Is the US Navy banning diving on Military wrecks?

[Omisson]

If the Navy is so concerned about these wrecks, they should remove them from our waters. It's just more military junk left behind IMHO. DISCLAIMER: I rarely dive wrecks although I understand their appeal to those with an interest in history

Wow. War graves are military junk?

Wow.

 

[Jared0425]

As mentioned above with exception of U-boats, there is no military graves in that area as a previous post stated.

 

[paulw]

While I believe divers should not take items from wrecks I do not agree with this law or the fines. The sunken ships in question are indeed the property of the United States but "We The People" are the the owners of that entity. These should not belong to a few elite people (like historians) to study they should be enjoyed by all who are able to go to them. These ships will not last forever so stopping divers from visiting them is preserving what also what good is an unseen artifact? Just my O2.

 

[drbill]

Wow. War graves are military junk?

Wow.

Just the ships. If there are sailors or marines trapped within these sunken vessels, I'd understand. But if the Navy respected them enough, and they were in diveable depths, one would think the Navy would retrieve the bodies.

 

[Avonthediver]

This was sent out in the Gary Gentile news letter.

Newsletter for April 2014​

As the cliché goes, there's good news and there's bad news. In this case, so much has happened in the past few of months that there are two items of good news and two items of very, very bad news. The good news first:
The GGP website has had a facelift that resulted in an entirely new look. The credit for this massive surgical procedure goes to my webmaster and long-time dive buddy Mike Boring. He not only restructured the skin, skeletal structure, and connecting links, but he took my picture and posted it on the home screen. This enormous undertaking was months in the planning and execution. The style is now in keeping with modern forms of Internet expression.
Many thanks, Mike!
The second item of good news is the publication of my latest title: Shipwrecks of the Chesapeake Bay in Virginia Waters. This is the companion volume to Shipwrecks of the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland Waters. The title is self-explanatory. I postponed completing these books for years because I didn't think there was much interest in Chesapeake Bay shipwreck history. Sales of the first book proved me wrong!
So, visit my reformed website and check out my most recent literary addition.
Now for the bad news. NOAA has withdrawn funding for the preservation and conservation of artifacts that NOAA and the Navy recovered from the Monitor. This reckless abandonment flies in the face of NOAA's avowed commitment toward "preserving" shipwrecks. As a result of NOAA's callous disregard for its sworn responsibilities, conservation efforts for both the engine and turret have ceased. Forsaking these and other precious artifacts in order to pursue its self-aggrandizing goals confirms the unsavory truth that NOAA wants only to control shipwrecks, not preserve them.
Instead of preserving what it already possesses, NOAA is spending its enormous resources on increasing its possessions. NOAA is presently funding an expensive lobbying campaign to expand the Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary tenfold! Lake Huron has no coral reefs, and no fish or biological organisms that are endangered or in need of protection. The sole purpose of this proposed expansion is to gain control over hundreds of sunken shipwrecks that are currently under State management.
While Thunder Bay NMS may be the hottest item on NOAA's plate, other Sanctuaries are also on its hit list. NOAA is in the process of taking over all the ocean waters off the States of California, Massachusetts, and North Carolina. Florida and South Carolina are not far behind in NOAA's long-range scheme for total usurpation of the underwater world.
It gets worse. The U.S. Navy has proposed regulations that would require every person on the planet to obtain a permit to examine any shipwreck, anywhere in the world, which at any time in its past was affiliated with the Navy, even if it was only under charter to the Navy at some time during its career, and even if it was only transporting cargo that might conceivably have been used by the Navy. These regulations would apply not only to diving, but to fishing, anchoring, and any form of observation - direct or remote - including submersible and drop-camera photography. Absolute and total control would be exercised by a handful of civilians who work at the Naval Historical Center.
When I write "handful" I do not exaggerate. The senior staff of the NHC consists of approximately five individuals, and they are not even Navy personnel. These control freaks are bent on a global shipwreck conquest that will forever change wreck-diving as we know it.
If the NHC gets its way, everyone - recreational divers, charter boat operators, commercial and non-commercial anglers, archaeologists, and citizens of other nations - will have to beg these territorial staff members for a written permit to conduct any kind of activity on a shipwreck which they deem falls under their jurisdiction.
If you believe that obtaining a permit to look at a wreck is merely a formality, remember that it took me six years and three federal lawsuits to obtain a permit to photograph the Monitor. Then it took me two more years and another federal lawsuit to obtain a second permit.
Here is the link to the proposed regulatory changes: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-01-06/pdf/2013-31068.pdf.
Read it and weep. Then write to your Congressional representatives and protest this worldwide takeover. Those of you who believe that they don't have an oar in these waters, and who refuse to take a stand in these matters, will likely be the ones who cry the loudest after their rights have been revoked by domestic invaders.
Between NOAA and the Navy, there may be no more wreck-diving for Americans ever again. Wreck-diving may soon be nothing more than a memory of lost liberties, or a footnote in the history books, unless they travel to foreign countries that let freedom ring.

 

[MichigandiverJon]

First we have to battle NOAA over the right to dive one rusted ironclad and then deal with an expansion of a sanctuary that goes from 400sq miles to 2500sq mi that encases pretty much the entire northern part of Lake Huron, and now the govt wants restrictions on wrecks that in reality they couldn't care less about. In wonder where the line in the sand will be drawn by divers like us who suffer under the euphinism protection in reality means control.

Jared0425,
I'm of much the same opinion as you. Thunder Bay is where I do most of my serious diving. Those wrecks are why I started diving in the first place. This should be link to the proposed law. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-01-06/pdf/2013-31068.pdf. I intend to write my congressman as I believe every diver and aspiring diver should.

---------- Post added April 9th, 2014 at 10:48 PM ----------

This should be a working link : http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-01-06/pdf/2013-31068.pdf I haven't gotten very far through this bill as it's about as dry as the Sahara for reading. But this looks so far to be the Navy's side of things. I had the NOAA proposition at one time but a computer crash lost it for me. I'll re-post it as soon as I find it unless someone else happens to post it first.

 

[Jared0425]

Well Jon, when we found the Frank Goodyear back in 04' NOAA has tried time and time again to jump us on the site. We lost the WC Franz and HP Bridge to them and now as usual they want to take the artifacts off and "preserve them". I has special access to their wear house and they have over 5000+ artifacts that won't ever see the light of day. Yet we as divers cannot take them and display them in our homes.

 

[mrose]

I didn't read all of it, but it appears to only prohibit disturbing, destroying or removing pieces of the wreck site. I believe there should be rules prohibiting the destruction of military wrecks. However, it will be ridiculous if the law is enforced in a way that restricts or prohibits diving on the wrecks.

 

[tagline]

This proposed rule applies primarily to vessels which where active US Navy at the time they sunk. The USS Spiegel Grove (LSD-32) was owned by the state of Florida at the time of sinking so I don't believe this ruling applies. I believe the ruling is primarily intended at preventing salvage operations on wrecks which are outside of US jurisdiction. They have sunk in international or another countries waters and the US Navy is trying to prevent salvage operations on these vessels.

 

[AfterDark]

Sounds like the Navy has too much time on its hands. They should be protecting our country not wasting time and resources on nonsense like this. The Navy is making regulations for civilans?!?! Where the F does this end! The Navy has jurisdiction over civilians now!!?!??! Good God! Where did America go anyway?

During the 70's and 80's the German govt. complained about divers on the U853 because it was considered a war grave. The Navy sent divers down to weld the hatches shut in an attempt to seal the sub off from penetration.

People I dived with would go down with a cutting torch cut all the welds and we'd continue to dive the sub. The Navy finally removed all the remains they could find from the sub. The Germans stopped complaining and we kept diving.