Shipwecks

[bauza]

I need inf. about shipwrecks in Puerto Rico. Antonio

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[FISHEYE]

The Puerto Rican government wont let you work any wrecks there.

 

[Darren in NC]

Google this:

[h=1]Shipwrecks in Puerto Rico's History by Walter Cardona
[/h]

 

[Black Duck]

Google this:

Shipwrecks in Puerto Rico's History by Walter Cardona


You need a permit from the Council for the Conservation and Study of Underwater Archaeological Sites and Resources to conduct work at archeological sites in inland and coastal waters under the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Permits are issued for exploration and excavation, and for recovery or salvage. Applicants must submit an archeological research design and an environmental impact statement. Persons who are authorized to study underwater archeological sites must use the most advanced scientific techniques available to prevent environmental damage.[h=3][/h]the Protection, Conservation and Study of the Underwater Archaeological Sites and Resources.” The statute reaffirms the Commonwealth’s policy to conserve and maintain underwater archeological sites and resources within its jurisdiction for the benefit of its citizens, and creates the Council for the Conservation and Study of Underwater Archaeological Sites and Resources. The statute is codified in Chapter 93 of Part III in Title 18 of the Laws of Puerto Rico. The Council’s procedures for issuing permits are in Regulation No. 2. Related laws about archeological sites on land are codified in Chapter 95 of Title 18, and laws about the Historic Preservation Office are in Chapter 46 of Title 3.

 

[Vox veritas]

I have a more complete than Walter Cardona list. What is the purpose?

 

[G.I.B.]

I need inf. about shipwrecks in Puerto Rico. Antonio

Would you like the exact GPS coords with ships the inventory, or just something fairly close?

 

[seekerGH]

Perhaps you can apply for a permit, but given the ASA, I see little hope of getting a permit that would mean anything.

"The Abandoned Shipwreck Act applies in the fifty States of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands. A shipwreck is defined to include the vessel or wreck, its cargo, and other contents. The term embedded means firmly affixed in submerged lands or coralline formations such that tools of excavation are required to move bottom sediments to gain access to the shipwreck, its cargo, and any part."

https://www.nps.gov/archeology/sites/stateSubmerged/puertorico.htm



The Nautical Archaeology of Puerto Rico | Filipe Castro, Richard Fontanez, Gustavo Garcia, and W. Lusardi - Academia.edu

 

[bulletprobe]

do you have any shipwreck in puerto rico my friends

 

[Black Duck]

seeker, what are talking about, what does the shipwreck act have to do with it UNLESS its a Military SHIP

Perhaps you can apply for a permit, but given the ASA, I see little hope of getting a permit that would mean anything.

"The Abandoned Shipwreck Act applies in the fifty States of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands. A shipwreck is defined to include the vessel or wreck, its cargo, and other contents. The term embedded means firmly affixed in submerged lands or coralline formations such that tools of excavation are required to move bottom sediments to gain access to the shipwreck, its cargo, and any part."

https://www.nps.gov/archeology/sites/stateSubmerged/puertorico.htm



The Nautical Archaeology of Puerto Rico | Filipe Castro, Richard Fontanez, Gustavo Garcia, and W. Lusardi - Academia.edu

 

[Salvor6]

Black Duck and seeker you are forgetting one important thing, these guys don't need no steenking permit.

 

[seekerGH]

These problems were resolved by the Abandoned Shipwreck Act. Under the statute, the US Government asserted title to three classes of abandoned shipwrecks located within three nautical miles of the US coastline and in the internal navigable waters of the United States. The Act covers abandoned shipwrecks that are embedded in submerged lands, abandoned shipwrecks that are embedded in coralline formations protected by a State, and abandoned shipwrecks that are on submerged lands and included in or determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Upon asserting title to these shipwrecks, the US Government transferred its title to the government entity that owns the submerged lands containing the shipwrecks. As a result, State governments have title to shipwrecks located on State lands, the US Government has title to shipwrecks located on Federal lands, and Indian tribes have title to shipwrecks located on Indian lands. However, the US Government continues to hold title to sunken US warships and other shipwrecks entitled to Sovereign Immunity, no matter where the vessels are located. Such vessels are not affected by the statute.

One of the statute's most important provisions specifies that the laws of salvage and finds do not apply to abandoned shipwrecks claimed by the government under the Act. This provision removes those shipwrecks from the jurisdiction of Federal Admiralty Court. It means that the shipwrecks and their cargo and contents are no longer treated only as commodities lost at sea and in need of salvage. This means that an historically valuable shipwreck can be treated as an archaeological or historical site instead of a commercial property.

 

[Salvor6]

One of the statue's most important provisions specifies that the laws of salvage and finds do not apply to pirates. It means that the shipwrecks and their cargo and contents are fair game to whomever finds it first.

 

[Black Duck]

Seeker good explanation but Only IF it is proven to be "military" key word is proven, burden of proof

These problems were resolved by the Abandoned Shipwreck Act. Under the statute, the US Government asserted title to three classes of abandoned shipwrecks located within three nautical miles of the US coastline and in the internal navigable waters of the United States. The Act covers abandoned shipwrecks that are embedded in submerged lands, abandoned shipwrecks that are embedded in coralline formations protected by a State, and abandoned shipwrecks that are on submerged lands and included in or determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Upon asserting title to these shipwrecks, the US Government transferred its title to the government entity that owns the submerged lands containing the shipwrecks. As a result, State governments have title to shipwrecks located on State lands, the US Government has title to shipwrecks located on Federal lands, and Indian tribes have title to shipwrecks located on Indian lands. However, the US Government continues to hold title to sunken US warships and other shipwrecks entitled to Sovereign Immunity, no matter where the vessels are located. Such vessels are not affected by the statute.

One of the statute's most important provisions specifies that the laws of salvage and finds do not apply to abandoned shipwrecks claimed by the government under the Act. This provision removes those shipwrecks from the jurisdiction of Federal Admiralty Court. It means that the shipwrecks and their cargo and contents are no longer treated only as commodities lost at sea and in need of salvage. This means that an historically valuable shipwreck can be treated as an archaeological or historical site instead of a commercial property.

 

[aquanut]

Black Duck and seeker you are forgetting one important thing, these guys don't need no steenking permit.

Salvor is Right!

 

[Jolly Mon]

Seeker good explanation but Only IF it is proven to be "military" key word is proven, burden of proof

Actually, military craft are specifically EXCLUDED from protection under the ASA. Military craft are protected under the Sunken Military Craft Act.

Ultimately, the "proof" of whether a vessel is or is not a "military craft" is up to the courts to decide. Remember Juno and Galaga? The courts "decided" the vessels belonged to Spain with virtually ZERO proof of the ships' identity.

A careful reading of the SMCA reveals some interesting tidbits and loopholes. For instance, entire GROUPS of ships can be protected in one fell swoop...the recent permitting guidelines also state that in the case of foreign military craft in US waters, the foreign entity must merely "assert ownership of its sunken military craft"...what actual "proof" a court would require in order to enforce this is anybody's guess...given the aggressive stance of the US in regards these matters, it probably would not take much.

 

[Black Duck]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]17[/FONT]
1750 and 1802 yes I think they could prove they were what they were as they did, come on every knew these were military, this is not a good example here

Actually, military craft are specifically EXCLUDED from protection under the ASA. Military craft are protected under the Sunken Military Craft Act.

Ultimately, the "proof" of whether a vessel is or is not a "military craft" is up to the courts to decide. Remember Juno and Galaga? The courts "decided" the vessels belonged to Spain with virtually ZERO proof of the ships' identity.

A careful reading of the SMCA reveals some interesting tidbits and loopholes. For instance, entire GROUPS of ships can be protected in one fell swoop...the recent permitting guidelines also state that in the case of foreign military craft in US waters, the foreign entity must merely "assert ownership of its sunken military craft"...what actual "proof" a court would require in order to enforce this is anybody's guess...given the aggressive stance of the US in regards these matters, it probably would not take much.

 

[Darren in NC]

1750 and 1802 yes I think they could prove they were what they were as they did...

I don't think JM meant they can't be proven to exist historically or that they were military, but that the actual sites Ben Benson found were proven to be the LaGalga and Juno.

 

[seekerGH]

One of the statue's most important provisions specifies that the laws of salvage and finds do not apply to pirates. It means that the shipwrecks and their cargo and contents are fair game to whomever finds it first.

Sorry, but you are misreading what is stated and the intent.

One of the statute's most important provisions specifies that the laws of salvage and finds do not apply to abandoned shipwrecks claimed by the government under the Act. This provision removes those shipwrecks from the jurisdiction of Federal Admiralty Court. It means that the shipwrecks and their cargo and contents are no longer treated only as commodities lost at sea and in need of salvage. This means that an historically valuable shipwreck can be treated as an archaeological or historical site instead of a commercial property.

It does not mean that the shipwrecks are fair game. It means that the Laws of Salvage and the Laws are Finds are not applicable. The cargo is not lost at sea, and the wrecks are not in need of salvage.
Admiralty Arrests cannot be filed on these wrecks.

the recent permitting guidelines also state that in the case of foreign military craft in US waters, the foreign entity must merely "assert ownership of its sunken military craft".

Looking at the recent cases with the Spanish, Brits, France, and Germany, it seems all the US has to to is ask to foreign entity, and they all say yes. As noted, Germany has recently laid claim to all of the 3rd Reich property.

but that the actual sites Ben Benson found were proven to be the LaGalga and Juno.

Looking at the research, I think it was proven that the Juno and LaGalga were sovereign, not abandoned, and the property of Spain. I do not see where it was proven that those sites were the Juno and La Galga.

 

[Black Duck]

In order to prove they are sovereign, you must prove they are Military, if you can not prove what it is how can you give it away, ( meaning a State of USA) what if u think its English but it turns out to be French, that would look good, and what archaeologist is going to ruin his/her rep. when they find they are wrong, like the guy in Haiti and Beeker there rep. is now shot to hell and they have in my opinion no credibility from making incorrect statements

State issues are different from Fed or International waters also, The State of the USA has a responsibility to the people of the State not a foreign country

Sorry, but you are misreading what is stated and the intent.

One of the statute's most important provisions specifies that the laws of salvage and finds do not apply to abandoned shipwrecks claimed by the government under the Act. This provision removes those shipwrecks from the jurisdiction of Federal Admiralty Court. It means that the shipwrecks and their cargo and contents are no longer treated only as commodities lost at sea and in need of salvage. This means that an historically valuable shipwreck can be treated as an archaeological or historical site instead of a commercial property.

It does not mean that the shipwrecks are fair game. It means that the Laws of Salvage and the Laws are Finds are not applicable. The cargo is not lost at sea, and the wrecks are not in need of salvage.
Admiralty Arrests cannot be filed on these wrecks.



Looking at the recent cases with the Spanish, Brits, France, and Germany, it seems all the US has to to is ask to foreign entity, and they all say yes. As noted, Germany has recently laid claim to all of the 3rd Reich property.



Looking at the research, I think it was proven that the Juno and LaGalga were sovereign, not abandoned, and the property of Spain. I do not see where it was proven that those sites were the Juno and La Galga.

 

[Jolly Mon]

One of the statue's most important provisions specifies that the laws of salvage and finds do not apply to pirates. It means that the shipwrecks and their cargo and contents are fair game to whomever finds it first.

LOL...missed this post first time around...