Posted by Brendon Baillod on January 31, 1999 at 09:27:06:
In Reply to: Re: Illegal to search for shipwrecks posted by J.M. on January 30, 1999 at 05:12:17:
Before the speculation gets out of hand, allow me to present
some of the facts in this matter:
Last year, the Center for Marine and Underwater
Resource Management at Michigan State University
hosted a series of workshops. They invited about
20 prominent wreckhunters from around the region.
The purpose of the workshops was to develop recommendations
to the state of Michigan for the management of existing
historic wrecksites and for responding to new discoveries.
The results are being published next week and will be
presented to the state. Having been involved in the
process, I can tell you that there is no consideration
of banning wreckhunting. The state has no problem with
wreckhunting, so long as artifacts are not taken from
the wrecksites. Further, the states and provinces have
no interest in restricting access to wrecksites. In the
case of the Lady Elgin, it was Harry Zych who requested
the injuction against visiting the wreck until the case
was settled. The Illinois Historic Preservation Agency
wanted the wreck open for sport divers. They simply did
not want Zych to strip the wrecksite any further. Zych
wanted the injuction to keep sport divers from stealing
artifacts, many of which had already disappeared. The
Lady Elgin is also a very unusual case because Zych was
able to find documentation from the 1860s asserting that
the wreck was never abandoned. That is how he was able
to make a case for ownership. If you go to my website on
the Elgin, you'll see that there's really nothing there
worth owning. As far as I'm concerned the case stopped
being about the wreck years ago and is now a personal quest.
Zych should never have vacated his agreement to donate the
wreck to the state. Hundreds of other salvors
have discovered wrecks worth far more than the Elgin and
most of them were happy to place the wrecks in public trust.
To my knowledge, all states and provinces on the lakes take
the standpoint that wrecks are a non renewable public
resource which they manage for the enjoyment of sport
divers and the scientific inquiry of archeologists.
Management means prosecuting people who steal, not
restricting access. It is important to remember that
"state owned" means publicly owned. When wrecks
become privately owned, they become "off limits." So,
when someone steals from a wreck, they steal from all
of us.
To my knowledge no states or provinces have ever restricted
access to a wrecksite. Archeologists may have requested that
the site not be disturbed while they were doing a survey, but
divers have generally been welcome and in many cases they
have been encouraged to assist. Organizations like the
Underwater Archeology Society of Chicago, the Wisconsin
Underwater Archeology Association, Save Ontario Shipwrecks,
the Michigan Underwater Preserve Council and others all
consist of sport divers who assist state efforts to study
and preserve wrecksites.
The state archeology offices generally are so underfunded
that they are only able to survey one or two sites a year
and most new discoveries are never professionally surveyed.
Further, there is limited money for law enforcement to
protect wrecks from theft. For these reasons, most wreck
hunters keep news of discoveries and location confidential.
In short, the states and provinces are not interested in
regulating sport divers. They are interested in preserving
the wrecks. They know that the best way to do this is
not to antagonize divers with regulation. Rather, they
try to involve sport divers in their efforts. So, rather
than speculating about the bad intentions of state and
provincial agencies, I would challenge sport divers to
become involved in the process by joining a preserve
committee, conservation organization or contacting the
agencies involved in order to get the facts.
: : Has any one heard or doe's any one know why the state wants to make it illegal to search for wrecks on the great lakes
: I have heard that there are individuals in the State of Michigan who work in natural resources that would like to see such a law pass. Presently, of course, it is not illegal to do so but I believe that it is tempting for many who wish to have more control to have such laws.
: Even though passing such a law seems unlikely I understand that there are people at Michigan State University that are presently involved in a study, using coastal managment funds, to suggest reccomendations to State lawmakers about that very issue. One of the questionable aspects of this study is that the people who are conducting it are using taxpayer funds to make recommendations to lawmakers for the distribution of taxpayer revenue (ask me sometime what you should do with your money and I can gaurentee you that I can make some great investments for you!?!?).
: The problem, it seems, lies in how much control resource "managers" have in what happens to the wrecks. When private individuals find wrecks then the possibility/belief exists that these resources are irreparably harmed through ignorance and mistreatment and to some extent this is true. I my opinion, what the people who want these types of laws fail to recognize is that there are far more important harms going on that can not be legislated against then shipwreck finders. For example the zebra mussels have done morein one year to make shipwrecks inaccessible to anyone then all of the ignorant divers have in thirty years. Also, as a taxpayer and a shipwreck diver, I would much rather see my taxz dollars; a) returned to me if they don't have a legitimate use for them; b)Used for infrastructure rather spending huge amounts to try and control a very small group of individuals.
: In short, as a freedom-loving, overtaxed, over-regulated person, I am not in favor of such a law.
: J.M.