signumops
Hero Member
- Feb 28, 2007
- 756
- 226
- Detector(s) used
- Garrett, Minelab, Aqua-Pulse
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
The document is a challenge to GME's Admiralty arrest, on its face, but some very important issues are exposed. If you actually READ the document it says:
"The permit was amended on August 19, 2015, to allow limited test excavation and diagnostic artifact recovery for shipwreck identification. Exh. B. The amendment also allowed the limited use of prop wash deflectors and suction dredges of less than 10 inches in diameter to perform the limited test excavations only. Exh. B, ¶ A.1.e. Prior to recovering any diagnostic artifacts, GME was to notify the Division of Historical Resources. Exh. B, ¶ A.1.c."
This means that a hydraulic dredge with a maximum throat of 10 inches can be used, OR a blower, so GME did have a blower permissable in its permit. LAMP used a hydraulic dredge with negative results.
"In the admiralty complaint, GME alleged to have found an unknown wrecked vessel in state waters while operating under validly issued permits form the State of Florida, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. GME alleges the wrecked vessel is abandoned and its "…cargo and/or artifacts are not firmly affixed in the submerged lands nor in coralline formations such that the use of tools of excavation is required in order to move the bottom sediments to gain access to the shipwreck, its cargo, or any part thereof."
GME made no mention of "embedded", but pointed out that the material was not "affixed". Florida asserts the definition of "embedded" as a qualification for its own claim that Admiralty arrest is not qualified in this instance because "excavation" was required. The judge accepted that argument without testing the meaning of the word "embedded", rather avoiding the meaning and simply noting that excavation by use of tools was required.
Merriam-Webster:
Synonym Discussion of affix
fasten, fix, attach, affix mean to make something stay firmly in place.
Merriam-Webster:
Definition of embedded
2 : enclosed closely in or as if in a matrix : set firmly into a mass or material
To affect an Admiralty Arrest, the finder must supply the court with something taken from the wreck, attesting to the existence of the wreck, to wit in this particular instance: cannon balls, ballast stones, ect. Cleverly enough, the ASA as administered in Florida does not permit the finder to remove the necessary evidence for an Admiralty claim, and in this case, that collection of evidence for an Admiralty arrest by GME was used as the excuse to nullify GME's permit. Gotcha!
NPS states that the U.S. Congress intends for States shipwreck management programs to be consistent with the ASA and these “Guidelines.”
So here is the guideline for excavation of shipwrecks per the NPS "Guidelines"
"Guideline 6: Ground-truth shipwrecks and anomalies using non-destructive methods.
All shipwrecks and unverified anomalies located during a remote sensing survey should be ground-truthed through sea-bottom inspection--either by remotely operated vehicle or by divers. Shipwrecks should be examined to determine the nature, extent and integrity of the Wrecked vessel, surviving cargo, and associated scattered wreckage, and to locate any visible human remains. Shipwrecks should be examined in as non-destructive and non-disturbing a manner as possible. Determinations of a shipwreck's type, age, condition and, when possible, specific identity should be made without test excavations or removal of artifacts or other materials. When test excavations are necessary or artifacts or other materials must be removed (such as when the shipwreck is embedded or encrusted), the amount to be excavated or removed should be as limited as possible to make evaluations, and be done using archeological methods. This is particularly important in cases where historical value is suspected. Any artifacts or other materials recovered from historic shipwrecks should be conseived by a nautical conservator."
The court made this observation in its judgement:
"In fact, Dr. Duggins stated in his report that “BAR archaeologists did not encounter any of the visibly diagnostic cultural material at the site because it was covered with sediment." Imagine that.
And once more I reiterate Duggin's remark of record in this case: "This excavation pit was likely created via blowers and were outside the scope of the limited test excavations authorized under GME’s permit."
There was no investigation by the judge as to what this arbitrary opinion was based upon, and Duggin's claim that he'd never encountered a sunken ship as found in "Pirates of the Caribbean" might tell us that he's never seen anything like the wreckage found on some of the 1715 Fleet wrecks where some material can be found firmly "affixed" to solid rock, some artifacts are "embedded" in sand, and some artifacts are simply rolling around on occasion in the littoral trough.
The idea that divers are going to use 10-inch hydraulic dredges to remove 7 feet of sand over a widely dispersed wreck scatter in the near-shore waters of Cape Canaveral is comical. It also means that we will never get at the whole story in our lifetime.
"The permit was amended on August 19, 2015, to allow limited test excavation and diagnostic artifact recovery for shipwreck identification. Exh. B. The amendment also allowed the limited use of prop wash deflectors and suction dredges of less than 10 inches in diameter to perform the limited test excavations only. Exh. B, ¶ A.1.e. Prior to recovering any diagnostic artifacts, GME was to notify the Division of Historical Resources. Exh. B, ¶ A.1.c."
This means that a hydraulic dredge with a maximum throat of 10 inches can be used, OR a blower, so GME did have a blower permissable in its permit. LAMP used a hydraulic dredge with negative results.
"In the admiralty complaint, GME alleged to have found an unknown wrecked vessel in state waters while operating under validly issued permits form the State of Florida, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. GME alleges the wrecked vessel is abandoned and its "…cargo and/or artifacts are not firmly affixed in the submerged lands nor in coralline formations such that the use of tools of excavation is required in order to move the bottom sediments to gain access to the shipwreck, its cargo, or any part thereof."
GME made no mention of "embedded", but pointed out that the material was not "affixed". Florida asserts the definition of "embedded" as a qualification for its own claim that Admiralty arrest is not qualified in this instance because "excavation" was required. The judge accepted that argument without testing the meaning of the word "embedded", rather avoiding the meaning and simply noting that excavation by use of tools was required.
Merriam-Webster:
Synonym Discussion of affix
fasten, fix, attach, affix mean to make something stay firmly in place.
Merriam-Webster:
Definition of embedded
2 : enclosed closely in or as if in a matrix : set firmly into a mass or material
To affect an Admiralty Arrest, the finder must supply the court with something taken from the wreck, attesting to the existence of the wreck, to wit in this particular instance: cannon balls, ballast stones, ect. Cleverly enough, the ASA as administered in Florida does not permit the finder to remove the necessary evidence for an Admiralty claim, and in this case, that collection of evidence for an Admiralty arrest by GME was used as the excuse to nullify GME's permit. Gotcha!
NPS states that the U.S. Congress intends for States shipwreck management programs to be consistent with the ASA and these “Guidelines.”
So here is the guideline for excavation of shipwrecks per the NPS "Guidelines"
"Guideline 6: Ground-truth shipwrecks and anomalies using non-destructive methods.
All shipwrecks and unverified anomalies located during a remote sensing survey should be ground-truthed through sea-bottom inspection--either by remotely operated vehicle or by divers. Shipwrecks should be examined to determine the nature, extent and integrity of the Wrecked vessel, surviving cargo, and associated scattered wreckage, and to locate any visible human remains. Shipwrecks should be examined in as non-destructive and non-disturbing a manner as possible. Determinations of a shipwreck's type, age, condition and, when possible, specific identity should be made without test excavations or removal of artifacts or other materials. When test excavations are necessary or artifacts or other materials must be removed (such as when the shipwreck is embedded or encrusted), the amount to be excavated or removed should be as limited as possible to make evaluations, and be done using archeological methods. This is particularly important in cases where historical value is suspected. Any artifacts or other materials recovered from historic shipwrecks should be conseived by a nautical conservator."
The court made this observation in its judgement:
"In fact, Dr. Duggins stated in his report that “BAR archaeologists did not encounter any of the visibly diagnostic cultural material at the site because it was covered with sediment." Imagine that.
And once more I reiterate Duggin's remark of record in this case: "This excavation pit was likely created via blowers and were outside the scope of the limited test excavations authorized under GME’s permit."
There was no investigation by the judge as to what this arbitrary opinion was based upon, and Duggin's claim that he'd never encountered a sunken ship as found in "Pirates of the Caribbean" might tell us that he's never seen anything like the wreckage found on some of the 1715 Fleet wrecks where some material can be found firmly "affixed" to solid rock, some artifacts are "embedded" in sand, and some artifacts are simply rolling around on occasion in the littoral trough.
The idea that divers are going to use 10-inch hydraulic dredges to remove 7 feet of sand over a widely dispersed wreck scatter in the near-shore waters of Cape Canaveral is comical. It also means that we will never get at the whole story in our lifetime.
Amazon Forum Fav 👍
Last edited:
