[ Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Greg
Category: Shipwreck Research
Date: 28 May 2007
Time: 21:18:13
Remote Name: 24.231.159.86
Please read thru this post and compare the proposed legislation to what is currently in effect.
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (EXCERPT) Act 451 of 1994 PART 761 ABORIGINAL RECORDS AND ANTIQUITIES
324.76112 Rules generally. Sec. 76112. (1) The department and the department of history, arts, and libraries, jointly or separately, may promulgate rules as are necessary to implement this part. (2) Within each Great Lakes bottomlands preserve, the department and the department of history, arts, and libraries may jointly promulgate rules that govern access to and use of a Great Lakes bottomlands preserve.
324.76111 Great Lakes bottomlands preserve; establishment; rules; determination; factors; granting permit to recover abandoned artifacts; limitation; intentional sinking of vessel; prohibited use of state money; Thunder Bay Great Lakes state bottomland preserve.
(6) Upon the approval of the committee, not more than 1 vessel associated with Great Lakes maritime history may be sunk intentionally within a Great Lakes bottomlands preserve. However, state money shall not be expended to purchase, transport, or sink the vessel.
324.76118 Underwater preserve fund; creation; sources of revenue; purposes for which money appropriated.
Sec. 76118. (1) The underwater preserve fund is created as a separate fund in the state treasury, and it may receive revenue as provided in this part, or revenue from any other source. (2) Money in the underwater preserve fund shall be appropriated for only the following purposes: (a) To the department of history, arts, and libraries for the development of maritime archaeology and for the promotion of Great Lakes bottomlands preserves in this state. (b) To the department for the enforcement of this part. ***************************************************************************************************** Comments:
The reason you'll never see money from this current legislation is that it's not a "recreational-tourism" based agency/department. You complain now that the proposed legislation will never infuse money into the preserves... Well, the way it's set up now, you never will. Maybe this is why you never see any money? So you use this reason to shoot down any attempt to improve the system because of "past performance"....
Right now, DHAL can bring limitations to diving within the preserves. Why have a non-recreationally based agency determine limitations? I thought we wanted to dive free?
Right now, now "public input" will not be considered as DHAL is the one making the decisions. The proposed new legislation puts more control into YOUR HANDS - THE PUBLIC!
So, how do you want it? DHAL (with no recreational/tourism background) making the decisions on how to administer the funds -OR- put it into the hands of the PUBLIC and MDNR combined - where YOU have direct input in where the funds go and place limitations on funding requests? Do you (the public) want some control or no control at all?
By creating a seperate fund that will benefit all, we have a much better chance of seeing a return. Right now, you'll never see a return. - which is why everybody is complaining in the first place!