The Future of Historical Shipwreck Salvage

This article explains how a grass roots organizition like the Historic Shipwreck Policy Council of Florida (HSSPC) was formed, accepted and eventially received acclaim at the State level. The HSSPC has now taken it's success, with the States encouragement, into the International Salvage Arena where it is viewed as a model for other coastal states to form similar organizations.

As many readers may already know the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) is now a reality. On January 28, 1997, the Florida Cabinet voted its approval of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) management plan for the sanctuary.

However, in response to the concerns expressed by many citizens of the Florida Keys, and as a result of the November 4, 1996 non-binding referendum vote in which 55% of the voters in the Keys were against the FKNMS, the Florida Cabinet adopted a set of resolutions that took much of NOAA's all encompassing power away. NOAA must now have the approval of the Florida Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund on a whole host of issues ranging from the imposition of fees, the formulation of emergency regulations, the promulgation of federal fisheries regulations that are more restrictive than those established by Florida, etc., etc. Further, "The final resolution of any management conflicts between the state and federal governments shall be decided by NOAA in the waters of federal jurisdiction and by the Board in state waters."

While there is still much to be done, historical shipwreck recovery by the private sector is guaranteed a place within the management of the FKNMS, particularly those sites within the territorial waters of the State of Florida. To be sure, the days of taking out the boat to a favorite wreck site, dropping down through 15 or 20 feet of clear blue water, unlimbering your favorite metal detector and going for the gold unrestricted are gone. But those days were pretty much gone even before the advent of the FKNMS.

Historical shipwreck salvors (a term I prefer over treasure hunter to describe our efforts to recover treasures, artifacts, historical and archaeological information from sunken shipwrecks and which I first started using some 15 years ago) must begin to realize that we do have a responsibility to ensure that our recovery efforts meet certain minimum standards that will preserve our cumulative collected on site data, historical research and reasonable representative collections of recovered treasures and artifacts, so that future generations can share in the excitement, adventure and knowledge that we are fortunate enough to be involved in recovering.

Failure to do so will result in the end of private sector recovery of historical shipwrecks. This will be brought about by a handful of well connected government and university archaeologists who covet the shipwrecks of Florida for themselves. Not particularly for their archaeological or historical importance, which in most cases is limited, but rather because they represent potential sources of government grants.

Indeed it is important that everyone be cognizant of the real historical and archaeological importance of the shipwrecks lost off the Florida coast, and not just what some would have us believe.

First, what would be considered an historically important shipwreck? A criteria for this evaluation might include the following. Those vessels which played a significant and pivotal role in history either as a result of their sinking or in their use within their lifetime. These might include vessels lost while on voyages of colonization or exploration or vessels lost in important major or key naval battles or engagements, etc. The vast majority of vessels lost off the coast of Florida will not fit this definition as most were only engaged in seaborne commerce. While their losses may have caused financial hardships for individuals, companies or governments, they rarely played significant roles in the overall evolution of history.

Next would be the criteria for what is archaeologically important. Using stringent scientific criteria for artifacts or sites to be construed as being of archaeological importance, they must add significant, previously unknown data to the world body of knowledge pertaining to a given culture, time frame or technology. The collection of redundant data is not good science, nor is it a cost effective use of public funds and resources.

Over the last 30 years hundreds of shipwrecks have been discovered and explored off the coast of Florida and in the Caribbean. Millions of artifacts have been recovered of many types and categories. We are now to the point where these types and categories of artifacts have become extremely redundant, and while many may have significant intrinsic value and are interesting or beautiful, most have ceased to impart relative new data. Additionally, the majority of these artifacts, from virtually every time period over the last 500 years, exist in much more pristine condition, having never suffered the effects of sea immersion , in museums around the world.

To be sure, and this is something that every historical shipwreck salvor and even casual collectors must remember, every historical shipwreck site must be explored with the assumption that it might yield new and unknown data to the world body of knowledge and therefore exploration and recovery must always be carried out under applicable, reasonable, and acceptable archaeological guidelines. However, historical shipwrecks should never be used in a whole sale manner by government archaeologists and/or government agencies for the purpose of gaining access to the public coffers in order to use tax payers dollars for spurious or questionable shipwreck related projects that have little chance of yielding previously unknown archaeological data nor will prove to be of pivotal historical importance.

Additionally, it only makes good sense for salvors to keep accurate on site data as most shipwrecks are spread over miles of ocean bottom. It is only through the compilation and evaluation of accurate on site date that the modern salvor can hope to maximize his recoveries and understanding of the site he or she is exploring. Further, the legacy of accurate information the salvor leaves behind will help future salvors and archaeologists to interpret and explore the shipwrecks of Florida.

Florida has one of the most historically important and intrinsically valuable collections of new world shipwreck artifacts and treasure in the world, virtually all of it provided by the private sector at little or no cost to the taxpayers. Further, this information has been disseminated by the private sector to the public through every media source available making Florida's shipwrecks the most famous and well researched in the world. Private sector salvors have been the driving force behind the acquisition of knowledge relating to Florida's maritime heritage.

The FKNMS plan did not bode well for the future of private sector exploration and recovery within the FKNMS. For instance, the plan required that to even get a permit for exploration and recovery the permitee would have to be a degreed archaeologist or anthropologist. This criteria alone would eliminate 99.9% of the salvors and the draft was full of other stipulations clearly designed to eliminate private sector recovery within the FKNMS.

Needless to say salvors in the Keys and around the state were up in arms over this plan, but there was no clear or coordinated direction in which the salvors could move. Then in May of 1995 a meeting was set up by Keys salvors Jay Usher and Taras Lysenko between the salvors, NOAA and the DHR, in Marathon, in the Florida Keys. The meeting was well attended by the salvage community with about 100 people present. Such Keys salvors as Mel Fisher, Kane Fisher, Don Washington, Jack Haskins, Bobby Jordan, Chuck Mitchell, Joe Kimbell, Kevin McKee, Pat Clyne, PT Rampy and many others were in attendance. In addition salvors from other parts of the state, such as myself, were also there.

It was clear that all of the salvors present at this meeting were against the FKNMS plan as written and after much shouting and leveling of grievances, one side against the other, it was suggested by FKNMS superintendent Billy Causey that the salvors form a committee to provide input into the FKNMS plan.

This was done on the spot, with the salvors present nominating and electing 10 representatives. Although several members have changed, this committee of 10 which we chose to call the Historic Shipwreck Salvage Policy Council or HSSPC, has remained essentially unchanged. Our members currently consist of Mel Fisher, Don Washington, Jack Haskins (who also sits on the FKNMS Citizens Advisory Counsel) Pat Clyne, PT Rampy, Chuck Mitchell, Jay Usher, Gordon Cotrell, and myself, John Brandon.

HSSPC also critiqued the SCRs sections of the FKNMS management plan line by line. We also drafted a position statement, archaeological guidelines and division guidelines among other documents and letters.

As we completed these documents we forwarded them to NOAA. At a meeting of NOAA's own hand picked Citizens Advisory Council, in Marathon, in 1996, and much to NOAA's dismay, their council voted approval of the changes HSSPC had recommended to the FKNMS draft management plan. They did this to send a clear message to NOAA to work with the private sector salvors. NOAA chose mostly to ignore this suggestion.

HSSPC continued to negotiate with Jim Miller of the DHR, Ole Varmer, NOAA attorney and Bruce Terrell, NOAA archaeologist/historian. Some gains were made but much more needed to be accomplished.

Secretary of State Mortham appointed her chief cabinet aide, Paul Mitchell, to work with HSSPC , the DHR and NOAA to come up with a plan that will accommodate everyone as nearly as is possible and be in the best interest of the people of Florida and the tax payers. Of course it will be impossible to please everyone. Some federal and state archaeologists want absolutely no private sector recovery in the FKNMS. On the other hand, some salvors don’t want to work under any type of archaeological guidelines no matter how reasonable.

HSSPC believed that somewhere in between these extreme views there must lie a middle ground which would allow all parties to get at least some of what they want. The salvors to be able to continue to search for and recover shipwrecks within the FKNMS, and the archaeologist to ensure it is done in a proper manner. On the other hand, it would be certain that all parties would also have to give up some things that they might have liked. But such is the nature of compromise.

Secretary of State Mortham, working through Paul Mitchell, has been instrumental in getting us to the point we are today. Paul has worked very hard to keep the process of negotiation alive and moving forward and the Secretary up to date on what progress is being made.

In November of 1996 a second draft management plan for the FKNMS was released to the public. A number of the suggestions made by HSSPC were incorporated into this new document that clearly moved us in the right direction. After that document was released we made even more progress. Some of our gains are listed below:

1. You no longer have to be an archaeologist or anthropologist to obtain a permit.
2. No permit is required at all to conduct non-intrusive searches, such as magnetometer surveys. If you discover something you can then go through the permitting process. On the other hand if you are fairly certain you know where something is, say through archival research for instance, you can still get a search permit for that area and that will give you first option at obtaining a recovery permit.
3. Bonds may not be required of those who can show a prior ability to complete projects.
4. Insurance for treasures and artifacts may be waived if the salvor can demonstrate safe storage of same, such as a safe deposit box.
5. The salvor will be in charge of the project as principle permitee, with an approved archaeologist as a consultant to ensure the archaeological guidelines are met.
6. The archaeologist will not have to be on board at all times but may designate an archaeological assistant who will ensure all records and procedures are properly kept and followed.
7. Artifacts and treasures will be available for deacession (division) to the salvor if it is determined that the artifacts and treasures are of little historical importance and/or if a representative cross section of the recovered artifacts and treasures are retained in the public possession.
8. Deacessions (divisions) will occur on a yearly basis after the permitee submits his report for the prior field season. A final report will be required at the end of the salvors project.
9. The State will act as a repository for the governments share of the treasures and artifacts or the salvor may make arrangements with an approved repository of his choice to provide public access to his recoveries. Some salvors may wish for their finds to be displayed in a more local forum rather than in Tallahassee.
10. The salvor will maintain possession of the treasures and artifacts until the time of deacession (division).

These are just a few of the things that are now part of the FKNMS management plan that are in favor of continued private sector recovery, along with many others, but more needs to be done.

Of course there are also a number of environmental concerns in the Florida Keys, which is why the FKNMS was formed in the first place. While none of these concerns can be traced back to the activities of salvors, they are much more vast than the limited excavations carried out by salvors, it has created a heightened awareness of future excavations that may take place. As a result, stricter rules and regulations will be in place regulating excavation, particularly in areas of sea grass and live coral.

This does not mean that excavation might not take place, but rather greater care might need to be exercised in some areas. For instance, in excavating very close to a live reef prop wash deflectors (blowers) might not be appropriate. Injection dredges or airlifts might be the more environmentally sound methodology. On the other hand in areas of sand or mud, prop wash excavation might still prove viable.

As with other matter concerning SCR’s, the creation of the FKNMS did not bring about this situation. Excavation anywhere in state waters, and at least 80% of the shallow waters where shipwrecks are likely to be found in the FKNMS are within State waters, now require Sate DEP permits and federal Army Corp. of Engineer permits. This is with or without the FKNMS being in place. Once again this is a reality that salvors will have to deal with now and in the future.

As most salvors already know, points of excavation readily fill in from natural wave action, sea grasses grow back and excavation can take place in areas of live coral without damaging this natural resource. Hopefully, as time goes on and we work with the DEP, Army Corps. Of Engineers and NOAA, a base line of data will emerge to support these facts.

HSSPC remains in a position to effect change within the system that will benefit the private sector salvors and the people of Florida and we are committed to doing the best we can. The members of HSSPC have spent considerable amounts of their own monies and invested hundreds of man hours in the drafting, re-drafting and submitting of documents to various governmental agencies.

We are making progress and feel that if in the end we can produce a system where the members of HSSPC can continue to carry out explorations and recoveries within the FKNMS , then most anyone should be able to do the same.

While other states with shipwreck potential languish because of a few narrow minded, opportunistic and opinionated archaeologists advising them not to work with the private sector, it is hoped that Florida will continue to fill its museums with treasures and artifacts and its libraries with archaeological and historical data, as it has in the past, by working with the private sector. In this manner Florida will continue to bring its maritime heritage alive for its people and the people of the world.