|
Before
Terry and I went back out to the lake that morning, a friend recommended
calling the Lake Champlain Maritime Museum. Several years before,
Dan Carpenter had taken a diving certification course from LCMM’s current
Director, Arthur Cohn. Dan thought that Art could offer some assistance.
We agreed that we could use some helpful advice and Dan made the call.
 |
I didn’t know Art Cohn
but I was familiar with the Lake Champlain Maritime Museum. I had taken
my family to the museum in the fall of 1998. The LCMM conservators had
just begun with the conservation of an anchor, recovered from Plattsburgh
Bay that year. The anchor was believed to have fallen from the British
ship, Confiance, during the Battle of Plattsburgh in 1814.
Not only did we have the opportunity to view the anchor from the Lab’s
lobby, we also had one of the staff offer us a personal tour of the lab.
|
 |
|
Left and right: Key to Liberty
exhibit at the Lake Champlain Maritime Museum. Click on the
thumbnails to see a large image in a new window.
|
Philadelphia II |
He pointed out several
of the anchor’s markings and inscriptions, and explained the various
conservation techniques they were employing to preserve them.
We also visited LCMM’s Key to Liberty exhibit, an
interpretation of the struggle for the lake’s control during the
Revolutionary War. The exhibit contained a wealth of information about
the Battle of Valcour Island and the American Fleet’s demise near Panton,
Vermont. We were also welcomed aboard the Philadelphia II, a
full-scale replica of the original, American gunboat. If anybody knew
what we should do about the Valcour cannon, the staff at LCMM would. |
|
|
Ernest Haas painting of the
Philadelphia sinking on display at the Key to Liberty
exhibit. |
Art Cohn and I
introduced ourselves during a cell phone conversation from Terry’s
boat. Once I explained what we had discovered, he suggested a
course of action; one that I wouldn’t fully appreciate for time.
He would first contact New York State Education Department and U.S. Navy officials on our
behalf. He would then assist us in obtaining the required permits for an
archeological study of the site. Until then, we would have to suspend any
further excavation of the cannon or the surrounding area. When I began to
protest he patiently explained that it wasn’t only a matter of
archeological science, it was a matter of law. |
It is not uncommon for
divers to make archeological discoveries and remove them from their
original settings. Undoubtedly, some artifacts are removed by collectors
as souvenirs. But I believe that most are removed out of a sense of
protecting them. Underwater navigation is difficult and a diver may
recover an artifact out of concerns of not being able to find it again.
Because underwater sites are also remote, a diver may make the recovery
out of a fear of not being able to protect his discovery. In either
event, the diver makes the recovery out of his appreciation for the
artifact’s value and because he feels his options for its protection are
limited.
Certainly, artifacts have value
in what they are – objects of significant historical or cultural
importance. But an artifact’s value also lies in where it is. As
my friend and fellow VBRP member, Matt Booth, puts it: “Each artifact is
but another piece in an overall mosaic and has more value when viewed as a
part of the whole picture than standing alone. The sum is greater than
all its parts.” This holds especially true on a battle site. Information
and inferences can be obtained from an artifact’s position with related
artifacts. Once its position is lost, so is a large portion of its
value. The “overall mosaic” looses its definition.
During our phone conversation
and later meetings, Art made me aware of a New York State Education Law
statute that protects property of archeological or scientific value on
state lands. The statute, Education Law §233, also provides for the
establishment of an archeological permit process. The intent of the law
is to not only to protect objects of historical or scientific importance,
but also to protect “the acquisition and dissemination of knowledge” that
is derived from them. Until we obtained an archeological permit from
the New York State Department of Education and thoroughly mapped
the site for later study, the cannon would have to remain where it was.
I could appreciate the
importance of preserving the cannon’s full value and adhering to the law,
but I was still concerned about the possibility of an unknowing diver
tampering with it. It was a concern that often bordered on panic.
Fortunately, Valcour Bay is only three-quarters of a mile wide and several
residences are located along its shores. Art suggested that I enlist the
help of friends and area residents. Together, we formed a “community
watch” of the site.
Art also set up a meeting with
Mr. Philip Lord, Jr., Historical Survey Chief of New York State Museum’s
Office of State History. The three of us met at LCMM. Besides discussing
the discovery and the archaeological permit application, we also discussed
current area concerns. Three significant battle sites are located in the
short distance between Valcour and Plattsburgh Bays. Two of these sites
have been granted status as National Historic Landmarks on the National
Register of Historic Places Inventory. For an area rich with cultural
and historical material, the lack of a formalized archeological management
plan was a major concern. Another was the diving community’s overall
ignorance or disregard of the federal and state statutes that protect
these sites. Divers have collected numerous artifacts over the years and
if state officials were notified of a discovery, it was often after the
material had been removed.
Both Art and Mr. Lord saw an
opportunity to address these concerns with this latest discovery. We all
agreed that the best way to educate divers of these concerns, the laws and
the science was to have them intimately involved with the process. The
Valcour Bay Research Project was designed with that in mind and volunteer
sport divers have played a significant role in protecting, studying and
mapping the site. They’ve become the backbone of the project and a major
contributor to the project’s successes.
In my excitement and out
of a sense of taking responsibility for my actions, I’m certain that I
would have arranged to have the cannon brought to the surface. But if I
would have removed the cannon before funds were obtained for its
conservation and the site was adequately mapped, I would have been
responsible for more harm than good. Now that I have the benefit of
hindsight and a firsthand view of the VBRP’s successes, I realize that the
formations of the VBRP and its long-term goals were the better
alternative.
How we see a problem is
often at the root of the problem itself. Once I saw the cannon’s value
for contributing to our knowledge of the Battle of Valcour, I was able to
focus on what was most important – mapping the site. As you’ll see in
later additions to The Valcour Bay Research Project on the Web and
from our mapping, we’ve been able to trace the movements of a specific
vessel within the American Fleet. Who knows what else we’ll discover as
the mapping continues?
Thanks to the
involvement of the divers, Mr. Lord, LCMM and the introduction of an
emerging management approach (Submerged Cultural Resource Management), the
cannon’s value may reach its full historical and educational potential.
From this collaborative effort, historical links have been developed to
the cannon itself. I hope you’ll take a look in subsequent pages to
The Valcour Bay Research Project on the Web and on links to Lake
Champlain Maritime Museum’s website. I think you’ll agree that it’s some
mosaic.
For
more information on Education Law § 233 and archeological permits on state
lands, click on:
http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/services/srvpermits.html.. |
