Richie Kohler accused of looting

[LVX]

No, I am not against private ownership but my question is where do you draw the line. Or do you? Should it always be finder's keepers. I am an underwater archaeologist and am very familiar with the problems of small or even large museums as well as state archives and state red tape. I also do believe in the rights of divers to be able to dive on wrecks.

My question is really where do you draw the line. For instance the wreck I mentioned I worked which sank in 1685, If a private person had found this shipwreck and then did not tell a soul about it (I don't want to bring up legal concerns regarding Texas laws) how would anyone know to contact him. Also, it is one of the most significant shipwrecks in Texas' history. Should it not be in a museum?

I am working with a private group now looking for Spanish shipwrecks. The private group is spending their own money to survey, locate, excavate and conserve all artifacts found. To recoup their costs they are building several museums in various locations (at their own expense) to display the remains. I can't go into all the details but they want to recoup their expenses from ticket sales for the museums, replicas, books and videos.

To me that is a better solution. Maybe wreck divers could do the same. Get a group together to fund a small museum in their area and get some of their money back in the same way.

As far as art is concerned, they were bought and paid for from one owner to the next. Shipwreck remains were lost at sea. Not really comparing apples to apples if you ask me.

 

[Zieg]

Mike, you hit it on the head.

 

[aue-mike]

No, I am not against private ownership but my question is where do you draw the line. Or do you?

historical significance. and that is not defined by time alone. as an archaeologist you know you can find an interesting aspect of a shipwreck, its crew, its builders, etc., if you dig deep enough (bad pun). but is it *really* significant, or just a neat fact? my group has independently or cooperatively identified almost 30 shipwrecks, and only a couple were really historically significant. and we immediately reported our findings to archaeologists, etc. however, due to issues working with some groups and many within the archaeological community constantly villifying wreck divers, I am not sure how open we will be about future findings. and - unfortunately - that may explain why many others opt to keep things to themselves.

there are and have been lots of "museums" with the same idea your group has. not many have fared well, and go under after some time. then what happens to the artifacts?

in a perfect world and as a shipwreck nut I think we should raise, conserve, and display everything. but that just aint gonna happen. there are no easy answers and you will never please everyone. while I respect your opinion, I simply disagree with it.

 

[cdiver2]

No, I am not against private ownership but my question is where do you draw the line. Or do you? Should it always be finder's keepers. I am an underwater archaeologist and am very familiar with the problems of small or even large museums as well as state archives and state red tape. I also do believe in the rights of divers to be able to dive on wrecks.

My question is really where do you draw the line. For instance the wreck I mentioned I worked which sank in 1685, If a private person had found this shipwreck and then did not tell a soul about it (I don't want to bring up legal concerns regarding Texas laws) how would anyone know to contact him. Also, it is one of the most significant shipwrecks in Texas' history. Should it not be in a museum?

I am working with a private group now looking for Spanish shipwrecks. The private group is spending their own money to survey, locate, excavate and conserve all artifacts found. To recoup their costs they are building several museums in various locations (at their own expense) to display the remains. I can't go into all the details but they want to recoup their expenses from ticket sales for the museums, replicas, books and videos.

To me that is a better solution. Maybe wreck divers could do the same. Get a group together to fund a small museum in their area and get some of their money back in the same way.

As far as art is concerned, they were bought and paid for from one owner to the next. Shipwreck remains were lost at sea. Not really comparing apples to apples if you ask me.

An example

Near where I used to live was a Spanish Galleon. Lots of gold, silver and jewels. A lot of the treasure is in a museum room devoted to the wreck for everyone to see.
(See Photos)

However there is a local man that also has a lot of artifacts unknown to the ROW. They are hidden away where very few people get to see them (mostly family).

What is going to happen to them? he can not sell them on the open market, black market, he would get less than 1/2 the true value and if he did, what then, hidden away again by the new owner.

If he hands them down in the family how long before they come into the hands of a drunk or druggie sold for a six pack or snort.

The last part I think would also apply to things like ships bells, while it means a lot to you and maybe the next generation it will mean less and less as it is handed on, just another thing to clean.

Yes you may want to show it off to friends, how about the stranger that comes knocking at your door asking to see it 5-10 years down the road.

A ships bell was recovered from a wreck I used to dive I found out who had it and e mailed asking if they would e me a photo for my log book, lots of E's no replies

(Last photo was supposed to be a Emerald dragon not a dragonfly)

 

[aue-mike]

As far as art is concerned, they were bought and paid for from one owner to the next. Shipwreck remains were lost at sea. Not really comparing apples to apples if you ask me.

I do think its a fair comparison. If the artifacts were legally recovered, either via Admiralty Arrest (e.g., John Chatterton's project on the REPUBLIC or Moyer's DORIA work) or thru channels like ROW, etc. then its legally theirs ("bought and paid for").

Regardless, I don't think a bell off a historically insignificant wreck would be deemed more, or anywhere as near as, important to society as a whole than a masterpiece by a classical or influential artist that is discussed in classes, written about in numerous books, generates stupid amounts of money at auction, and any museum curator would give their left nut to have it on display in their museum.

 

[LVX]

ok, you win... : )

 

[aue-mike]

ok, you win... : )

that was a forgone conclusion - we were just waiting for you to realize it.

 

[Mike Veitch]

two guys in palau got arrested for removing artifacts from a WWII ship there back in 2006 or 2005, one did 6 months jail, the other did a year. Fine was in the tens of thousands of dollars...

not really relevent to the original topic of this thread but yes, some governments treat that sort of thing quite seriously and it can pay quite serious consequences.

 

[lamont]

So how do we allow mike to recover a bell from a ship in order to identify it while at the same time preventing simple outright vandalism like what happened to the warren car here in Washington?

Purely selfishly, I'd rather do something to prevent validalism, even if its not perfect, at the cost of the kind of research mike is doing. I'm never going to get to see the warren car how it was back when it was first discovered, and its in freshwater so there's no reason it couldn't still be in very good condition. That is what I care about.

More than just that ... it sometimes results in what would be a fascinating look at history being placed off-limits to everybody.

There was a famous case out here in Lake Crescent ... a disappearance of a couple in the 1920's that remained a mystery until just a few years ago, when someone located their car at about 170 feet in Lake Crescent. A painstaking effort was made to positively identify both the car and the human remains found in it ... to the tremendous relief of grandchildren and greatgrandchildren. The car was declared a grave site, located in a national park ... but divers were allowed to dive it.

Over the next year or so, pieces of the car started disappearing ... first the headlights, then the bumpers, then the spare tire ... even the roof. Today, little remains except this ...

>>>Lake Crescent Dive Project<<<

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Mike Edmonston]

Purely selfishly, I'd rather do something to prevent validalism, even if its not perfect, at the cost of the kind of research mike is doing. I'm never going to get to see the warren car how it was back when it was first discovered, and its in freshwater so there's no reason it couldn't still be in very good condition. That is what I care about.

Ok, I see your point. But who sais that you are ENTITLED to see anything?? Just because it's sunk does not automatically give anyone the right to proclaim that it must remain intact for future generations, at the expense of identification.

Think of it this way,

A father and son diving a wreck that can't be touched. "wow dad, nice dive, what was the name of that ship?.. Don't know son... How did it sink?.. Can't help you there either. Do we know anything about this ship?.. Sorry son, we can't even touch it! How will we ever know what happened??? Can't help you there either, but we did see some great rusting hull plates didn't we??"

Personally, I would rather know what happened at the expense of a few artifacts, as it gives the dive meaning and purpose.

And, having spent the last 5 days wreck diving with Richie, I can tell you that he's as stand up of a guy as I have ever met!

Safe Diving