Written evidence submitted by the Joint
Nautical Archaeology Policy Committee (arts 172)
SUMMARY
— The JNAPC is working for the better protection
of underwater cultural heritage (UCH) in the UK's territorial
waters and the international waters adjacent to its coasts. The
Committee represents a very wide range of stakeholders in maritime
archaeology. See www.jnapc.org.uk .
— English Heritage provides Government
support in England through its maritime team, which is of very
modest proportions. This team and its contractor already deliver
excellent value for a small amount of Government money. DCMS has
a minimal resource allocation to UCH.
— Maritime archaeology in the UK delivers
great value for money as it is carried out mainly by volunteers.
Wrecks designated under the Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 are
resourced and managed by unpaid volunteer divers and archaeologists.
The cost to Government is minimal.
— DCMS and Government need to improve protection
of our underwater cultural heritage, which is currently at risk.
Resource needs to be increased rather than potentially reduced.
— There appears to be no material operational
or financial reason for DCMS to abolish the Advisory Committee
on Historic Wreck Sites and the decision should be reviewed. Savings
will be minimal, if indeed any are achieved.
— As a major seafaring nation, Britain
has a legacy of sunken naval and merchant vessels throughout the
world that represents an enormous resource of historical and cultural
interest to this and future generations. Until recently they have
been protected by the water depth and lack of technology.
— However with greatly improved technology
there is now a major threat to our historic wrecks and commercial
salvors are successfully targeting the valuable historic wrecks
around our coasts, which will lead to the loss of irreplaceable
historical information. There is only one opportunity to gather
the unique evidence of our past from these "time-capsules"
of history and this should not be squandered for short-term financial
gain.
— Legislation for protection of UCH within
our 12 nautical mile territorial waters is inadequate. Beyond
territorial waters there is very little that the Government can
do to protect historic sites unless they are naval warships.
— DCMS needs to lead an urgent review across
Government of heritage legislation related to territorial waters,
which would also remove UCH from the salvage regime. Beyond territorial
waters the Government needs to ratify the UNESCO Convention on
the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage 2001.
— The need for future legislation and appropriate
management support for our underwater cultural heritage at risk
provides the strong reason why funding support for this sector
should not be reduced, but should if possible be modestly increased.
INTRODUCTION
1. The JNAPC was formed in 1988 to raise
awareness of the United Kingdom's underwater cultural heritage
(UCH) and to persuade government that underwater sites of historic
importance should receive no less protection than those on land.
The Committee represents a very wide range of interests in maritime
archaeology including national societies, museums, archaeological
associations and sports diving organisations. Observers are drawn
from Government Departments, national heritage agencies, and relevant
maritime organisations. Summary information on the JNAPC and its
membership is attached in Appendices 1 & 2[144]
below. More information is on www.jnapc.org.uk .
CURRENT FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS
CURRENT RESOURCES
FOR UCH
2. English Heritage provides Government
support in England through its maritime team, which is of very
modest proportions. This team and its contractor already deliver
excellent value for a small amount of Government money and its
assistance with volunteer projects provides considerable leverage
to those projects. Historic Scotland, Cadw and Environment Service
Northern Ireland have a very modest allocation of resource to
UCH. DCMS also has a minimal resource allocation to UCH.
3. Maritime archaeology in the UK delivers
great value for money as it is carried out mainly by volunteers
and in this respect maritime archaeology is the very epitome of
community engagement and delivery. Wrecks designated under the
Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 (PWA 73) are resourced and managed
by unpaid volunteer divers and archaeologists. The Nautical Archaeology
Society, a registered charity, usually provides training for divers
and so the cost to Government is minimal.
FUTURE FUNDING
OF UNDERWATER
CULTURAL HERITAGE
4. There is a considerable task to be undertaken
in future by DCMS and Government to improve protection of the
underwater cultural heritage, which it is not adequate at present.
If we are a nation that seriously believes in our maritime past
and wishes to preserve this for future generations the resource
needs to be increased rather than potentially reduced.
5. The danger is that removing or substantially
reducing the central government catalyst will save very little
but will have more serious impacts in the indirect loss of substantial
private sector and voluntary activity which actually represent
the core sources of input to safeguarding and studying Britain's
maritime heritage for the very substantial economic and social
benefits through tourism, education, volunteering and conservation.
DCMS ARM'S
LENGTH BODIES
6. DCMS has just announced that it will
abolish the Advisory Committee on Historic Wreck Sites (ACHWS),
which advises DCMS on designating wreck sites under the PWA 73
in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The committee
comprises unpaid experts and observers who provide transparent
and independent advice seamlessly across UK and Northern Ireland
on which wrecks should be protected and their future management.
The cost of the committee itself is minimal. English Heritage
carries out the administration of the committee. The voluntary
Licensees of designated wreck sites, who monitor and safeguard
them, also have the greatest respect for the independence of the
ACHWS.
7. DCMS has not said how this advice will
be provided in future but there are indications that English Heritage
might be asked to carry out the function. Whilst we have great
respect for English Heritage, we suggest that Wales, Scotland
and Northern Ireland would be unlikely to accept this proposal
and would set up their own advisory resources. There would be
a consequent duplication of costs, and policy would diverge over
time across the UK and Northern Ireland, which would be unhelpful.
8. JNAPC believes there is no material operational
or financial reason for abolishing the ACHWS and that the decision
should be reviewed.
WHY THE RESOURCES ARE NEEDED
THE THREAT
TO OUR
UNDERWATER CULTURAL
HERITAGE
9. Britain has been a major seafaring nation
for hundreds of years. As a result we have a legacy of sunken
naval and merchant vessels in our territorial waters and lying
on seabeds throughout the world representing an enormous resource
of historical and cultural interest to this and future generations.
In some cases preservation underwater can be better than on land,
particularly for organic materials. Nowhere on land have the remains
of the iconic English longbow been found, but on the Mary Rose
they found not one, but boxes of them, beautifully preserved.
Our underwater cultural heritage is hugely important but it is
now at serious risk.
10. The enormous water depths and the limitation
of technology have been the great protectors of historic wreck
sites until now. However, the recent advances in underwater survey
techniques, positioning systems and remote excavation have effectively
stripped away this protection. Commercial salvage companies are
targeting "high value" historic wrecks off the English
coast and worldwide, which they will excavate and sell off artefacts
for profit. One American company, Odyssey Marine Exploration Inc,
has already located 267 potential targets off the UK coast and
is continuing its search. Many of these wrecks lie in deep water
and excavation techniques at depth using remote operated vehicles
are in their infancy. Salvage today will almost certainly lead
to the unnecessary loss of irreplaceable historical information.
There is only one opportunity to gather the unique evidence of
our past from these "time-capsules" of history and this
should not be squandered for short-term financial gain.
THE UK GOVERNMENT'S
POSITION
11. Within the 12 nautical mile limit of
territorial waters the Government can use the PWA 73 to designate
wrecks of historic importance (63 wreck sites to date) but legislation
for protecting the remaining majority of historic wrecks is inconsistent
and weak. A full review of both UCH legislation and Salvage Law
is urgently required.
12. Beyond UK territorial waters there is
very little that the Government can do to protect these sites
unless they are naval warships, such as the recently discovered
HMS Victory, which sank in 1744. Fortunately, as warships, these
are classed as sovereign immune vessels and may only be salvaged
with the Crown's permission. But for the thousands of wrecks of
merchant vessels carrying valuable cargoes there is no protection
and it is open season for treasure hunters. The English vessel,
Merchant Royall, which sank in 1641 40 miles off Lands End, and
reported to have been carrying hundreds of millions of pound of
silver and gold, is a target that Odyssey and other salvors are
seeking to locate. Should they find it, our Government would have
no legal means to prevent salvage of the vessel. We and the Government
would be unable to prevent the wreck being pillaged off our coast
and then we would have to watch the artefacts being auctioned
off around the world.
POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS
13. DCMS needs to lead an urgent review
across Government (including DfT, MoD, Defra &MMO) of heritage
legislation related to territorial waters, which would also remove
UCH from the salvage regime. Suitable recommendations were made
to DCMS by its Salvage Working Group in 2006 but these were not
carried forward into the draft Heritage Protection Bill. The proposed
treatment of UCH in the draft legislation provided virtually no
improvement at all over the existing inadequate position. Revised
legislation is therefore the solution within territorial waters.
14. Beyond territorial waters the Government
does have a potential solution by ratifying the UNESCO Convention
on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage 2001. The
main thrust of the Convention is that historic shipwrecks should
not be exploited by treasure hunters for commercial gain, and
artefacts should not be sold to finance salvage. Countries that
have ratified the convention cooperate to enforce legal protection
of wrecks in the international waters off their coasts. The Convention
came into force in 2009 and 33 countries have now ratified including
Spain, Italy and Portugal. France is expected to ratify in 2010.
These are countries that have similar worldwide shipwreck legacies
as the UK and have decided that it is in their interest to ratify
the Convention so that their historic wrecks in international
waters may be protected.
15. However in 2001 the previous UK Government
decided not to ratify the Convention. Recently DCMS would not
find the very modest resources needed to undertake a review of
its dated decision.
16. DCMS should now lead a Government wide
review (including FCO, MoD, DfT, Defra and MMO) of the UNESCO
Convention with a view to ratifying it in the near future. This
would also show leadership to other countries who are considering
ratification so that our underwater cultural heritage in international
waters can be properly protected.
17 .The necessity of the future legislative
and management support programme for UCH at risk provides the
strong reason why funding support for this sector should not be
reduced, but should if possible be modestly increased.
GENERAL
18. The JNAPC trusts that this response
will be of assistance to the Committee and would be pleased to
give evidence in person if required.
APPENDIX 1
JOINT NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY POLICY COMMITTEE
THE JNAPC—PAST,
PRESENT AND
FUTURE
The JNAPC was formed in 1988 from individuals
and representatives of institutions who wished to raise awareness
of Britain's underwater cultural heritage and to persuade government
that underwater sites of historic importance should receive no
less protection than those on land.
The JNAPC launched Heritage at Sea in
May 1989, which put forward proposals for the better protection
of archaeological sites underwater. Recommendations covered improved
legislation and better reporting of finds, a proposed inventory
of underwater sites, the waiving of fees by the Receiver of Wreck,
the encouragement of seabed operators to undertake pre-disturbance
surveys, greater responsibility by the Ministry of Defence and
the Foreign and Commonwealth Office for their historic wrecks,
proper management by government agencies of underwater sites,
and the education and the training of sports divers to respect
and conserve the underwater historic environment.
The aim of the JNAPC has been to raise the profile
of nautical archaeology in both government and diving circles
and to present a consensus upon which government and other organisations
can act. Heritage at Sea was followed up by Still at
Sea in May 1993 which drew attention to outstanding issues,
the Code of Practice for Seabed Developers was launched
in January 1995, and an archaeological leaflet for divers, Underwater
Finds—What to Do, was published in January 1998 in collaboration
with the Sports Diving Associations BSAC, PADI and SAA. The more
detailed explanatory brochure, Underwater Finds—Guidance
for Divers, followed in May 2000 and Wreck Diving—Don't
Get Scuttled, an educational brochure for divers, was published
in October 2000.
The JNAPC continues its campaign for the education
of all sea users about the importance of our nautical heritage.
The JNAPC will be seeking better funding for nautical archaeology
and improved legislation, a subject on which it has published
initial proposals for change in Heritage Law at Sea in
June 2000 and An Interim Report on The Valletta Convention
& Heritage Law at Sea in 2003. The latter made detailed
recommendations for legal and administrative changes to improve
protection of the UK's underwater cultural heritage.
The JNAPC has played a major role in English
Heritage's review of marine archaeological legislation and in
DCMS's consultation exercise Protecting our Marine Historic
Environment: Making the System Work Better, and was represented
on the DCMS Salvage Working Group reviewing potential requirements
for new legislation. The JNAPC has also been working towards the
ratification of the UNESCO Convention with the preparation of
the Burlington House Declaration, which was presented to
Government in 2006.
The JNAPC continues to work for the improved
protection of underwater cultural heritage in both territorial
and international waters.
September 2010
144 Ev. Not printed. Back
| 
