Archaeologica.org

From today’s news:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hea ... 84688.html

What I really like about this story is the way the wreck was found.
It was while doing an oil pipeline survey.
The Gulf has a virtual spider web of pipes from the wells to collection points and then to on shore refineries.
The traditional way to do this was with are called “ROV’s.” (Remotely Operated Vehicles.)
The most famous being used in the movie Titanic.
The biggest problem they have is the tether to a surface ship.
That limits their depth and the weather they can be used in.

I get a magazine called Sea Technology that is about just that.
(The magazine is really good at shielding their stories from the net, so I cannot give you any useful addresses.
If you want to try, they are www.sea-technology.com.)
The October issue had 2 papers about underwater archeology in the Gulf.

One story was about ROV’s being replaced by AUVs (Autonomous Underwater Vehicle)
These machines can go deeper and farther because they are not tethered.
They were invented by the oil companies for sea floor route surveying but have found a number of unknown wrecks in the process.
The oil companies loan them out to archeologists when they are not using them.
The sonar systems on them give photo quality images.

The second story was from the point of view of “Permitting Agencies.”
State “Cultural Resource Managers” and the federal MMS (Mineral and Mining Service.)
It turns out that they are very much aware of the possibility of Submerged Prehistoric Sites in the Gulf, as well as anywhere else on the continental shelf.

I found it to be an encouraging example of co-operation between businesses, government, and academia.

(Boy, would I love for them to find an Egyptian/Phoenician/Libyan shipwreck.)

Shipwreck databases are kept by the State Historical Preservation Offices in all the Gulf states. These databases are not available to the public to dissuade looters.

There are several private firms with nautical archaeology programs in the Gulf area that conduct frequent shipwreck investigations. These projects usually begin as archaeological surveys conducted for pipeline projects. Well over 90% of the archaeological surveys conducted in the US -- terrestrial and nautical -- are conducted by cultural resource management firms. The reports from these surveys are submitted to the SHPOs who then maintain them in libraries. They are rarely reported on publicly -- again to preserve the resources.

As far as finding intact prehistoric sites in the Gulf -- there is a well-publicized academic expedition going on this year in an attempt to locate submerged prehistoric sites. I am skeptical but I hope they prove me wrong. They would have to successfully map locations of submerged rivers, streams & creeks and then identify associated submerged landforms likely to have significant sites. Once they have done that they have only found likely places for sites which they would then have to test to find actual sites. Needle in a haystack. Very expensive undertaking with no guarantee of any results.

Very good points santyago61
(BTW: I don’t recognize the name. Welcome aboard.)

I am assuming you are referring to the expedition to the off shore “big bend” area.
I would hope they find something, even though it is a true “needle in a haystack.”
I am out of date now on the current scene, but I remember a time when the LORAN coordinates for finding fresh water fish well offshore were well guarded.
Those big springs inland were just the dry land outlets of the fresh water flowing down from Georgia.
That there were some of, what are now, off shore outlets, makes sense...
They would be logical places to camp out if the sea level was lower.

I guess I have mixed feelings about keeping the news under wraps.
I see the need for preventing looting, but I also see the need for the discoveries to be made widely known.
Public knowledge is a two edged sword.
It may bring looters, but it also brings contribution dollars.

Hiding knowledge brings us into the land of the "hidden discoveries" conspirators,
(Egyptian Temples in the Grand Canyon)
It should be avoided.

Very expensive undertaking with no guarantee of any results.

True enough and reason to give them full marks for looking.

santyago61 wrote:As far as finding intact prehistoric sites in the Gulf -- there is a well-publicized academic expedition going on this year in an attempt to locate submerged prehistoric sites. I am skeptical but I hope they prove me wrong. They would have to successfully map locations of submerged rivers, streams & creeks and then identify associated submerged landforms likely to have significant sites. Once they have done that they have only found likely places for sites which they would then have to test to find actual sites. Needle in a haystack. Very expensive undertaking with no guarantee of any results.

This has been done here in British Columbia-with some success.

BALLARD had an expedition to the FLOWER GARDEN REEF last summer. Have seen no report on any findings.

Which might be an indication that they found something?
I have forgotten who the sponsors were.
But if they were not some one like Nat Geo,
who only make back their investment with publicity,
is it being “hidden?.”

Ballard's expedition:

http://www.marinelink.com/Story/ShowSto ... yID=206102

kbs -- check this out. Very detailed account of research on submerged prehistoric sites in the Gulf.

http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/whatsnew ... ession.pdf

Sorry,

But you are putting out fires with gasoline.
The Ballard news release is a pre expedition news release.
It is what we were referring to.
Where are the after expedition, with results, releases?

The APALACHEE BAY report was new to me, but still it is 2001 news.