Wreck legislation

[Richard Greenwood]

Count me in too.

[chas49]

Claire
Add me to the list!
Actually - presumably you could just post the text of the letter here for everyone to use rather than running a list???

[jptaylor9]

Claire
Add me to the list!
Actually - presumably you could just post the text of the letter here for everyone to use rather than running a list???

Don't give people text to paste into their faxes.

Spamming lots of MPs with near-identical faxes is definitely bad behaviour in our book. This is our most common reason for blocking a campaign. (Click here for more information.) Instead, provide a short list of points which people should address in their own words.

See: http://www.faxyourmp.com/guidelines.php3

[Clare]

The Fax your MP website is to be used to contact your own MP only. No-one on here is suggesting that multiple faxes are sent by any one diver to more than one MP.

Co-ordinated campaigns are effective in Westminster - they get talked about in the corridors at the House. There is no need to avoid using a standard letter - if there were I would not have had to answer letters from Oxfam, the RSPCA, the Countryside Alliance and Age Concern today.

[Brian of Aquanauts]

I just read the whole document "Protecting our Marine Historic Environment: Making the system work better"

It is extremely short sighted and focused entirely on the false idea that underwater items are better preserved in situ. They therefore think that diving on wrecks should be prohibited. The words Diver and Salvager are often used in the same sentence. The author does not understand what the modern diver is.

This must have been written by a "non marine" archeologist, as they certainly don't understand the marine environment. There is not one argument in the whole document against preservation in situ...

Bri

Unfortunately it is complacency that "It will never happen" which leads most Governments to say 'well no-one complained'

Have a look here...
http://www.culture.gov.uk/historic_environment/heritage_protection_review/#2

I'll sort something out tomorrow and post it up for comment.

[Brian of Aquanauts]

"Question 13 How should the heritage agencies seek to encourage public access, both physical and virtual, to marine historic assets?

70% of respondents answered this question For many people the marine historic environment is remote, only accessible to and understood by those who dive or have technical knowledge of it. All those who responded were in favour of widening access to the marine historic environment and were keen to suggest ways to enable this.... SNIP...

Some respondents felt that increased access would not only open up the marine historic environment to a wider audience but would help to prevent intrusive and potentially destructive diving practices and encourage a safe environment to explore. However, some respondents focused on methods of opening up historic sites to divers, including increasing dive trails and visitor licences."

Hmmmm... they seem to keep forgetting that their own survey results show that access by divers should be increased.

And yep just checked not a single diving organisation on the working groups, just lots museums, loads of archeologists, the MCA, ROW and a couple of salvagers. This needs PADI, BSAC, SAA, PSA, IANTD, TDI, GUE, Scotsac etc etc etc

[Seadart Bob]

so fall in lads, behind the drum!
colours blazing like the sun,
along the road to come what may,
over the hills and far away.

wot he said and add me to the list.

Bob

[resting rifleman]

Won't happen, too many livleyhoods would go down the pan.

didnt they say the same thing about the coal industry?
car manufacturing
shipbuilding
i'm gonna stop there,................. i'm depressed.:bandit:

[ANDY 64]

Originally Posted by Mike Rowley, BSAC Forums
At the Plymouth wreck conference at the weekend leaflets were circulated concerning two Governmental review groups that are currently looking at wreck legislation. These groups have been formed by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport. One group is looking at salvage law, the other at wreck designation and protection.
Among the propsals being considered it is aleged that the following are on the table;
1 All wrecks over 50 years old to be designated as historic wrecks and protected as such.
2 Mandatory that divers report all items or wrecks they find to the government
3 Salvage awards to be abolished
4 A massive extension of the number of Designated sites and protected wrecks under the Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 to include any wreck that involved any loss of life, whether military or merchant seaman.
The leaflet also stated that the DCM&S will not allow any representation on these working groups from the Diving organisations.
Has anyone heard anything about this?
Cheers
Mike

Time to take up golf?
JT

It's all talk...........typical Department of Culture, Media and Sport afternoon tea chin dribble.

We had this 5 - 6 years ago when UNESCO stepped in and what a load of cock and ball that was.
Just another scare, i think........

[darthmoll]

I just read the whole document "Protecting our Marine Historic Environment: Making the system work better"
It is extremely short sighted and focused entirely on the false idea that underwater items are better preserved in situ. They therefore think that diving on wrecks should be prohibited. The words Diver and Salvager are often used in the same sentence. The author does not understand what the modern diver is.
This must have been written by a "non marine" archeologist, as they certainly don't understand the marine environment. There is not one argument in the whole document against preservation in situ...
Bri

Tell us what is the modern diver?

What i read on here seems to indicate that divers cant be trusted to look and not touch, we only have ourselves to blame for this, when will divers learn that if they want to get up to wreck plundering, they should do it in a quiet way and not draw attention to it, or better still just leave it all where it is.

I have to admit it makes me smile to think that we are very ready to accept the fact that wrecks will be robbed, or just vadilised, i remmember the SS Kintyre, when it had a wheel and all the old victorian toilets, all removed or destroyed now, also the Wallacia used to have jars on the deck, those to are all gone or destroyed. if this was an above water archaeological site how many of us would think that it was cool to take what you wanted from it. Only guessing but i think nobody would aggree, and rightly so.

Of course i will be writing to my MP, but what a pity i wont be able to say in the letter that divers can be trusted not to rob wrecks, it makes it hard to argue why we should be allowed to dive on what really are in many cases time capsuals of the past.