMES needs to be on the forefront of opposing this new and nefarious means of asserting federal ownership to potentially valuable sites in unknown locations.

In the works in an agency to agency agreement between NPS and the UK 's Fleet Heritage (Dept.?). Although neither the US nor the UK are likely to ratify the UNESCO Con, its provisions will be ensconced in the forthcoming agreement. Among the provisions will be the power to restrict diver access to sites if so requested by the UK --and such restrictions to sites like HMS FOWEY are (apparently)
already under contemplation in revisions to the FKNMS Management Plan.

A representative from the US State Dept. then essentially parroted what the other federal agency reps had been saying: cultural property issues are gaining increasing visibility and importance and will be the subject of international cooperation, including the notification of foreign "owners" like France and Spain of the activities of US citizens concerning "their" shipwrecks.

During a Q&A session following, an audience member asked if the protections for military gravesites can be extended to civilian ones--ie, no "desecration" of a shipwreck containing civilian remains or merely the site of a marine casualty. The response from Ms. Blanco was that the extension offshore of state anti-grave descretation laws would be a welcome measure, but it hasn't happened yet. Mark my word, after yesterday's conference, one of those bureaucrats scurried back to his or her agency to draft up such a law....

Well I have blathered on a lot longer than I intended and I haven't even gotten to the UNESCO Con or TITANIC yet. By my reckoning, I've covered only about a third of my seminar notes. I am signing off for the night but will pick this report up again tomorrow. I hope that those of you who happen to read it tonight don't have too many nightmares!


Peter E. Hess
PO Box 7753
Wilmington Delaware 19803-7753
(302) 690-1715
[email protected]

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

g'sfternoon Peter: I personally thank you for an extremely lucid, but uncomfortable, report. Personally, under today's world conditions I think that they are unintentionally painting themselves into a corner.

With governments going bankrupt everywhere, the least worry that many gov'ts, including the US, will have for possibly years, will be expenditures for archaeological 'searches' and possible recoveries. Subsequently the need for present and future archaeologists to work in their field will dry up, since there will be no private work effectively to employ them, thanks to their own efforts.

The market for archaeologists may dry up for an indefinite period, prob. 20 - 40 years in the future.

Side issues, I wonder if there is any type of ship in the past 1000 years that doesn't have it's intimate construction and cargo thoroughly understood, with museums full of examples from the same periods on land, ship yard construction details, and written plans.

The final problem with me is why the difference in the dead between the sea and the land? Based upon the sanctuary of the dead, all of Europe should be out of bounds for 'any' excavation. IS there a square meter of land that hasn't been fought over with it's dead, and what about the poor civilians?

Don Jose de La Mancha ( el Santito in his cave meditating on the hypocrisy and illogical thinking of the world)

 

[cuzcosquirrel]

"A new weapon in the federal anti-diver arsenal is the designation of a National Historic Landmark ("NHL"). This is going to be done imminently to "protect"--ie, give federal ownership to--the 1592 Manila galleon shipwreck SAN AGUSTIN, lost (but as of yet, never found!) in Drake's Bay north of San Francisco . Since its location is unknown, it is unclear if SAN AGUSTIN is in federal (NOAA's Gulf of the Farallones NMS) or California waters. Or if Spain or Mexico have an ownership claim. But what is clear is that the shipwreck can be saved from those evil treasure hunters like Robert Marx, who arrested the site in the 1980's."

There is even a map on the internet of where this wreck supposedly is based on old beach recoveries. The map is incorrect, but the wreck is still pretty close in. I think saying that the site is unknown is a bit of an exaggeration. Perhaps not having a good idea of exactly what is where might be a better way to describe it.

No one will ever finger it the way they describe. I think what might happen is that an increased effort will be made to keep the public away. A public who will be very interested in it after the recovery of the San Felipe is completed in the next 2 years.

They will ask, "Where is our galleon at? We want to see it."

People will say, "We don't know. It is owned, and it is protected."

 

[trinidad]

Thanks Peter. Waiting for some more notes.

 

[capt dom]

Here is Peter's second installment
via internet email copy,

Capt Dom:

Fellas
Here's my second installment describing the Thurs Nov 3rd DC conference....

THE UNESCO CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE UNDERWATER CULTURAL HERITAGE ("UNESCO CON") AT TEN
This was the second major topic at the KLO conference. November 2011 marks a decade since UNESCO's adoption of the UNESCO Con. Since then, 40 nations have formally ratified, making its terms enforceable against citizen and vessels flying the flag of those signatory nations. As of yet, no major maritime power has ratified--NOT because they object to the UNESCO Con's avowed goal of stomping out (profit-oriented) private sector historic shipwreck recovery, but rather due to--at least as the KLO experts contend--technical objections as to how the UNESCO is inconsistent with and/or undermines the universally-accepted UN Convention on the Law of the Sea ("UNCLOS").

Speakers described the genesis of the UNESCO Con, attributing its eventual passage to widespread outrage at the looting of UCH in the guise of salvage. Under UNCLOS, nations have a duty to protect UCH but nothing may adversely affect the rights of owners or the law of salvage. The UNESCO Con does both. Adopting strict archaeological protocols set forth by the Int'l Council on Monuments and Sites ("ICOMOS"), any "commercial exploitation" of UCH is prohibited. Thus, artifacts may not be bought, sold or traded. Collections must stay together. Profit is incompatible with proper heritage management. In situ preservation is always the preferred option for protection (ie, do nothing and leave it on the seafloor); recovery is authorized only where there is a significant threat to the site or there will be a great enhancement of knowledge and science. Coastal states (nations) may exercise jurisdiction over UCH out to the limits of their Exclusive Economic Zone, or 200 nautical miles offshore; for sites beneath the High Seas over which no nation has sovereignty, that UCH may not be imported into a signatory nation. So deepwater salvage is fine so long as all of the artifacts remain offshore. Where's the Flying Dutchman when us salvors really need him? [He's the mariner condemned to perpetually roam the world's oceans without ever calling on any port.]

The UNESCO Con makes it emphatically clear that there is no such thing as a good treasure hunter. Salvage and conservation are too costly and time-consuming to allow for the co-existence of science and profit. [This is particularly true if one is doing archaeology on the taxpayers' nickel. The final archaeological report on the 1400's Basque whaling shipwrecks found in Red Bay , Labrador , Canada was issued this year: 30 years(!) after the completion of diving operations. Many a nautical archaeologist milked that project for his or her entire working career at the expense of Canadian taxpayers. Not surprisingly, this was never mentioned during the course of the KLO conference.]

One of the imminent achievements for the UNESCO Con is its projected ratification by France . This will be its first acceptance by one of the major maritime powers. The UNESCO Secretariot, Ulrich Guerin, responsible for the UNESCO Con's implementation, presented the rosy scenario of all of the other maritime powers--US, UK, Germany, Russia, Japan, etc.--rapidly following suit once France endorses it.

If ProMES has contacts with the French government or allies working in France , now is the time to mobilize some opposition there to the UNESCO Con. There is ample precedent under existing French law recognizing the rights of historic shipwreck salvors: the first 1,800 artifacts recovered from TITANIC in 19087 were adjudicated in France as the exclusive property of their finders--ie finders, keepers: the so-called "law of finds". That finder was the company now known as RMS Titanic, Inc., which had sponsored the joint 1987 French/US TITANIC salvage expedition.

I must sign off once again: the climactic LSU/Alabama NCAA football game is about to start. More to follow tomorrow......

Peter E. Hess
PO Box 7753
Wilmington Delaware 19803-7753
(302) 690-1715
[email protected]

 

[VOC]

Make 2012 the sack some Underwater Archaeologist year.

With governments around the world struggling to pay the bills and heritage bodies adopting the UNESCO Convention, it’s time for all active wreck divers to have a major push to get government agencies to reduce the number of Archaeologist that they have on the payroll, and also to have an embargo on training any new ones for ten years.

Over the years we have seen a large reduction in the amount of actual underwater archaeology being carried out, and going forward there will be even less, so we should all campaign at every opportunity to reduce the numbers of paid archaeologist being employed.

 

[capt dom]

Here is Peter's latest installment
of observations on this travesty of a meeting:

Here is my latest in recounting this symposium in Washington DC Thurs Nov 3, 2011. More frightening than the week's other big event, Halloween....

Volume I of this loooong series of Emails focused primarily on domestic (ie, US) legislative, regulatory and/or legal enforcement initiatives aimed at preventing divers and commercial salvors from recovering what they have discovered underwater.

Volume II focused on the UNESCO Con (the Int'l Con for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage).

This Email, Volume III will describe the regimen being adopted in Spain , followed by an overview of other foreign (ie, non-US) nations' efforts to stamp out wreck diving and salvage.

The UNESCO presenters were followed by Guillermo Corral, the Cultural Counsel to the Spanish Embassy. Perhaps no other nation has changed its policies so radically as has Spain in recent years. For example, prior to the Sea Hunt case in Norfolk VA and later in the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals [denying salvage rights to finder and declaring Spanish ownership of the shipwrecks LA GALGA (1750) and JUNO (1802) off of Assateague National Seashore] some 35 reported US court decisions had uniformly ruled that Spanish treasure wrecks found by US salvors had long since been abandoned by their King.

Corral asserted that the main impetus for Spain 's recent activism in dealing with "increasingly aggressive treasure hunters" and Spain 's invigorated efforts to protect its ownership rights in long-lost shipwrecks was Odyssey's secretive salvage of 600,000 silver coins from the 1802 MERCEDES wreck off the Portuguese coast. The controversy sparked (according to Corral, anyhow) widespread outrage in Spain over the theft of their property, creating popular support for taking governmental action.

In response, Spain has drafted a national plan for the protection of its UCH (and, of course, ratified the UNESCO Con). This has entailed the large-scale use of the Spanish Navy to map and identify "its" shipwrecks, particularly off the Iberian Peninsula . Allegedly, dozens of such sites have thus far been found, although few have been positively identified as of yet. Programs such as on-site surveillance and even satellite monitoring are features of the Spanish endeavor, but as far as I can tell, at the present such technological initiatives are only in the planning stages.

More troubling for us are the bilateral agreements being negotiated between Spain and foreign nations. Not surprisingly, the first such agreements were with the United States: one between the Spanish and US Navy recognizing reciprocal sovereign rights to warships, and an even broader Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") between their Ministries of Culture, Defense and Foreign Affairs and NOAA granting that US agency enforcement authority over Spanish sovereign wreck "in waters under its authority".

Some may recall that when ProMES specifically questioned NOAA General Counsel Ole Varmer, (the KLO conference organizer) as to whether its MOU with Spain was limited to the waters of National Marine Sanctuaries (the only territories actually under NOAA jurisdiction), no response was forthcoming. I believe that NOAA intends to try to implement this new authority broadly and is likely at some point to seek to enjoin and even prosecute the unauthorized disturbance of Spanish shipwrecks by US citizens operating anywhere within 200 NM of the US (ie, in the US Exclusive Economic Zone or "EEZ").

Something else to bear in mind: an MOU is an Executive Agreement between respective governmental agencies. It does not rise to the level of a treaty, which requires US Senate ratification. As we can see, a great deal of mischief--and damage to the rights of divers and underwater explorers--can be done under the auspices of an MOU.

I spoke with Mr. Corral at the reception following the KLO conference. I asked him if Spain would consider working with a privately-funded salvor along the lines of the TITANIC protocols--that is to say, all the artifacts kept together and placed on public display. "Oh no" he replied. "Profit and archaeology are fundamentally incompatible. But Spain will work with a certain not-for-profit US-based organization (whose name presently eludes me) [on Spanish shipwreck archaeological recovery]." Guess what, folks? Our buddy, attorney James Goold--who represents the King of Spain in cases against US "looters"--is a principle member of this very same not-for-profit. Yup, he'll go to court, steal away the shipwreck you've discovered--and then add insult to injury by salvaging it himself under the guise of "rescue archaeology!"

Out of time again--this time the pool at the Y beckons after which I have a social event to attend. So the next installment will be either tonight or tomorrow. Yes, unfortunately, there is more to come. Hope I'm not boring y'all with too much information. Feel free to pass it on among your colleagues and other sympathetic readers. Our work is truly cut out for us.

And if you have not done so already, you should seriously consider joining ProMES, which is the ONLY organization trying to stand up and defend the venerable rights of underwater explorers. Our opponents are well mobilized and embedded in the halls of government. If we cannot respond convincingly, the right to dive on and recover an artifact will become, like the shipwreck from which it was found, a relic of the past.

Peter E. Hess
PO Box 7753
Wilmington Delaware 19803-7753
(302) 690-1715
[email protected]

 

[Teredo Navalis]

Peter,
Appreciate your update and summary. The name you were looking for is RPM Nautical (http://rpmnautical.org/ ) which James Goold is Board Chairman and General Counsel. It is an interesting company found by George Robb, a former Wall Street type. George has the terrible problem of being married to the smoking hot movie star Veronica Webb. The company is a 501 c.3 ( non profit). They are partnered with 8-9 countries and organizations:
Albanian Institute of Archaeology
Croatian Ministry of Culture
East Carolina University Maritime Studies
Institute of Nautical Archaeology
Malta Ministry of Culture and Tourism
Montenegro Ministry of Culture
Moroccan Ministry of Culture
Superintendent of Archaeology, Calabria
Superintendent of Underwater Archaeology, Sicily
Tunisian Ministry of Culture

I would be very interested if someone could pull there financial statements and see where there income is derived?

 

[Darren in NC]

Being the chairman of a board and general counsel of an organization with interests in shipwrecks puts Goold squarely in a conflict of interest position, since he would stand to benefit. This should be challenged.

AND everyone should consider starting nonprofits to begin to make headway into this sensitive industry.

 

[Alexandre]

What, no taxpayer's dollar at work here, just private funding? Where's the world coming at??

George Robb has come to Portugal and has done some survey here, as well as some artifact rising (amphorae at Berlengas, for instance). A very nice chap. Their work in the Med is top notch and an example on how a private institution can do archaeology without doing any treasure hunting.

Peter,
Appreciate your update and summary. The name you were looking for is RPM Nautical (http://rpmnautical.org/ ) which James Goold is Board Chairman and General Counsel. It is an interesting company found by George Robb, a former Wall Street type. George has the terrible problem of being married to the smoking hot movie star Veronica Webb. The company is a 501 c.3 ( non profit). They are partnered with 8-9 countries and organizations:
Albanian Institute of Archaeology
Croatian Ministry of Culture
East Carolina University Maritime Studies
Institute of Nautical Archaeology
Malta Ministry of Culture and Tourism
Montenegro Ministry of Culture
Moroccan Ministry of Culture
Superintendent of Archaeology, Calabria
Superintendent of Underwater Archaeology, Sicily
Tunisian Ministry of Culture

I would be very interested if someone could pull there financial statements and see where there income is derived?

 

[saltydog1733]

George Robb and Veronica Webb have been divorced for a few years now. He taught her well however....she is a big collector of shipwreck artifacts.

 

[Teredo Navalis]

Alexandre,
My source have stated the same. RPM Nautical is a class act and does excellent work. Still wonder if they are paid per project, per month, per day or perhaps have an extra fee added based on artifacts recovered? It presents another model to help bridge the large chasm between governments, salvage groups of all types and the archaeologic community.

Saltydog, Thanks for the correction. Does that means Veronica is a free agent?