Hudson River Shipwrecks Secretly Mapped 262
jonerik writes "According to this article in the New York Times (registration required) more than 200 shipwreck sites lying beneath New York's Hudson River have been mapped by sonar. In fact, scientists feel confident that the location of every Hudson shipwreck between Manhattan and Troy has now been pinpointed, adding that the nearly oxygen-free mud of the Hudson nearly guarantees that many of the wrecks and their contents are almost perfectly preserved. The hitch? For the time being the maps - paid for as part of the $186 million Hudson River Estuary Plan - are not being published since state officials are nervous about the prospect of so many shipwrecks suddenly being opened up to salvagers on one of the U.S.'s busiest rivers. 'We don't want to ring the dinner bell for people who have ulterior motives and don't behave responsibly,' says Mark L. Peckham, a historic preservation coordinator at the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. In the meantime, state officials are now attempting to determine the historical significance of the wrecks and how they might be protected, which should hopefully lead to the publication of the Hudson River maps at some future date."
so (Score:3, Insightful)
also, who is to say these ships now 'belong' to the state of NY ? i never understood that, it should be finders keepers.
Re:so (Score:4, Informative)
Perhaps not belong, but I would imagine they fall under the juristiction of the NY coast guard or port authority.
Re:so (Score:2, Funny)
Re:so (Score:2)
salvage rights (Score:5, Informative)
Think of the ship at the bottom as not lost but in long-term storage. Just because someone can get to it before you can doesn't make it theirs. Access is not ownership. But if someone finds the wreck, they should be able to sell that information to the owner.
No, I can't justify these ancient rules. Changes [redherring.com] may be in the wind.
Isn't that mud still PCB-laden? (Score:3, Interesting)
More interestingly - what about GE and the whole PCB issue? I see a few problems with anybody digging anything up on a large scale:
a.) Scenic Hudson (or maybe it was another group, I forget) doesn't want anybody stirring up silt in the Hudson for the purposes of GE dredging the PCB-filled mud, so I can't think that they'd think lightly of lots of treasure hunters doing ths same thing.
b.) GE argued from the start that the biggest harm in removing the silt would be that it stirred up all of the PCBs which, over time, have become more benign (or at least less latent on the surface of the mud). Stirring them up, they said, would put them back into the fish, etc... this might relieve GE from its primary argument against dredging, so I've got to think they'd be considering it carefully.
c.) No matter what Scenic Hudson and GE think today about the Hudson, it is well-established that the silt is still chock full of PCBs, and as such, would qualify for treatment as a "hazardous material" upon its removal from the Hudson. Part of the dredging issue was figuring out what lucky Upstate NY town was going to host the geomembrane-protected "silt dump" for disposal of the stuff so it wouldn't leach into the ground and contaminate groundwater, etc. The rule of NIMBY has applied thus far, as far as I know... It would therefore follow that anybody trying to dig up ships would run into a big problem of what to do with the dirt they dug through. (Granted, it's not the whole Hudson, but it still creates an issue if you do anything but leave it there.)
Poison Mud (Score:2)
On obscure references, for anyone who wonders, NIMBY = Not In My Back Yard
*
Funny you should attach this mud Q here -- it was the first thing that crossed my mind because of the GE debate. I thought GE's anti-dredging argument sounded plausible, and I'm an environmentalist, which means that of course if dredging caused more problems I would not be knee-jerk against GE (stereotypes of environmentalist are so ugly
They dredged in Boston Harbor, which has similar issues, to make way for the 3rd harbor tunnel, and put the material called mud on the bottom but toxic waste on the surface into barges. Then the Army Corps of Engineers forbade them from dumping it in Mass Bay as planned. So they had to stop digging with this incredibly expensive rented scoop until they found somewhere to put the muck. Oh yeah, then one of the barges sank at its berth. I think it went to the airport and, ultimately, I don't know. Illustrates how messy this stuff can be.
Anyway, I assume salvage would not involve that much disturbance of the river bed. Don't worry, if it is an issue someone will raise it.
Re:salvage rights (Score:2)
how many people are still getting things in the titanic? i think that there are rightful owners, but those owners can't really go down there for themselves.
also, who 'owns' the river/ocean? so if i ever wanted to put something into 'longterm storage' i could just dump it in the water? fun fun
and please, with the viper analogy, how is that even remotely similar to this?
i think this is more in terms of finding a $100 bill on the street, dated from 1950. with no claims on record since then.
Re:salvage rights (Score:2)
how many people are still getting things in the titanic? i think that there are rightful owners, but those owners can't really go down there for themselves.
I don't knnow, I'd forgotten about it. But if "getting things" is stealing, it's still stealing if they're old and on the ocean floor.
i think this is more in terms of finding a $100 bill on the street, dated from 1950. with no claims on record since then.
Sure. But most wrecks are not like that, even ones 500 years old. If a ship sinks with $200 million in gold, the owners remember it.
Re:so (Score:5, Interesting)
Bzzzzzzz! Wrong...unfortunately. I've dove at least a dozen shipwrecks now in the great lakes, and ethics are pretty far from the mind of most people. If you want a great example of ethics, go read a book called "Deep Descent - Adventure and Death Diving The Andrea Doria". The Doria is one of the greatest wrecks in the world to dive. However...many people have foolishly died on the wreck in their efforts to collect something as stupid as china plates.
Salvers may be more ethical (I don't know any so I can't say) but I know that the mentality of a lot of divers is that it's finders keepers. There are underwater preserves in the great lakes, meaning that the shipwrecks are protected. But...most wrecks are found by private individuals and then pilfered of all the interesting stuff before they notify the government. So, when you actually get a chance to dive on the wreck most of the neat artifacts are gone. It's a shame...nothing can compare to the beauty of descended onto a wreck in the dark blue water and crawling through the hatches and seeing old tools, ropes...hundreds of years old. But a lot of divers only see a decoration in their living room.
Even a recent wreck (10 years old) - the US Coast Guard cutter The Mesquite - is in a protected area. When it was sunk, there were crew uniforms, utensils, logbooks - theres still a copy machine and a radio on the deck. A couple of years after the sinking you could find ad's in diving magazines of crew uniforms for sale from the mesquite. It's a HUGE debate in the diving community, about whether artifacts should stay on the wreck or if they should be collected...but ethics....hrm. More of a feeding frenzy on some wrecks...
Re:so (Score:3, Insightful)
The Hudson river is bordered by two states, New York and New Jersey. Does NJ have a say in this as well?
(And No, I'm from NYC)
Re:so (Score:2, Interesting)
Personally,I'd find all of them in probably one trip down river using not much more than a rebent coathanger in a comfy boat with a lil cold beer,but thats another discussion.heck,I'd even tell you depth and position.
"Arrest" the shipwrecks. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:"Arrest" the shipwrecks. (Score:3, Informative)
It may be *possible* to get and hold rights to wreck but it's by no means easy.
Rustin
And, yes, I am currently on the edge of a team with a pending effort to retrieve a wreck in the Hudson.
Sonar? (Score:2, Interesting)
National Park (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:National Park (Score:3, Interesting)
First time I read this I almost passed it off as a troll. Thinking about it though, this seems to me a very good idea - there are a lot of Nava Battle sites around the world that are not in international waters (Pearl Harbor for one, which I think is officially a national monuement). Preserving such historical sites is important for future generations.
Good post that man! (or woman!)
Re:National Park (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, we have absolutely no idea how to preserve a ship under water.
In fact, we are sitting around helplessly watching the Titanic and the ships at Pearl Harbor disintegrate (which, BTW is a very bad thing - since the ships at Pearl still have a lot of fuel trapped within them). The only way we can "preserve" a ship is to raise it out of the water, and that can only be done under certain circumstances.
So +10 points for the thought, but -100 for complete inability do to anything about it.
Look at the Vasa and Mary Rose. (Score:3, Interesting)
Raising the ships was difficult. Preserving the ships after they were raised has been a major effort (costing a small fortune) and requiring many thousands of man hours. It is wonderful that the wrecks were raised, but I don't think either the UK or Sweden could have coped with more than one every ten years or so.
Steel and iron ships are actually harder than wood to raise once they are over a certain page where the hull is substantially oxidised and what you end up with is almost impossible to treat (iron oxide crumbles).
Re:National Park (Score:2)
Re:National Park (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, who knows what tunes they might play on it!
Tim
Re:National Park (Score:3, Interesting)
The old Tacoma Narrows bridge ("Galloping Gertie") that went down in high winds in 1940(?) is a protected underwater landmark. You've all seen the video, right? Wouldn't want the souvenir hunters stripping it to nothing. Although why a collapsed bridge should be preserved is beyond me. It has no historical value at all. It's just a massive engineering failure.
isn't it obvious? (Score:2)
Re:National Park (Score:3, Funny)
Why would the Greeks or the Egyptians make the Hudson River a national park?
Suspected plane wreckage (Score:2, Interesting)
Sleeping with the fishes... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sleeping with the fishes... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Sleeping with the fishes... (Score:2)
Hmmm...So the scientists get to plunder first? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hmmm...So the scientists get to plunder first? (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, but the thing you have to realize is that many of the scientists will actually take the time to document what, where, when, location etc.... in an effort to preserve the history and data in the wreck so that further research can be done.
I have dived before on wrecks and there are some folks I have seen that literally have no respect for the graves that many of these wrecks are or for the history of those wrecks. These people are out to tear off whatever trinket they can and sometimes those trinkets can be of great historical value. Furthermore, if not properly restored or stored, they can disintegrate loosing whatever value they retained.
Mmmm...plunder (Score:2, Interesting)
How many historical sites/wrecks can be researched in 100 years? Take this number and double it. Now make a list of these sites. These sites would be "off limits" to looters, er treasure hunters.
Now if a "new" site is found, in order to add it to the list you must drop an existing site from the list.
My point is that there are so many sites there is no way they can all be researched, and without "looters" many existing museum pieces would not have been found and available for the public to see and researchers to study.
Thank goodness for maritime law and the law of salvage....
More power to 'em (Score:4, Funny)
Re:More power to 'em (Score:2)
People swim [nycswim.org] in it all the time. Honestly, your biggest danger is uh...
Okay, being hit by a floating telephone pole. Satisfied? But you don't need any shots!
Re:More power to 'em (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyone looking for buried treasure? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Anyone looking for buried treasure? (Score:3, Funny)
Didn't some big lizard really mess that bridge up once? I ran across that news story while I was channel surfing one day. Barely used indeed.
You know... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a serious disappointment that society has arrived (not recently) at a state where truly worthwhile information is rightfully withheld because we, as humans, can't treat things with respect.
Re:You know... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:You know... (Score:2, Interesting)
This is only devil's advocate: the nostalgic feeling we have towards these shipwrecks is of arguable value, but the monetary value of the ships' materials can provide a direct injection of wealth into the economy.
Alas, choosing when to be sentimental is often hard (especially when spring cleaning comes around...)
Yes, I know. (Score:2, Flamebait)
Soon, I hope that they make the whole sea bottom property of the federal government, so that any ship that sinks will be owned by my children forever on the bottom. That way, I know that I'll always be able to get great rewards from today's disasters. As it is, just anyone can go out and riun my heratige. Obviouly, only someone approved by the federal government should be alowed to pick up wrecks from the sea floor. The proceeds can be used to keep me from doing the same thing myself. I know that I'm not special and can't or won't learn how to do things right. It's not like you can simply make a law about how certian wrecks must be documented and share the information about state of the art preservation, now is it? No, I'm sure people will always get around the law if they can for filthy lucre, after all I'm greedy like that and so are so many other posters here who openly say this is such a good thing that New York is doing.
New York has always been so far advanced in the ways of correct government. Just look at Tamany Hall! Wow, New Yorkers sure know how to co-operate. Exclusive franchises rock, NDAs are wonderful. How else can we maintain such excellence?
Permits? (Score:3, Interesting)
Could someone with some knowledge of major salvage work give some words on wether or not a permit is required?
It depends on several factors. (Score:4, Informative)
I work for the outfit that is doing this survey [melfisher.org] and a couple others here in the keys plus one each in Portugal and Morocco (RPM, not Mel Fisher's). Putting aside the overseas projects, since that involves several more layers of bureaucracy, and not knowing the laws covering the Hudson, I can only give you an idea of what happens here.
Just about anything inside the reef is within the Floida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), so we have to pull a permit from them as well as from NOAA. FKNMS is a joint state / federal authority and NOAA of course is federal. In some areas we are allowed to do non-invasive surveys, such as towing magnetometers, a sidescan sonar or a sub-bottom profiler. Any excavation, which is done scientifically and with respect for the site, requires a separate permit. All data collected, whether from towed surveys or excavation must be shared with the permitting agency but is otherwise proprietary.
Hey, it's expensive to do this kind of work and there are plenty of treasure hunters that would love to get a hold of some of our "numbers". But as the article points out, those wrecks are mostly the workaday variety and probably of little commercial value. I think they are doing the right thing by holding back until the historically significant sites can be identified and protected even if the Hudson is not exactly a diving hot spot.
Where are ya, Jimmy? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Where are ya, Jimmy? (Score:2)
Seriously, it's interesting that the article says they (the wrecks) would be well preserved because of the "lack of oxygen" at the river bottom. I guess this could apply to people wearing cement overshoes, as well. And sisce there's no statute of limitations on murder ... :-)
Re:Where are ya, Jimmy? (Score:2)
Re:Where are ya, Jimmy? (Score:2)
It would seem to be an unnecessary risk to dispose of the body that far away.
--T
Bodies in NYC waters (Score:3)
Let's get this out of the way once and for all.
First of all, the only extensively documented case of this kind of thing was with the Irish gangs over in Hell's Kitchen. They had a guy on their crew who was trained (in prison, yet) as a butcher, so when they killed somebody, they would have this guy come in and chop up the body. Then they would take the parts to Ward's Island (where the East River meets the Harlem at the northern tip of Manhattan) and drop the body bits into the stream right by a water treatment plant. This would ensure that what littel was left got ripped up and washed way out to sea. Keep in mind that this would not work as well these days as now the population density of Roosevelt Island (in the middle of the East River at about Midtown) is much higher and people spend more time by the water.
Yes, people are killed and dumped in the river. This is frequent enough that every spring the NYPD divers prepare for the annual "crop" of bodies that have swollen up over the winter and pop to the surface as the weather warms up.
The primary variable is how well the large cavities like the lungs and intestines have been punctured. If you do the job "right" and make sure that those are open to the water (and the body weighted down), the gases will tend to bubble out and the body stay submerged. Of course, with DNA testing all bets are off as one floating bit of tissue can be enough; *if* spotted.
Keep in mind that, contrary to popular misconception, there is quite a lot of sealife around NYC (I used to collect seashells half a block from 23rd street) so if a body is down long enough, it will be GONE.
Why the East River and not the Hudson? The East has historically been closer to more nasty bits like the Lower East Side and the docks in Brooklyn and Queens. However, given the Mafia action along the old port facilities and institutional sites (Javits anybody?), each side has most likely seen its share of activity.
There. Now can we get back to arguing about salvage?
Rustin
Titanic (Score:3, Interesting)
-Foxxz
Re:Titanic (Score:3, Insightful)
Not sure what the right answer to this is, but keeping it under wraps for the time being seems to be the wise course of action.
Jon
Possible disaster... (Score:5, Interesting)
The last thing they need is a bunch of yahoo's with treasure maps digging around in the sediment and silt looking for treasure while dredging up 80 years worth of PCB's.
The biggest opponents to cleaning the PCB's out of the river point to the environmental impact of disturbing all of this sediment. Imagine the nightmare when Joe Adventurer goes out and starts digging up the River.
Re:Possible disaster... (Score:5, Informative)
I just want to clairify a point that often gets lost. It seems to be common belief that the PCBs in the Hudson River are locked in the the sediment and just so long as nothing disturbs the sediment everything is A OK.
This is purpetuated by GE's ad campaign that shows pretty graphs with the PCB concentration dropping of dramatically in the 1970s (I can't remember exactly when) and saying "The River is healing itself!" What GE don't tell you is that this dramatic decrease is a result of them ceasing pollution. The PCB concentration in the water droped because GE stoped pumping PCBs into the water! NOT becasue the river is healing itself.
Furthermore, PCB levels in fish have remained constant. There is a reason you are not allowed to eat the fish in the Hudson River (only catch and release is allowed). I know of no real evidence that the PCBs remain 'locked' in the sediment.
To me this is a damn good example of a successful advertising campaign. The EPA really dropped the ball when GE spent millions and they [EPA] didn't respond in turn. Just look at the number of no dredging signs in the area, or if you're from the area ... chances are you've been visited by a GE PR rep (think kid on summer job) with nice fliers. I know I have. The kid was actually happy to get the other side of the story from my father, who is in a position to know damn well what goes on in that river.
Oh yeah, one other thing: modern dredging techniques don't use those bucket chains on the GE fliers ... they use a vacuum technology that prevents recontamination of the river bed.
My personal opinion is that GE should clean up their mess (ATM). And the EPA should have and should do a much better job with advertising.
And to stick with the parent ... you're right ... you really do not want Joe Adventurer (without advaced equipement) stiring things up. No sense in making things worse, again.
Re:Possible disaster... (Score:2)
And the EPA should have and should do a much better job with advertising.
Doesn't that stike anyone else as a little off?
It's not the EPA's job to buy comercials during Oprah or Star Trek. LOL
-
Re:Possible disaster... (Score:2, Informative)
What I think you are refereing to is the Upper Hudson River (between the Federal Dam at Troy and Hudson Falls). Catch and release is still the rule there.
http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/
Joe Adventurer Yahoo (Score:2)
Dredging the hudson (Score:2)
I think the decision weighed whether it was better to leave the PCBs there or to remove them. They decided in the long run it was better to remove them as PCBs don't break down naturally and have a nasty habit of moving up the food chain.
It's only a matter of time (Score:2, Insightful)
I should think that a more prudent way of handling this project would have been to map all of the ships, catalogue them, survey them individually (with divers, remote subs, or the like), and only then proclaim a successful project. At the same time, you could publish the maps without a problem.
To announce to the world that you have maps simply invites people to use whatever means at their disposal to procure them--social engineering, hacking at computers storing the maps, or good old-fashioned information leaks.
I used to fly down the river.... + PCBs in River (Score:3, Interesting)
On a second note, how many PCBs are in the riverbed and would be disturbed and brought downstream. Dont know if they'd "stir up" the environmentalists by suggesting going down for the wrecks/moving them.
Insurance companies may take the loot (Score:2, Insightful)
Once the insurance company pays out the claim they own the ship and cargo. If a salver raises the ship or cargo then the insurance company can collect on the find.
Re:Insurance companies may take the loot (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, yes and no. I do not know all the issues involved, suffice to say it is complex, so if you want a real answer see a lawyer.
That out of the way, the insurance company only owns the wreck until the abandon it. If you try to salvage a wreck and the insurance company can prove they are in the process of trying to get it, then it belongs to them, and they can decide what to pay you for your efforts (read they will screw you).
However if you salavege a wreck long after it happens, and the insurance company has made no effort to get it, then it is assumed the insurance company has decided that the cost to salavage the wreck is greater than the benifits of doing so, and it is yours for the taking.
The key is while the insurance company is making efforts to raise the wreck it belongs to them. I wouldn't start any salavage operation without consulting a lawyer. International waters are a little more tricky, if you can get the loot to the right country you might be able to salvage it from under the insurance company.
Insurance companies generally don't bother with salvage unless they suspect the operation will turn up something other than the loot. Evidence that they don't have to pay the claim due to fraud is worth more than the claim itself if it keeps others from fraud. In minnesota they have divers bring up all outboards dropped overboard even though it often costs more than the claim because it teaches people that throwing a moter overboard will not get them a new one.
Except in this case most of the wrecks. . . (Score:2)
We aren't talking huge Spanish Galleons loaded with Inca gold here, nor are we, as some other poster suggested, talking about anything worth salvaging for a barge full of steel. Albany is no "El Dorado." Trust me, I know. And Coxsackie is pretty dipshit NOW, let alone 200 years ago.
For the most part we aren't even talking "ships" in the modern sense, but rather "boats," and wooden ones at that. A few odd "pleasure" vessels maybe, but mostly small trade "ships" ( such as the 90 foot wooden sloop Clearwater) and military vessels of the smaller kind such as might have patroled the river during the Revolutionary War period.
Most of the trade vessels were carrying cargo such as the average upstate NY farmer of over one hundred years ago might want if they were heading upriver, and food stores if they were heading down. Bolts of cloth, hoes and rakes, pumpkins, things of that nature.
For all practical purposes no part of these vessels or their cargos would be worth a damn to a salvager or insurer for financial gain, and the military vessels could already be claimed to be the property of the government.
No, what's valuable on these vessels is simply the information examining the vessels themselves might provide. Like how they were built. How people lived on them. What kind of farm tools and fabric went up the river when, and what kind of food came back down.
The only "salvage" here, for the most part, is historical knowledge. However, one guy rooting around in SCUBA gear ( and for the most part any of these wrecks would be accessable to an amatuer diver in SCUBA gear, no huge "recovery platform" needed. It's just a river bottom) looking for an 18th century button or something that he can put in a parts drawer and forget about could completely destroy an archeological site beyond recovery by the experts.
This is what they're worried about, not someone dragging up a 20 year old oil tanker's anchor and selling it for scrap.
KFG
Wise course (Score:3, Insightful)
Interesting ethical questions (Score:5, Interesting)
My take is that the information is public knowledge, but releasing it would destroy public safety and public history. What needs to be done is a massive, organized effort to salvage and record the vast wealth of finds. Maybe private companies could be involved.
Interesting to think of - I wonder what other cases of withheld public information may be justifiable . .
Re:Interesting ethical questions (Score:2, Insightful)
For instance, they could provide the information, along with notices that disturbing the PCB laden sediment is hazardous, as well as illegal. Then go and actually bust the people who decide it was worth the risk (use the map data to see where to catch them)
In the end, I suppose the decision has to be made based on whether the government thinks it can beat back the blithering idiot masses who don't care.
Re:Interesting ethical questions (Score:2)
Good idea and a good point. This is a case of "The cat's not out of the bag, but we let you know we've got a bag and a cat."
Re:Interesting ethical questions (Score:3, Interesting)
Good idea. Maybe certain things can be kept by the state government, others sold off, and you get a win-win situation plus a lot of interesting artifacts and information.
Yeah. It is unlikely. But thought-provoking.
Sometimes government secrets aren't all bad.... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sure there will be people on here screaming that the government has no right to keep the fruits of labor paid for by taxpayers money a secret, but it sounds like NY, just like Arizona, is doing it to protect the sites they have invested a lot of time and energy in.
It's only a model (Score:2, Funny)
Judging from the picture at Hudson River [hudsonriver.com], the river seems to be quite small compared to the people on the bicycles, soldiers, and horses.
What's the big deal about mapping such a tiny thing?
And check out the miniture bridge, what's that about...
Re:It's only a model (Score:2, Funny)
That's an old picture.
People and horses were much bigger back then.
O2 free Hudson (Score:2)
speaking as a former resident of Troy, i think the O2 free hudson should be more of a concern than mapping the shipwrecks. not to get all partison, but the next time an anti-environmentalist raves that pollution isn't a problem, have him/her go for a dip in the hudson and see how many simultaneous illnesses they come down with. eeew.
Re:O2 free Hudson (Score:2)
Re:O2 free Hudson (not!) (Score:2, Informative)
And as to getting ill from taking a dip, give me a break. Maybe down around Manhattan (especially the East River), but not for us upstaters. I've been swimming in that river since I was a kid, and let me tell you, when I was a kid (mid 70s)the toxins were flowing fresh daily. Yeah, there were limits, anytime a bunch of fish or clams etc washed up on the beach dead we couldn't go swimming (and usually wound up bagging some samples to see what killed them this time around). So taking a dip won't kill you, eating the local fish will.
+6, Informative (Score:2, Funny)
Dirty Politicians (Score:2, Insightful)
2) Give "rights to salvage" to political contributors
3) Profit
Re:Dirty Politicians (Score:3, Insightful)
What about the PCBs? (Score:5, Interesting)
Dredging the river will decimate the shipwrecks
or salvaging the shipwrecks will spread PCBs back into the river, which is one of the big problems with dredging
More info is at the EPA [epa.gov]. The article doesn't really mention this, which seems odd, since the PCB/Dredging issue has been a hell of a hot topic in the Upper Hudson Valley for the past year or two.
Re:What about the PCBs? (Score:3, Funny)
It took my brain a few minutes to click that people aren't talking about Printed Circuit Boards.
Re:What about the PCBs? (Score:2)
Re:What about the PCBs? (Score:2)
Soviets did this LONG ago (Score:2)
The question is... (Score:2)
Jason.
other sites? (Score:3, Interesting)
In think it would be even cooler if there was a similar project in europe or the middle east - places that have way more history than the US.
The oldest ships you'll find in the Hudson are going to be ~2 hundred years old. Imagine finding a shipwreck in the mediteranean, red sea, black sea, or caspian sea thats ~2 thousand years old!!
all sorts of interesting stuff (Score:3, Interesting)
there is supposedly pirates treasure. [hudsonriver.com]
it would be nice to find one of these [columbia.edu], called "General Washington's Watch Chain."
maybe a german u-boat? [uboat.net]
or relics from the age of steamboats [ulster.net].
the hudson is also pretty deep in places [highlands.com]. off of west point, for example (206 feet), or near bear mountain bridge (165 feet). it is an ancient river, as old as the appalachians. some of it was carved during the last ice age, and is similar to a norwegian fjord. plenty of room down there.
check this gem out, [hudsonvalleyruins.org] bannerman's island. an old arms dealer from the spanish american war blew up the castle he built with his business profits by locating his arsenal right next to his castle on his private island. oops. i've kayaked around it and can make out weird shapes in the shallow muck between the island and the shore. wonder what you would find near there!
zerg (Score:2)
It's too bad our seniors are too incompetent to get a winning entry in the underwater autonomous submersible competition... It'd be cool to explore the wrecks ourselves...
too late (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry, you're too late. The people with ulterior motives who don't behave responsibly have already been elected, and were the ones that directed the study to be done. They now have the information, and aren't giving it to the rest of us.
Hitch? (Score:3, Funny)
Geez, with over 200 wrecks, couldn't you just drag an anchor down the river and disturb at least a few? Or would suggesting that make this post a ``troll''?
Bring In Cussler! (Score:2)
Re:What? (Score:2)
Its not a Pitt novel. Its about Cussler and NUMA actually finding the wrecks, and diving on them, and in some cases bringing them up. (Things like the Hunley.) Its all based on fact, and is basically a trip report of the expeditions to locate them.
Maeryk
What I don't understand... (Score:4, Interesting)
What I don't understand is why the City of New York is doing it this way.
I'm employed by my local city government and within the last several years we've been developing a Geographic Information System. GIS is basically digital photos of the entire city with various meta data attached (street names; water, sewer, & electric lines; zoning info; etc.).
Long story short - it required photographs taken during VERY expensive fly-overs. Not only is the city going to use the GIS information internally (police, fire, planning, and engineering departments), but in an effort to recoup some of the costs the city is planning on selling the information to local businesses. How do you sell information that is publicly owned? Simple - don't let the public own it.
What they're doing is leasing access to the GIS data, but allowing a 3rd party (the ones who did the fly-overs) to actually own it. The city is then under no legal obligation to allow the public to get to it for free.
Why couldn't New York do the same and allow whoever did the sonar scans to own the data?
Whoops (Score:3, Interesting)
On the one hand, you can't fault GE for this line of thinking, as much of the dumping was done before the harm in PCBs were realized. On the other, if you treat an area like a sewer, you should own up to doing some sort of cleanup.
All that being said, there will be a big ecological impact if you're digging up ships buried for 400 years, well below where the PCBs are.
The shipwreck recovered in Kansas City, MO (Score:2)
Arrr! Avast! Such riches await! (Score:4, Funny)
The bottom of the Hudson is littered with wrecks containing priceless cargo from the Golden Age of industrialism in upstate New York.
Imagine the riches that await:
Most disgusting thing I've seen (Score:2)
the title seems a little sensational. (Score:2)
shouldn't that be:
"Hudson River Shipwrecks map kept secret"?
Re:Age (Score:3, Informative)
Henry Hudson was exploring the river in 1609. What do you mean by *old*, exactly?
Re:Age (Score:2)
Re:Age (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Age (Score:2)
Let's look at the title of the article:
Hudson Shipwrecks Found, but No Loose Lips
Did that say shipwrecks? I thought it did. Not tiny little sunken dugout canoes, but shipwrecks.
Then they go on to talk about the various types of ships they're talking about - a 19th century sailing sloop, and revolutionary war vessels. Hey, here's an idea!
SHIP [reference.com]:
1a) A vessel of considerable size for deep-water navigation.
b) A sailing vessel having three or more square-rigged masts.
2) An aircraft or spacecraft.
So uh... right. Please point me to the Native American tribe that built such vessels, and sailed them on the hudson. I'll be right here holding my breath!
Re:Age (Score:3, Informative)
So I'd say from 400 yrs or so.
Re:withholding the info is illegal (Score:2)
- violates someone's privacy
- endagers someone's safety
Then again:
IANAL + YANAL = pointless arguing that solves nothing.
(Kinda like
Re:they have to release the data (Score:2)
Silly me.