Page 397 - Green - Maritime Archaeology: A Technical Handbook. 2nd ed
P. 397
376
Maritime Archaeology: A Technical Handbook, Second Edition
5.
based on the state of preservation of the site, thus discouraging the concept of looting sites and then revealing their presence for a reward. Care should be taken in the assessment of the sites. A number of countries have adopted a reward system. This reward system does not need to be financial, but could include a civil award instead.
The results of the work should be publicly available. A museum is an ideal venue for this. It is essential that there is a forum where all members of the public (diving and non-diving) can see the results of the work and, more particularly, become involved in it. At the very least this should be some form of physical and visual description of the work; then the public can see and understand what the objective and outcome of the program is. A Web site is a useful additional method for achieving this.
A. GENERAL NON-DIVING PUBLIC
It is difficult to assess the attitude of the general public toward under- water archaeology. Its understanding of the subject is likely to be limited, simply because archaeologists have not generally worked in the public forum. There are few popular books that give a true picture of the subject and the media is usually saturated with stories of treasure hunting. Museum displays, popular articles, publications, the Internet, wreck trails, and tele- vision documentaries have all proven to be successful ways of enabling public access to information and encouraging public involvement.
B. RECREATIONAL DIVING PUBLIC (NON-LOCAL)
This group represents one of the main threats to underwater archaeo- logical sites in any region. As the group that is likely to have the largest impact on underwater cultural heritage, it is the most important one to influ- ence. Within the group, there are possibly three subgroups: a minority of dedicated divers who are extremely interested in wishing to help or be actively involved in the preservation of this heritage, a majority of divers who remove material from sites out of ignorance, and divers who purposely set out to loot sites for financial or personal gain. The first two groups can be encouraged to be involved in programs and training courses like those provided by the Nautical Archaeological Society (NAS). The third group is unlikely to be influenced by involvement in the program. It is probably better to attempt to marginalize them, using protective legislation to curb their activities. It is possible that, over a period of time, through the object