90 replies to this topic

[hesmond]

Well matey boy yes wreck diver with 23 years experince diveing on wrecks from English Channel, Atlantic ,Carribien, and the Med ,dives include Boston Traders ,Spitfires ,Sunderland ,the odd Great War bits and WW2 destroyers ,have seen with my own eyes what has been done by divers ,from taking not only portholes ,but personel items from wrecks that were later designated War Graves ,yes you will only get the take only pictures comments but that sounds all well and good ,the reality is somewhat diffrent .

[Simon Mills]

hesmond, on 04 February 2012 - 10:11 PM, said:

Well matey boy yes wreck diver with 23 years experince diveing on wrecks from English Channel, Atlantic ,Carribien, and the Med ,dives include Boston Traders ,Spitfires ,Sunderland ,the odd Great War bits and WW2 destroyers ,have seen with my own eyes what has been done by divers ,from taking not only portholes ,but personel items from wrecks that were later designated War Graves ,yes you will only get the take only pictures comments but that sounds all well and good ,the reality is somewhat diffrent .

Quite true. As I said in an earlier post in this thread (#36), while most diving agencies have a "look but don't touch" policy, inevitably there will always be a number of rogue divers who will give little thought to ripping a bell off a mast when they see one. I also know for a fact that in 2001 the UK Receiver of Wreck had a three-month divers' amnesty, during which 4,616 reports were filed, covering something in the region of 30,000 items that had been illegally retrieved and landed.

As you say, the reality is VERY different to what we would like to believe is the truth...

[MichaelBully]

You're probably right SImon. Perhaps the best we can hope for is that the interest in the Aboukir, Hogue, and Cressy will help protect other wrecks, but there is not more that we can do here. Regards, Michael Bully

Simon Mills, on 04 February 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

Michael,

My gut instinct is that in spite of the best of intentions there is little or nothing that anyone can now do insofar as Aboukir, Hogue and Cressy are concerned. Realistically all that may possibly be done is agree a future structure to ensure that any government wrecks that are sold -- or possibly those that may have been sold after the 1986 Act came into force, although that could still potentially leave the purchaser with strong grounds for a legal case -- are given better protection.

S.

[Marshal Ney]

Grant

[u]Ps - How many War memorials have been stolen for their scrap value ?
[/quote]

[/u]Hi Grant
Are you generalising over the years or referring to the latest crimes since metal has become valuable.

MN

[hesmond]

When the gold was salvaged from HMS Edinburgh ,it was known the magazine where the gold had been stored ,to acess this area divers cut in through the area where the sailors killed during the air attacks had been left ,this was known by MOD and all the agreements were given ,human remains were removed and brought to the surface ,at the conclusion of the dive there was a service held and the contents tipped back in to the sea ,if you dont belive it just watch the documentry made at the time and shown on TV ,money talks MOD turn a blind eye ,also rember what happened with HMS Natal when she was ripped open by the RN in the 70s their comment "oh after this amount of time there will be no human remains ? " divers removed many personel items including medals ,ID plates from ditty boxes and the Mayors chain was recoverd ,note Mayor was wearing it when she blew up ! and yes plenty of remains were found and put back on the wreck .

And you know when the Mary Rose was recoverd 100s of human remains were found and that sunk some time previous to both Cressy and Natal ,those remains were treated somewhat diffrent ,great to know the RN looks after its own ?

[Grantowi]

Marshal Ney, on 05 February 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

Hi Grant
Are you generalising over the years or referring to the latest crimes since metal has become valuable.

MN

No, MN,
It was in response to the poster who stated that people wouldn't desegrate a war grave memorial on land, but considers that evert diver is removing items from wrecks.
The quote at the top of my post might give you some idea

Grant

[Grantowi]

hesmond, on 05 February 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

HMS Natal when she was ripped open by the RN in the 70s their comment "oh after this amount of time there will be no human remains ? " divers removed many personel items including medals ,ID plates from ditty boxes and the Mayors chain was recoverd ,note Mayor was wearing it when she blew up !

Were these diver sport divers, RN divers or salvage divers ?

Grant

[hesmond]

Offical RN exercise well documented and the officer incharge if rember at the time was given a New Years award ,the wreck was reduced as the MOD were concerned the wreck was a danger to shipping ? that was the offical line ,any way well documented and at the time there were arguments as to why this was being done and the desacration of a grave .

[Grantowi]

MN,

Might be better off starting a new thread on that one, it will only take this thread away from the title post

Grant

[ph0ebus]

Grantowi, on 06 February 2012 - 09:54 PM, said:

MN,

Might be better off starting a new thread on that one, it will only take this thread away from the title post

Grant

This topic has been discussed ad nauseum here on the GWF and in other places before.  There is and will never be a consensus reached, because people hold wildly different views on what is and is not acceptable.  Just today I started a thread with a link to some fellow's posts who thinks it is perfectly acceptible to dig up battlefields and take home unexploded ordinances, and when he finds human remains, take pictures and make his own little wooden crosses for them but not go so far as to inform the local authorities.

I second Grant's call to keep this on point.  What can be done in regards to these three ships?  I gather the answer is not much, but if someone knows different, I hope they join in.

-Daniel

[Marshal Ney]

OK you two I take the point. Mind you phoebus that thread you mention is an eye opener.
I have placed the post in my word document for a rainy day.
Now deleting the post.
See what a reasonable chap I am.

Regards MN

[ph0ebus]

Marshal Ney, on 06 February 2012 - 10:09 PM, said:

OK you two I take the point. Mind you phoebus that thread you mention is an eye opener.
I have placed the post in my word document for a rainy day.
Now deleting the post.
See what a reasonable chap I am.

Regards MN

Absolutely reasonable!  An extra fig roll to that man!

I would love to read what stipulations, if any, the salvage company has to abide by should they find anything in the way of personal items relating to the crew.

-Daniel

[auchonvillerssomme]

We are quite selective when it comes to deciding what we should and should not desecrate, quite happy to dig a WW1 tank up for us to gawk at or years of watching Baldrick commentating on a few hairy men (and women) digging up human remains and making money for himself and TV director/execs. We view these remains in museums but perhaps desecration in the name of 'education' or entertainment is different?

I have items of equipment, ID tags and personal items found on the Somme and other areas, I don't disturb human remains and report any I have found, am I desecrater? Probably according to some but I make no apologies.

[Simon Mills]

ph0ebus, on 06 February 2012 - 10:36 PM, said:

I would love to read what stipulations, if any, the salvage company has to abide by should they find anything in the way of personal items relating to the crew.

I think I can answer that question...

The British government has the absolute right to sell its own property, but the rights to any personal items belonging either to the crew or even a commercial cargo are usually not included in the fine print. The cargo remains the property of the original owner or their insurer (unless reimbursed by HMG), while any personal items remain (in theory at least) the property of the descendants.

The real trick is establishing a convincing provenance. If the salvage company were to start bringing up personal items then the family of the sailor concerned do legally have a claim. However, establishing a solid provenance for any item would be incredibly unlikely and even if they could do so they would probably have to refund the salvage company for any of the associated retrieval costs. These would probably be quite considerable, so it's unlikely that any such claims would be made...

Generally speaking, though, salvage companies aren't there to pick up personal items; for them it's generally a side issue in the greater scheme of things. Sport divers, however, are another matter...

S.

[MichaelBully]

Seems that Henk van der Linden , author of 'Drie Massgraven voor De Nederlandse Kust'  ('Three Massgraves off the Dutch Coast' from 2010 ) and the Dutch divers organisation 'Bescherm een Wrak ' ('Protect  a wreck') are joining forces to make a documentary, about the sinking. The focus will be on HMS Aboukir  . This from a Brabant newspaper ,(  in Dutch )


http://www.brabantsd...ereldoorlog.ece

Mentions a 'cadet'  Ducan Stubbs : I think that this must mean Midshipman John Duncan Stubbs who died on HMS Aboukir.

http://www.cwgc.org/...20JOHN%20DUNCAN

Regards
Michael Bully

EDIT 'Bescherm een Wrak'  -'Protect'.... is an improved translation of 'Bescherm'  ( rather than 'defend' )

[MichaelBully]

Seems that Dutch TV are working on a documentary to be screened in 2013.Looking at the history of  HMS Aboukir, HMS Cressy and  HMS Hogue
the current state and the future of the wrecks.

A website is under construction
http://www.livebaitsquadron.com/


http://www.duikdenoo...gelse-kruisers/