Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Forecast may be a bit off. That is current conditions on the inner coastal right now. We have white caps.
And this post as well as your other long one adds to Raider's and my post how?
As for the sensor height tell your family member thanks you because I would not use the 882 without. Keeping the mag just off the bottom is a key part of the process.
I do not even know if the 882 was used for the HTQ surveys. Just that 3 different surveys were conducted.
I am well aware of how precise the Geometric’s 882 magnetometer and software can be IF (1) the GPS uses is of a high caliber, (2) Lay back is correctly measured, (3) offset correctly measured, and (4) the length counter or cable marking are correct, and (6) the correct length was entered correctly. I have worked with Geometric’s and they are a very friendly and most helpful company. I have in the past Bata Tested software for them.
So we have now beaten our chest at each other so let’s look at some clues.
I see in the videos that the divers have gone down with a swing circle pike and I have also seen the divers searching with a line leading to the pike. Clue number one.
We know last year Seafarer came into ownership of a magnetometer where they announced they were magging the Juno area, they made no announcement for the Melbourne area. Clue number 2.
The methods you talk about is when you are currently do in a survey and usually of a small area. Seafarer submitted request for permits for all 3 area with a Dig and ID request so they had to of had surveys of the area. Clue number 3.
These surveys had to have come from HTQ. Not well known unless you keep your ears to the ground in the community is HTQ conducted 3 surveys of the area, I can confirm 2 just by looking at the priority listing which has 2 different number systems. I also know that these surveys were done between 2005 to 2009. Clue number 4.
So before I would say it is just a jump in and find the target I would look at these clues and add, how much has the GPS improved in the 10 years, who did the surveys and with what type of magnetometer.
Now as for identifying the mag hit. So a diver jumps in and within feet he finds a large oil filter, the gamma hit was only a 2. Does he come up or do a search? Was the oil filter thrown over after the survey or before?
Never said an Arm Chair player could have never played the game. But an arm chair player is in fact not on the current playing field with all the clues, the answers to the questions, and as well as the current situations.
My point is to let them (Seafarer) play the game and not critique them or yell at the monitor so to speak. I will wait and see. What I have invested will not kill me if nothing pans out, the nature of the market is a game of chance unless you have some inside info and I do not play that type of game.
So when painting a picture make sure the whole picture is painted not just the sunshine.
Kentcrek, not to slam you but to give you some insight since some of the bubbas that are arm chair experts here are leading you astay.
On the mod to dig and id the listing of target have almost a full minute of latitude and over a half of minute of longitude between gps coordinates.
So in plotting that is 6068 by 3034 foot area or 18,410,312 sq ft area.
Not saying the entire area needs to be searched but each target is check either by grid squares or circle searches. In the video it appears they use circle searches. A normal search is between 40 and 50 feet.
So let use the smaller of the 2
A 40 foot seach circle is 5,024 sq ft.
32 targets at 5,024 is 160,768 sq ft of area to search.
Remember I am saying square feet.
Don't look now but Seafarer just posted videos disrupting the bottom. So much for a swim permit.
You received 2600 pages that did include the disapproved reports as well as the correspondence relating to the RAI on the reports but not the approved reports themself. The FBAR was required to provide all documentation and so what you are saying is that they did not. Hummmmmmmm.............
So why don't you post the approved Reports to FBAR.
Current sea state..... 3 to 4 foot seas at about 9 seconds with a 1 foot secondary at about 4 seconds. On shore winds guessing at 9 to 10. So much for the NOAA.
Treasure hunting is for the young, if you remembered in one of my posts I stated it was bed time for bonzo. Kind of give you a hint.
You are correct you did not say that, I did and was bouncing back and forth last year on the safety of getting in and out of the boat. Can't blow without finding an area to blow and need divers for that, can't set the blowers directly over target without divers. And if the blowers are bouncing around you don't get a true layering. Now if you just want to blow the (bleep) out of the bottom I guess you do not need anything but luck and a don't give a (bleep) attitude. Keep in mind I too have done these operations.
So you based you opinion on a rejected report and not the priority listing that was provided in the Mod to the permit for dig and id. Also, since the report was rejected by the FBAR and SCM will NOT post the approved ones I would not make any call on that report..
From what I see on the listing is that these are in a very tight area, very few seconds separate the targets. So not saying it is or is not but to claim it is not without knowing the gamma or what is there is noting but your best guess.
You where on a somewhat of a fact post so I will tag on too.
Let us look at some facts and Assumption based on these facts.
The FBAR
Mission is to preserve historical resources in which they issue and monitor permits to both Academia and Corporate.
For both the applicant must provide a Listing of key personnel, assets to be used, scope of work, and financial statement.
Insurance rules were repelled.
Assumption – These requirements must be provided by the personal completing the actions.
The USACE
Mission is to protect beach erosion, shore lines, and all assets that fall within their scope of responsibility.
The FDEP
Mission is to protect the environment, wild life, water quality, and air quality.
Both the USACE and FDEP have no special permitting for the permits the FBAR issue. The permitting for this type of work falls into the construction requirements. The same permit a person wanting to build a pier would have to submit the same request as a treasure hunter. The FDEP also includes if I wanted a pool, build a gas station, put in a road to my house, build a house, etc…….
They need to provide a listing of personnel or companies conducting the work, assets that will be used, and proof of liability insurance.
Even in the permit requires that the USACE or DFEP must be notify when CONSTRUCTION starts, when CONSTRUCTION is suspended, and when CONSTRUCTION is completed. The Treasure Hunters must translate that to when diving starts for season, when diving stops for season, or when the diver just give up.
Assumption (somewhat) – If I want a pier the Lead company would request a permit, NOT the electricians, and carpenters, and masons, etc.……. All must be on the permit as to conducting work and all must have liability insurance. If I wanted to have the headache, if I wanted to have a pier built I could go out to get the permit and list all but I would rather find a lead company and pay him to do it.
Maybe if someone asked for all permits associated with a specific permit instead of a specific company they may have gotten a different response, IMO. But I really don’t care because if it were true that a CEO lied on an Official Company PR for personal gain, that person that knew he lied would either submit a formal complaint or sue the CEO in court instead of typing away on a message board.
I believe the PR and nothing from those closed minds can persuade me to change my opinion / mind. Case Closed………… For me but let the others go ahead and ramble on and on and on…………….
Funny wording when you use "custody" instead of "on file" or "any records"
We do not have custody of a record of permits from ACOE or DEP for Seafarer’s Quest current permit area.
Custody - immediate charge and control (as over a ward or a suspect) exercised by a person or an authority;
Just food for thought.
You really did get my other side comment in my post SCM did you? It the post you only linked the Exploration Permit. The use of Blowers is not in that, it is in the Mods to a permit which I found on you files when you linked the Permit.
https://www.scribd.com/document/318328330/2016-07-06-Seafarers-2016-05-Amendment-Executed
Here is the mod request in your files that tells all that SFRX can use blowers.........
Key part of the requirement in the permit you provided where it address the FDEP and USACE is:
"Copies of these permits must be submitted to the Division prior to the commencement of exploration activities."
Since no one can confirm that they are diving just maybe SFRX is sitting on it just to make you mad.
I am not going to argue points of view, the rules are not case law, they are rules. The main Bold point of my last post is Capped.
I am done with this issue, if we hear they are diving then they must have meet this rule even in spirit. It is their job not yours or mine.
I do thank you for posting the permit, I like the Prop Wash Deflection. Didn't even really put conditions on them out side normal requirements.
The way you Assume the Letter of the law Knowledge Toward Other departments doesn’t mean That is How Everyone Has to Assume No matter Due process.
You really need to look at this more objectively. Yes HTQ held the area 1 and 3, however, HTQ is a partner of Seafarer's Quest, LLC and the other partner is Seafarer Exploration Corp. The permit request to FBAR is from Seafarer's Quest, LLC. The permit for area 2 was issued to Seafarer's Quest, LLC.
IMO what I see as Seafarer Exploration takes care of the FBAR stuff and HTQ takes care of all the others. Best guess, but make since, since HTQ has more areas. Who knows it may be in their agreement. Write Kyle and see if you can get their contract.
From what I know of DFEP and USACE what they want to know is what boats and what personal will be working the area and are their personal and boats covered for liability. As long as these are the same names on the FBAR permit then they are good to go.
Again let us wait until you get your response from FBAR and stop beating it to death.
I did notvask what you asked FBAR so most of that was fodder.
Your statement The PR was a phony as they come. The dates..... don't even correspond.
If the dates in the phony PR don't correspond with what we hope you will post when you get them then you will be correct. If they do not get posted like the 2588 pages then we will know.
I am going to save this post and when you post the permits that you requested we will see if the dates are off. Hopefully, it will not join the 2588 pages of the 2600 that never saw the light.
What I hear is a direct opposite of that. I hope you are not getting that from the same location that gave you info on everyone was quiting last year.
I would agree on your time line if working south of the Sebastion Inlet where the botton mainly consists of shell rubble and coral. The area north of the inlet goes from shell rubble for about 10 to 12 miles, then it starts to turn into muck, the further north you go towards the Coco Beach area the deeper the muck. This stuff is like jello or better yet pudding. Finding anything other than what may ring off is very time consuming. Not trying to say it is impossible just hard. Drudges plug and the best method is propwash with divers cutting the muck. The best thing about muck is it preserve almost anything. I pulled up a beer can off Coco beach that dated to the late 1960s and it still had the color and no degradation and it was only 3.5 feet into the muck.
I am done with this, you are bringing a July 2014 statement by SFRX into a 2016 time frame. Also where does it state that the 2 Permits are to be reported in writing? If it was and to the Director then one she may not know or remember and two you would not have a copy to selectively look thru to post. Since SFRXvas not only submitted they have the permits but also the dates on need renewal I see no point of beating this dead house where you see it as one of the very few thing out of 2600 pages to beat them up.
I never said it is a good old boy thing, I said it will always be in the State's favor. Big difference. Please do not miss quote me too.
She is correct. In just a Exploration permit is to survey an area and only allows for exploration dives of target. BUT a modified (D&I) permit can uses blowers.
As for SFRX needed a FDEP or USACE permits at the time of Mary's testimony, show me where she said that SFRX still needs them? What you post states that they are needed for Permits.
I will once again explain the time. When you submit they have 90 days to accept or reject UNLESS. ....
The FBAR sends out a RAI. The 90 days in suspended until in the State's opinion has been answered. If another RAI is submitted then it is still in limbo until answered. I seem to remember you posting at least one RAI.
Your 90 days is a none issue which you are selectively making it an issue.
Last but not least. Look at the 2 permit requests and compare the 2014 to the 2016. This in itself shows me the growth the company has taken in the last 2 years in their knowledge of the business as well as the FBAR requirements.
Well that's all for tonight it is bed time for Bonzo.
There is a very big difference between the one in 2014 and the one that was posted today. As well as new personnel in the FBAR. So come to the present, stop living in the past.
Again, lack of knowledge "VERY simple to obtain".
APPLICATION FOR EXPLORATION PERMIT
Name, address, contact information and date of birth for the applicant:
Please provide the following information in a separate document:
Names, addresses, contact information for key project personnel
Name, address, contact information and date of birth for the project archaeologist
Attach to this application:
(a) a signed statement by a professional underwater archaeologist expressing willingness and intent to serve as the project archaeologist and certifying that he or she has read and will comply with the responsibilities and requirements set forth in chapter 1A-31, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.):
(b) a resume of the project archaeologist: and
(c) specific details of training, knowledge, experience and skills of the project archaeologist meeting the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Professional Qualifications and the standards set forth in rule 1A-31.030, F.A.C.
List all previous permits, contracts, leases or other permissions for shipwreck projects with which the applicant, key project personnel and the project archaeologist were involved
Names, descriptions and Florida registration numbers for all boats proposed to participate in the permitted activities
Description of remote sensing equipment to be used and experience and qualification of the operator, consistent with the requirements of rule 1A-46(3)(d), F.A.C.
Requested duration of the permit, if less than three years
Written description of the area proposed to be covered by the permit expressed in degrees/decimal minutes and yards
Attach to this application a current nautical chart showing boundaries of the area proposed to be covered by the permit with coordinates at each corner, center and other relevant point consistent with the written description.
Description of the proposed scope of work to be undertaken and archaeological guidelines appropriate to the types of activities proposed to be conducted Minimum standards of diligence expressed as a projected schedule of specific work activities to be initiated and completed.
The last statement is the most difficult. What are the parts of the Archaeological Guidelines? This in itself can be up to 12 pages of data. It must be precised and meet the requirements of the FBAR or should I say their interpretation of the elements of the Guideline are.
By the way the above post is 1A-31.040 Application Procedures.
(1) Applications for permits issued under this chapter shall be made on forms prescribed by the division. Application forms may be requested in writing at the division’s address in Rule 1A-31.0032, F.A.C. Application for Exploration Permit (Form HR6E9001-08), (4/09) is herein incorporated by reference, effective 7-20-09.
From my experience there is no such thing as a simple permit especially in Florida but you should know that with all your knowledge you have spread on the board about permits.
As for blowing, I seem to recall a few posts you and I did the back and forth on the legality of blowing. If I remember you stated that it was not and that it was not only in the permit but the 1A-31. But I could be wrong since the State approved the mods.
I also know when Fire Fighter have to send in a member into a vapor filled room they use the word "OATH" for about the same thing. Like to see someone make fun of them too.
Since I dive, have used blowers in the pass, and looked for shinny stuff I see that as being a very smart thing. When placing blowers over the correct position and getting the down wash to the correct volume without doing damage or just blow everything away, a diver has had to go up and down a number of times. This can be very dangerous to the diver especially if the water is deeper than 2 atmospheres. So make fun, it just shows your lack of knowledge.
Sorry I didn't get the punch line
Where did the week quote come from?
A serious slam.
Treasure is never found anywhere until it is found somewhere. I do know HTQ had worked the area but for a very short time. They were stopped from working early on during their permit period. The Polly-el did work some of the area but that area was very small in comparison to HTQs original 9 sq mile permitted area. Yes I know IYO what has been found is debris from a wreck further out to sea. Just keep in mind there are 3 ships that it is said to have been destroyed by the storm north of the ships that ran aground in Sebastian. These ships will have a trail of debris that can be followed. When finding a trail you either spend time going one way or the other, but if you find the end it stops the guess work. The beach will always be the end. Now as you follow this trail the closer you get to the source the more likely it may lead to the good stuff. You have also in the pasted said the company in the Cape area is finding items. All the info I hear in the area is they are on a French ship. So any looking between the Inlet and the Cape has a good chance to find one of these ships. As for years it takes to find. The Fishers stumbled over the silver bars and searched for many a year and paid their divers nothing during the time. Even the treasure hunter you have at times spoke highly of found his one claim to fame when they dragged an anchor overnight and decided to go head and dive there.
Who now is misleading investors?
Swim permit, really? Per the 1A-31 there is no requirement to (swim) on a historical wreck.
Let's streeeeeeeeeeeeeeetch the truth...................
What different does it make, isn't HTQ a partner? Maybe, that is part of their partnership agreement. Key word as you pointed out is renewed. That means they have had one since starting operations. That blows a hole in your theory of the partnership not having one. The PR blows a hole in them needing surveys still as well as not having an Archeologists, or the time requirements for approval. Oh well, nice try.
Is Sinclair The archeologist?
Who cares? When you analyze apples and oranges all you get is mixed fruit and nothing else.
First, if it is true what has been posted that Mary stated a permit is in process of being approved then SFRX must have a archeologist in their team. One of the requirements.
And, when writing official correspondence all information is about the main topic. You do not put a subject in the correspondence that is not with in that scope. The letter was about the reports not meeting the State's requirements and the reports are the archeologist responsibility. So I could read this as giving guidance to SFRX on getting assistance.
The attempt to read this as a negative is once again easy to identify. Blending subjects shows this. The slant shows true intention. This happened last Nov. Since then they have submitted new reports, at least 3 if not 4. Who signed these reports will tell you who is currently on staff.
Now as for the report, the State turned over 2600 pages of information to the lawyers for the Defendant. I really think if the reports where not within these 2600 pages SCM would be posting that items were withheld.
I bet the reports do not assist the slant, and that is also why out of the 2600 pages we only see a handful. Must have been really disappointing when reviewing the 2600 pages.
So you agree there were earlier permit requests being reviewed, then the clock stopped and then they were resubmitted. I wonder if having a new Director take over in Dec have anything to do with it?
As for the reports, I guess that the 2600 pages of information you got didn't have very much information.