Thieves Who Steal Sunken Warships, Right Down to the Bolts
outsideonline.com
outsideonline.com
The first thought that came to my mind was that the scavengers are cleaning up a small part of the pollution in the oceans.
As to cleaning up the oceans, I'd love it if someone could do some back of the napkin type calculations on how much pollution is caused by these sunken warships as opposed to commercial shipping or industrial runoff. I would assume this is negligible in the grand scheme of things.
Our ability for self-deception is breath taking.
Most Egyptian mummies come from a culture that was staggeringly remote and ancient - to Cleopatra, to later Byzantine culture, and certainly to Egypt after the Arab conquest... which was 1400 years ago!
Bronze age remains from Europe are not treated differently, you know. Those are also in museums around the world.
Also, to assuage your cultural guilt, Egyptians, who feel no linkage to ancient people, are now digging up artifacts to hock to various wealthy collectors in the Middle East and Europe.
There's an ongoing controversy around the Elgin Marbles, which were removed to London between 1801 and 1805, and many people believe they should be returned.
I think there's an increasing recognition that the historic behaviour of archaeologists removing artifacts for display wasn't necessarily acceptable, but addressing past wrongs is much harder than preventing new ones.
It has not increased to any degree near adequate. But remove antiquities foreign antiquities from European museums and see how barren the halls and storage become... So I guess 'sensitivity' isn't going to increase any more than present levels.
No, that's grave robbing. When Westerners did that in the past, it was grave robbing. If they do it now, it's also grave robbing. I suspect a lot of Westerners agree.
I think it's generally well-understood that when your remains rest in the ocean, you become fish food. The vast expanse of water itself is your tomb, not some little square on the floor.
Argue over the vehicle wreckage, but don't misplace your sentimentality.
I am writing this right now in literally the exact spot where thousands died during the Battle of Brooklyn in the Revolutionary War.
We subsequently moved on, they built Brooklyn Heights and DUMBO and a rather notable bridge here. It happens.
Both the US and UK seem to protect sunken military vessels for this reason.
I think that another way of looking at this story is some 'god' miraculously tidying up the litter that humans have carelessly left at the bottom of the ocean for one reason or another. In this magic universe the mystery tidy-up persons should be thanked for doing such a thorough job, leaving not so much as a bolt behind.
It is all so much easier if the human remains part is conveniently ignored.
The only difference is the amount of time that has passed.
To me, your wording makes it sound like you think that is a minor difference.
I think it's a major difference in the negative direction.
These maritime war graves that are being robbed are of men whose children or grandchildren are alive.
(How many souls were lost aboard the HMS Electra alone, over a hundred ?)
A question I'm not sure I want to know the answer to - what are these thieving scumbags doing with the remains of the sailors who died aboard these ships?
It's not appropriate to wax indignant about remains that may have all but disintegrated into unrecognizable mud. These are not organized places, like the parks on land with paths that people walk.
Consider the wreckage of the Titanic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wreck_of_the_RMS_Titanic
No one can simply swin to the bottom of the ocean to pay their respects.
One issue that does deserve some attention is what should be done to any human remains in the wrecks. But if the salvage operations themselves were legal, so the recovery operations didn't have to operate on the sly, it should be possible to get them to obey minimal standards of decency.
The governments that owns the vessels should also get a cut.
The Neolithic stone circle at Avebury, Wiltshire, had several stones removed by local villages who wanted stone to build cottages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avebury
In the centre of this screen, just south of Tunnel House In, you can see a square outline in a field. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Coates,+Cirencester/@51....
That's a Roman camp. It's been ploughed over (it's just a field) and unscrupulous metal detectorists have plundered the site: http://www.bgas.org.uk/tbgas_bg/v119/bg119083.pdf
People taking this metal from sunken ships aren't just cleaning up a mess, they're destroying historical information.
And who knows what stuff is on the ships (oil, fuel) that isn't being properly cleaned up, just dumped into the ocean?
Most sunken ships, they just sit there and nobody wants to take responsibility and maintain them so that no oil and fuel gets into the ocean. Furthermore, there is little to see. Sure there is some historical information on them but we should save those otherwise the ocean destroys them (surely but slowly).
If those sunken ships were properly maintained, I would also call those scrapers thieves because they take something that belongs to someone else and it has value to them. But since most are just sitting there, waiting to slowly decay.
The only things those scrapers should be held responsible for, is when they damage a tank or something like that which pollutes the ocean (and there should be resources on how to do that safely). But then again, those fuel tanks will leak at some point anyway (they won't last forever) and it should be our responsibility (as humans) to make sure that does not happen.
Who cares? If you really cared about that historical information, you'd salvage it and put it on display in a museum. "Historical information" isn't doing anyone any good sitting on the ocean floor.
>And who knows what stuff is on the ships (oil, fuel) that isn't being properly cleaned up, just dumped into the ocean?
Again, who cares? If you cared, you'd clean it up properly yourself, instead of just leaving it there to leak out into the ocean. The USS Arizona is still visibly leaking diesel fuel out into the water, and no one's doing anything about that, so it's hypocritical for you to complain about this.
This whole subject is just fraught with silly, misplaced sentimentality. I do personally agree that oil and fuel should be properly cleaned up, but we don't do that now, so it obviously isn't a valid concern. I do agree that historical information should be preserved, but we don't do that now (by leaving it inaccessible to the general public on the ocean floor in a remote part of the Pacific), so it obviously isn't a valid concern.
I'm all for museums and saving history, but this isn't it. Museums are great: you take something that could otherwise be lost, and you preserve and protect it and put it on display so that people can see it and learn from it. Keeping people away from a sunken warship doesn't do that at all. And the concern for the feelings of relatives of these long-dead crew is nuts too. How much concern is there for the feelings of the descendants of King Tut with his body on display? With these old ships, there are no bodies in many cases: human remains don't last long in the sea, unless they're locked up in a watertight compartment.
The final paragraph of the article is the only place where they really got it right: if you want to preserve these things, then salvage them yourself and put them in a museum. If you're going to leave something abandoned in the middle of nowhere, you can't get mad when someone comes and takes it.
These ships are maritime war graves. The remains were of men that weren't vikings or ancient Egyptians. They were our grandparents generation. That's pretty damned recent.
It's unsettling that a local population can not sink some steel to create a rich fishery anymore.
How do we balance the opportunity afforded to the salvagers against the grazing rights of the local fisherfolk? Is there a replacement structure that can be sunk locally like a concrete wall or honeycomb? Is there research on the time scale needed to seed the coral colonies? Should we place all pre-1942 steel in a UN mandated market?
[1] http://www.historyofwallasey.co.uk/wallasey/story_of_the_day...
Because that's what the country is willing to pay you for willing to die for the country, i.e. being a soldier. The military has to uphold a much higher standard for honoring the dead, or it will face problems finding new recruits.
That's very generous of the Danish government!
[0] http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/jul/04/nuclear...
http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/fallout-from-nuc...
The overall picture seems to be that thousands of people will get cancer as a result of fallout from nuclear testing, but millions of people get cancer for other reasons, so it's not a major effect.
From the article: "Sunken warships remain the property of their country of origin regardless of where they are found. Laws regarding their stewardship vary a little from nation to nation, but in general, the ships—and everything on or in them—belong to that country’s navy."
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kursk_submarine_disaster#Salva...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Azorian
[3] http://ardrubber.en.made-in-china.com/productimage/gSZmDMRbY...
and http://blueoceantackle.com/marine-supply-equipment/ship-salv...
The Earth facing an environmental crisis...
Has anyone checked on the IJN Yamato lately?
Adding to my doubt is the article's mention of "pre-1942 vessels." Why would that be the date? The first nuclear weapon was detonated in summer 1945, and I'd wager that contamination remained sufficiently low until sometime in the 50s. According to this page, there were only 7 nuclear test explosions in the 40s, for a total of 9 nuclear explosions all together:
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/nucleartesttally
But even if a single bomb is too much, the date should be 1945.
Back at the time, there was not very much requirement for nuclear safety/contamination prevention... so if you want steel definitely free from non-natural radiation you'll need 1942 or earlier steel.
Supporting this idea, here's another article on salvaging Japanese wrecks which mentions low-background steel in the context of ships built in 1943 and 1944: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/09/images-reveal-...
In this case though the salvagers are not taking the bones out, nor the personal effects. They are taking huge amounts of steel, brass and copper, none of which were personal artifacts or property of a single one of the persons who died at the site.
To call this grave robbing, then removing a wrecked bus or truck from an accident site on the side of the freeway would have to be considered grave robbing as well. If the person removing the bus also took the body, wedding rings and gold teeth of the victims, that would be a crime. But the person removing the bus isn't doing that.
It would be like you being buried in a coffin in a stone church and then one day someone decides they want the stones and they take the whole church ... including you :) As a relative i would be pretty pissed about that too.
If they were correctly identifying bodies and returning them to their families for proper burial etc... then it might be ok to reuse the steel.