Odyssey Marine Exploration sinks after judge rules $500 million treasure belongs

[wreckdiver1715]

mariner, as I understand it, and I'm no legal expert in maritime law, contiguous zone were established in the early 80's to give nations some authority to protect there shores from off shore dumping, preventing foreign fishing fleets from depleting fish resources, and foregin oil companies from depleting a nations natural resources. I have not read anything indicating that shipwrecks are considered as under control of any nations contiguous zone.
If you are correct, then yes it would be an issue in the case of the Sussex. However, there are bigger issues concerning territorial waters between Spain and Gibraltar that will have to be resolved first.

PS Gibraltar is an awesome place to visit if your a history buff.


Tom

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[jeff k]

Tom... Were the monkeys a problem while you were up there? I heard they could be pretty viscous at times.

 

[wreckdiver1715]

LOL, yea Jeff they are nasty little buggers, bit one of my buds in the hand, and defecated on another.

 

[architecad]

Treasure-diver quote

I would dump every last coin back into the 3500 foot deep before I turned it over to Spain. I'm sorry but I feel if a company puts the effort into locating a treasure over 200 years old they own it. Where has the Spanish government been for 200 years? Why don't you ever hear of a country finding a treasure like this? Because they aren't looking for it! They wait till a professional and/or amateur treasure hunter finds it then Everyone wants a piece of it. And states and governments wonder why no one wants to report valuable finds, heck they aren't even willing to share they want it all with no work what so ever. Lose lips sink ships. Thanks for listening to my rant.

What kind of mentality,.dump to the water 400 years of history in coins. Just use your brain, since the beginning never-ever Odyssey had the intention to share and recognize those 500 million with any country but it's "cousins" England or Englishman or whatever,...

 

[mariner]

WD1715,

When President Clinton established the US contiguous zone through Presidential Declaration # 7219 in 1999, one of the specific reasons cited for it was increased protection of underwater cultural heritage, so control over wrecks is a key aspect of the contiguous zone.

Great photos: Reminds me of the old Boy Scout song:

"Skipper's portrait lies a hanging on the wall
Next to the picture of the monkey in the hall
The worst of it all
Is that no-one knows at all
Which of the two is Skipper."

Don't worry, Tom. I am practically certain I know which is which, though each looks as if it could deliver a nasty bite!

Best wishes,

Mariner

 

[wreckdiver1715]

mariner, LOL!

I will have to do some research on that. The law establishing the contiguous zones is international maritime law under the espouses of the UN. Each nation has to apply as it is not automatic. I'm thinking that President Clinton may have made underwater cultural heritage an issue when the US established its contiguous zone. However, I doubt that it would also apply to any other nation unless they specifically added that when they applied to the UN. All I am sure of at this time is that Spain did also add a contiguous zone. Research time!

Tom

 

[jeff k]

"Extension of the contiguous zone of the United States to the limits permitted by international law will advance the law en-forcement and public health interests of the United States. Moreover, this extension is an important step in preventing the removal of cultural heritage found within 24 nautical miles of the baseline."

"Nothing in this proclamation:
(a) amends existing Federal or State law;
(b) amends or otherwise alters the rights
and duties of the United States or
other nations in the Exclusive Economic
Zone of the United States established
by Proclamation 5030 of March 10, 1983; or
(c) impairs the determination, in accordance
with international law, of any maritime
boundary of the United States with a foreign
jurisdiction."


http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/WCPD-1999-09-06/pdf/WCPD-1999-09-06-Pg1684.pdf

 

[wreckdiver1715]

kinda like the difference between "may" and "will".

 

[ivan salis]

"will" and "shall" are two little words that have very special legal meanings

 

[mariner]

Gentlemen,

The last two posts about "will" and "shall" and "will" and "may" are just red herrings, and though Jeff tries to cast doubt on the meaning of the declaration, there is none.

Saying that the establishment of the contiguous zone is an important step in preventing the removal of cultural heritage found within 24 nautical miles of the baseline, is simply acknowledging that establishing the contiguous zone in itself does not prevent anything. You also have to support that with monitoring, and policing.

Is anybody suggesting that those US laws that used to apply inside the US 12 nm territorial sea do not now apply to the 24 nm contiguous zone? This includes, incidentally, the special privileges accorded Spanish shipwrecks in US waters under the 1902 Treaty.

Mariner

 

[sthone]

Odyssey should return the stuff..... and they should do so via a US Military Ship (because of the value and all of the publicity... just to be safe ) and I don't know what if something tragic happens and say that ship happens to sink who's the gold belong to now

-Steve

 

[ivan salis]

the 24 NM "rule" does not bode well --as it extends the "feds" control of the waters by a additional 12 miles out to sea under the "abandoned shiopwreck act" -- thus cutting into even more possible treasure hunting "open waters" areas *

 

[jeff k]

Gentlemen,

Is anybody suggesting that those US laws that used to apply inside the US 12 nm territorial sea do not now apply to the 24 nm contiguous zone? This includes, incidentally, the special privileges accorded Spanish shipwrecks in US waters under the 1902 Treaty.

Mariner

Mariner... I know of no current US law that could be used to stop a salvage, but there could be one on the books that I'm not aware of. The Friendship Treaty applies to Spanish Naval vessels as far as I know. There are plenty of Spanish merchant ships out there.

 

[Shiloh1]

As with all laws, they are only as good as your ability to enforce them. Courts are one things but gunboats are another.

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

Odyssey should return the stuff..... and they should do so via a US Military Ship (because of the value and all of the publicity... just to be safe ) and I don't know what if something tragic happens and say that ship happens to sink who's the gold belong to now

-Steve

Great Idea sthone how much to do think a US war ship cost maybe only a few billion dollars
Ossy

 

[mariner]

Jeff,

You are wrong again, I am afraid. The 1902 Treaty provides special status for all Spanish wrecks in US waters, whether they were state owned or privately owned. The meaning of the Treaty clauses relating to shipwrecks was defined by the Court of Appeals in the SeaHunt case of 2000. None of the wrecks are considered to be "abandoned" and therefore subject to the 1987 ASA, or susceptible to salvage claims, unless they have been specifically abandoned by their owners or their successors. That means that the owner or their successors have specifically declared the wreck to have been abandoned. The Treaty defines what it means by a Spanish ship.

I don't have an electronic version of the Treaty, but I could take photographs of the appropriate clauses and post them, if anybody is interested.

Now, that being the case, taking artefacts off these ships with intent to keep them is theft, which is a crime. Also, there are now fairly recent laws such as the one enacted by the Bush administration and called the Sunken Warship Act, or something like that.

Mariner

 

[jeff k]

Mariner... This is the only reference to shipwrecks in the Friendship Treaty.

ARTICLE X

In cases of shipwreck, damages at sea, or forced putting in, each party shall afford to the vessels of the other, whether belonging to the State or to individuals, the same assistance and protection and the same immunities which would have been granted to its own vessels in similar cases.

A little vague as concerns salvage, don't you think. Had the Juno and Galga been merchant ships I doubt if the appellate court would have come to the same conclusion.

 

[mariner]

Jeff,

I assume you have read the SeaHunt findings. The court was very specific about the meaning of this article in the treaty, going way beyond the words in the Treaty itself, because they said that a Treaty means what the parties to the Treaty agree that it means. The implications are very widespread. The court ruled that wrecks covered by this treaty are not subject to the 1987 Abandoned Shipwrecks Act, which is the legal vehicle whereby title and management of abandoned wrecks are transferred to the coastal states. That is why states like Florida will never again be able to issue a recovery permit for a Spanish wreck in its waters, without having Spain's permission to do so, or the current owner of the wreck if it was a privately-owned Spanish ship.

Mariner

 

[jeff k]

Mariner... I've never read that verdict, but I know the U.S. State Dept. was behind the whole fiasco. Don't be surprised if it's overturned by the Supreme Court. That's what I'm hearing anyway.

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

Hi Tom you wrote: I think it would have been difficult to make that assumption with any reasonable degree of certainties a couple of years ago, given the lack of actual wreckage on the site"
Firstly Judge Pizzo written report. ( Doc. 138 at 3) " As part of Odyssey business model, THE FIRM EXTENSIVELY INVESTIGATES IT'S TARGETS, and so it did with the Mercedes. By 2006 Odyssey listed the Mercedes with thirty other shipwrecks of interest
(The "Amsterdam Project")
In November 2006, Odyssey representatives met with an official from Spain's Ministry of culture seeking Spain's consent to recover and sell artifacts from shipwrecks of historical or cultural interest to Spain.
All agree Spain failed to give Odyssey explicit approval.The meeting put Odyssey on notice that Spain had not abandoned its Sovereignty to Odyssey's commercial venture into Spanish shipwrecks.
Tom I'm sure you have seen Treasure quest episode 11, filmed back in 2007 of the so called Black swan. No shipwreck or No Timbers ! The Mercedes exploded Big time, what do you see! Well there is cannons ! which Odyssey chose to ignore, Tin and copper
fitting from the rudder, Plates and Silver and gold coins. Of Particular importance are the Bronze cannons which were on the manifest, two out of date cannons. Even though Odyssey didn't bring them up, they filmed them after blowing sand away from them, there is no mistake and Judge Pizzo has confirmed 100% they are from the Mercedes! It's in his report.
Tom I understand you backing Odyssey, But the facts are the facts and so is the Law that protects sovereign war ships.
Ossy