Artifact Arrest

[docwascuba]

Well in my case ,bring it up.. I dive in nc and the wrecks are dissolving in the sand . due to currents and hurricanes. I can honor my artifacts better than if they sit in the bottom of the ocean. Sorry guys but i disagree more with spearfishing our oceans,than artifact hunting.es

 

[ItsBruce]

I'm sure glad I've been reading this thread. It saved me from a most grievious fate. We were fishing in Santa Monica Bay, in SoCal. We had gone out abut 12 miles from Marina Del Rey. After a couple of hours of no bites, we decided to pack up the rods and reels and do some diving. We were a bit past rec limits, when we came upon what may have been the archeological find of all times. I'm convinced it was the Holly Grail. I did not have any kind of marker and I thought about bringing it up. But, then I realized what kind of trouble I mightt get into for moving an artifact ... so l left it. Next time I go out, I'll bring a GPS or something so if something like this happens again, I'll at least be able to relocate the general area again. As it is, I could probable get within 3 or 4 miles of the spot again.

I hope the preservationists, archeologists and such are proud of me.

 

[ScubaToneDog]

I have a question. What is the Historical importance of a three masted schooner barge built in 1877 that went down carrying a load of iron ore in 1899, that was clam shell salvaged and dynamited? Now, what is the Historical importance of a 1977 Mac truck that Jack Knifed on I-90 in 1999 who's cargo of steel coils were salvaged by forklift? Most of these "historical" maritime vessel's were cargo carriers, barges, and Tugs. They built America, but so did the train, horse and buckboard and yes, the mighty Semi Truck. We preserve submerged sites that only a very small percentage of the population can visit. And for what? Ooooh look a boiler.....oooh look a lump of coal...get over it...Historical importance...I don't see it. I say take it as long as it doesn't require the assistance of a lift bag, or need to be detached from a wreck.

 

[moneysavr]

If every wreck site stuff was taken even just one nail! nothing in years will be left! got to look at it this way,other folks someday will dive thease sites, if its all gone in some ones basement,garage, then who wins? who see's the history??
We had a group of well being divers years back excavate/ float a old schooner that was just fine on the bottom of the lake,in several years she fell apart age caught up with her being yanked out of her time capsule and now it has been bulldozed!
It is a fact most folks dont give a D_M about a old dead eye,anchor,hook,and so on,,. It seems like the folks that are ______ dive! so make sense that divers see it!
Now that said I like bottles and a good place to find them is under piers & ship wrecks=but at piers trash was tossed and not part of a wreck,,.That said if I found one on a wreck I would not take it,But may stash it on the wreck as so some goof will not snag it!
Brad

 

[Tom Yerian]

OK, here is one for you. I was the assistant project director for a shipwreck excavation in Matagoarda Bay off the coast of Texas. This is in saltwater mind you. The ship sank in 1685. That is over 300 years old. We found over 1 million artifacts. That is right 1 million.

This was also an area were very few divers ever went. Who is to say how long things will last underwater whether they be in fresh or salt water.

Archaeologist would love to go pick up everything and then have it all conserved and placed in a museum for everyone to see forever. Now, archaeologist don't have enough money to do this, state and federal governments don't have enough money to do this and the private sector doesn't have enough money to do this. Over time, more are being excavated or at least studied.

I know the argument, if left they will be destroyed. Well, if removed, are they any better off? Only the few who took them will ever know of their existence.

Just my 2 centsL

.... Well, the few to start is at least 3!! than the fews friends, that is a lot more! I left o the bottom, realistically, who will see the artifacts? So the public is being served by allowing private collections. If people wern't scared of showing their collections, more people would get interested and bring up more artifacts. Give people credit, were not stupid. I, and many people like myself have, and are keeping the things we find. If there was a different attitude with the Arch's.people would be more willing to cooperate with them! The Arch's just cut their own throats! They have forced a lot of people who invest a lot of time, money and the hard work involved to find these treasures, have nothing to gain by turning over info. They are not reimbursed for thir efforts, just kicked out, not even given credit with the discovery. The gov. has just created a new problem for themselves. They have made me and those like me modern day , PIRATES!!!....Capt. Tom

 

[archman]

I'm quoting U.S. antiquity law as it relates to regulated animal parts, but as I recall, artifacts have to be over 100 years old to qualify. So you can mess with that 1977 Mac truck all you want, so long as it's not an active crime scene. I think somebody would stick a sign on it if that were the case.

Typically historical artifacts look much better on the surface, where folks clean them up, research their significance, and stick 'em in collections or window displays at scuba shops or souvenir shops. Unless there's enough tangible salvage to qualify as a discrete *wreck*, little bits of junk on the seafloor really isn't of much diver interest.

No one should be looting wrecks though. That sucks.

 

[ScubaToneDog]

I'm quoting U.S. antiquity law as it relates to regulated animal parts, but as I recall, artifacts have to be over 100 years old to qualify. So you can mess with that 1977 Mac truck all you want, so long as it's not an active crime scene.

You miss my point...age aside, there is a romanticism connected with shipwrecks that makes everyone demand their preservation. Just like Lighthouses. At least Lighthouses can be enjoyed by more than 0.05% of the population. Preserving history like Pearl Harbor and the Titanic is one thing. Preserving the wreck of the schooner barge ??? is another. Preserving the structure is fine, but protecting a bottle or dish in the galley is a bit over reactive.

Take an 1870's train rusting away in a rail yard after a fatal collision....no one cares....bury it under a hill or sink it in the ocean or a lake and it becomes a protected archaeological wonder and a Discovery channel special...

 

[LVX]

arrogant intellectual archeologists would have things lay on the bottom and rot into oblivion. common sense goes a long way in life. gold and silver are the same in water or out.

I really take offense that this statement. I am an underwater archaeologist and don't consider myself arrogant. I fully realize there must be a symbiotic relationship but because there are divers with this kind of attitude, we will never see eye to eye.

You have no idea who I am or what I believe in regards to archaeological remains but you just lump all underwater archaeologist together. If I did the same and used you as the model for all scuba divers, I am guessing I would never speak to one again.

And by the way, silver is not the same in and out of the water unless it is fresh water.

L

 

[archman]

Preserving the wreck of the schooner barge ??? is another. Preserving the structure is fine, but protecting a bottle or dish in the galley is a bit over reactive.

The key difference between random artifacts on the seafloor and artifacts associated with a discrete structure (i.e. wreck) is that an archaeologist can interpret cultural uses/importances from the latter when they are located within a *greater historical context*. This is where all that fancy mapping and gridding seen on National Geographic comes into play. In such contexts, the original location of the artifact is often critically important. Analysis of structures and their (hopefully) undisturbed contents permits far greater analysis of the cultural period than a solitary object could ever do. A bottle stuck in the mud may be only useful as the artifact itself, but a bottle found in a ship's hold tells an archaeologist about the people that used the bottle, and life aboard ship.

Remember, archaeology is not merely the study of ancient artifacts, but the study of ancient cultures and civilizations. And most frequently, the best cultural information derives from dig sites representing everyday life of the period (i.e. generic schooner barge) rather than more unusual situations (King Tut's tomb, the Vasa wreck).

Most archaeologists are more interested in a collection of different pottery types than precious jewelry. They can get more and better info from the pottery. Weird but generally true. Although LVX likely knows a great deal more about this than I do.

 

[octotat]

With respect to individual artifacts in rivers or estuaries (as the original post in this thread was about), the State of South Carolina does a great job in bridging the peronal liberties and archeological concerns by issuing licenses and requiring declarations of recovered objects to be filled out. The review the information provided by the diver, and if interested, they may request additional information including photographs, or request to study the object. This really should be a model for other states. I do agree that if a particular section of a river is identified as historically/archeologically important, the state could set the area aside as off limits to anyone other than researchers. This shouldn't be sweeping however (i.e. entire length of a river). Compromise and education is the key to successfully allow divers to recover objects without trampling archeology.