Removing items from the USS Oriskany (interesting dilemma)

[Diver Dennis]

I think it depends on who owns or manages the wreck SB. I know for instance in Truk, we were told there are serious penalties for removing anything. In fact there was a sign saying that they had the right to search dive bags at Blue Lagoon.

 

[SparticleBrane]

I don't really see a problem with taking stuff from an actual wreck (read: not an artificial reef) that isn't secured--china, silverware, things like that.

I'm iffy about having to physically remove it from the wreck though, like hammering/chiseling/cutting it off.

 

[H2Andy]

i don't see a big deal with taking objects off an unprotected wreck either. let's face it, it's going to happen.

my problem is with taking things from protected sites. people should play by the rules of the wreck they are diving, and if the wreck they are diving is off limits, then
they deserve whatever they get if they break the rules.

these folks went ahead and spent a ton of money to sink the Oriskany, so it's
"their house" and they are inviting us to visit. we should at the very least obey
the house rules.

 

[Jason B]

The ship was a piece of junk that was stripped, had holes cut in it, and sunk.

Un-wad panties and go dive.

 

[H2Andy]

Un-wad panties and go dive.

Jason B, is there some secret about you you want to share with others?

 

[mike_s]

I don't really see a problem with taking stuff from an actual wreck (read: not an artificial reef) that isn't secured--china, silverware, things like that.

I'm iffy about having to physically remove it from the wreck though, like hammering/chiseling/cutting it off.

Well don't all "actual wrecks" in reality become "artificial reefs" in the end?

(whether they were intended to be sunk for that purpose or not... they will become an artificial reef.)

 

[K Mejean]

The ship was a piece of junk that was stripped, had holes cut in it, and sunk.

Un-wad panties and go dive.

I think I catch a hint of sarcasm in that statement. It must be because I doubt you know who among us is actually wearing panties to have them in a wad. Some of us might be going commando!!!!!!!!

 

[SparticleBrane]

Well don't all "actual wrecks" in reality become "artificial reefs" in the end?

(whether they were intended to be sunk for that purpose or not... they will become an artificial reef.)

Wasn't quite what I was going for. With the artificial reefs that are purposefully sunk, they've usually been stripped. In a normal wreck they still have everything onboard.

 

[DA Aquamaster]

This isn't quite a national treasure.

Not a national treasure? It's one of only two diveable carriers in the world, it represents the Essex class carriers, the largest single class of carriers in history, carriers that served this country through WWII, Korea, Vietnam as well as numerous recovery missions during the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo space programs, and it was the genesis of modern angled deck naval aviation in the US Navy.

What more do you need for it to be considered a national treasure?

And simply because the fed gov't decides it can change the boundaries and claim new things, doesn't mean a state can.

Come on, I know we got some lawyers on this site, any opining as to case law or precendent for this?

A state can if the federal government says they can.

And it's not as much a legal issue as it is a moral issue - one of repect and consideration for others. Even if it were legal (which it is not, depite your own perosnal views and wishes) it is clearly wrong and represents a situation where the wants of an individual come at the cost of denying everyone else the history and enjoyment of an item bought and paid for not only by public funds by the service and sacrifice of decades of dedicated Oriskany crew members.

 

[Guba]

Undergarments in a constricted and compressed state? ("panties in a wad...")
.......checking........

Nope, mine are right where they should be. However, JasonB, that does not mean this is not a concern for the diving community. That word...community...implies a group of people who co-exist together, respect certain rights, agree to certain moral codes, and abide by the precepts of fair and responsible behavior. If one should think that taking items from a governed site that was placed by and is being maintained for the benefit of ALL, then they are violating the very definition of "community". It is very fitting that the other members of said community should be alarmed, repulsed, angry, indignant, and disgusted by theives of what should be communal property (if it were allowed to stay in its proper place). After all, to disregard these ideas means a person could hack down a redwood, plough roads through pristine desert, carve out archaelogical symbols from Anasazi land, and plunder just about any of the state and national parks they should choose. If taking these items is not in your definition of "wrong", please make sure your undergarments are straight and dive in YOUR back yard...not mine.