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.
We are all staying alive, staying alive...ha ha ha ha
staying alive.
of to the tune of "Our day Will Come"?
You Keep Me Hanging On??
Try "Saltydog1733"
Saltydog's posts below are grouped and start in 2009, dates removed and might be out of order. Some are responses to other posts.
Everyone should determine what they want to believe.
Saltydog:
The fact is that the Junobeach wreck was first discovered back in the 1950's, that an admiralty arrest was issued in 1988 and various groups have worked the site ever since, including some very successful salvagers, AND NO TREASURE HAS BEEN FOUND. McKee, Marx and Molinar all unsuccessful. Yes, there is a shipwreck there. Every scuba diver in Palm Beach county has been on it. But unfortunately the ship was not carrying treasure. Even though it took Mel Fischer 18 years to find Atocha motherlode, he was still finding bits and pieces of treasure right from the beginning.
The identity has never been determined, which is pretty much the norm for shipwrecks this old and scattered. Some people think it may be the Santa Margarita, which Potter listed as a "ghost ship."
first, treasure has to exist on the wrecksite and then the divers have to find it, and finally they can photograph it. but sense the first scenario is not a reality, the second and third never will be.
I don't own any sfrx stock. My money would be better served given to the homeless guy sitting on the curb at the Kwiky-Mart.
I am a native Palm Beach county resident and former commercial diver and spent many years exploring in the vicinity of the Junobeach wreck, before I moved on down to salvage in the keys.
Keep wishing and maybe after 30 years of looking, the treasure galleon will mysteriuously appear
go to sebastion and vero and ft peirce for treasure. go to jupiter inlet. go to the keys. go to cape canaveral. but there isn't any at juno beach-just a supply boat sailing from havana to st augustine.
other sites? like????
you obviusly have no idea what is going on in politics regarding treasure hunting all over the world but esp. in the US. restrictive laws, Spain claims all their ships are never abandoned, archeologists screaming "looters" etc...
there are no more sites to choose from unless they get off there butts and start searching in Federal/Intl waters themselves and they better find a pirate ship because as soon as you say SPANISH GALLEON you are in deep doo-doo.
do some research before you make foolish statements.
and all the shipwreck sites that have been "grandfathered in" are all worked to death. Bits and pieces left.
Why they settled on the Juno site which facts not judgement show was NOT a treasure wreck and thus has never produced any treasure...oh wait, I think I know why..................Do YOU know the ship's name? If someone told you they have identified the ship off Junobeach, they are lying to you.
I registered here because someone alerted me to what I feel is misinformation about the shipwreck.
I am glad you realize it is speculative, but there are a number of "surer bets" available in the same industry....DO YOUR HOMEWORK
paperboy wrote: Show me reasearch that says it is not a treasure wreck.
I can do better than that. I can show you no treasure! None has ever been found after 33 years of exploration of the site. How many more years of no treasure being found do you need to convince you?
paperboy wrote: Magnotometer readings as you know are inconclusive at best. They just give you a rough estimate of where some metal may be.
It's spelled magnetometer. And the results from a proper mag survey are not "inconclusive at best." It is obvious you have never used such a device and know nothing about them. The software on today's magnetometers will PINPOINT the exact location of any ferrous anomaly. There is nothing inconclusive about that. All you have to do is dig it up
1) I read somewhere (was it here?) that Seafarers signed a 3 year agreement with Mr. Laird. They did not. It is a 1 year agreement that expires in 2011. (tic-toc)
2) If Seafarer did have permission to just go "explore," why aren't they doing so? I work at the marina located not even 1/4 of a mile south of the Seafarer dive house on US1. The boats never leave the dock, and when they do, it is to go party on Peanut Island or the Loxahatchee river sandbar. No one is doing any exploring and hasn't for many, many months. They do have lots of parties and riff-raff hanging out there however.
3) FTC could be right. Many people within the treasure hunting community have speculated that the anchor and other artifacts found on the Juno Beach site are what fell from the bottom of the ship as it started breaking up, before it hit shore about 3 miles to the north. This is not unheard of. The Atocha scatter trail is 11 miles long and some 1715 fleet wrecks have 3-4 mile long scatter trails. The Juno Beach site is not as old as Seafarer leads you to believe. The Jupiter inlet wreck is from 1659 and may of the objects found there are similar to the Juno site.
There wasn't any treasure on the Juno Beach wreck when Nelson Wait first discovered the site in 1977. There wasnt any treasure on it when a extensive salvage operation was started in 1988 (see link to article) and guess what folks...there isnt any treasure on it now, 33 years after the site was discovered. Because there isn't any
From the Motley Fool, 17, Oct., 2010. (It's as if they had SFRX specifically in mind when writing this)
"The penny stock universe is an exceptionally dangerous place to be. Con artists can manipulate penny stock prices easily, since the companies involved are small, with relatively few shares. The online world has made it easier still, as stocks can be hyped via email, forums and elsewhere, sending share prices up sharply as naive investors pile in. Then the hyper sells his shares, before the price collapses. You're best off simply steering clear. Many penny stocks are trading on promises and possibilities (oil or gold discoveries are around the corner; imminent cures for cancer), not on robust balance sheets and track records of profitability. Remember that great investments don't go trolling for buyers."
Oh, then there are those nagging facts that never go away like 1) no treasure has EVER been found on the Juno site 2) there is no archival or archaeological evidence to support the site as being a treasure wreck 3) the sand covering the site is 30-50 feet deep in many places 4) Seafarer has no permit and gloomy prospects for a permit in the future 5) even with a permit, they do not have & will never have the equipment to excavate that deep or ever get Army Corp permission/permit to dig that deep 6) they have no proven track record of anything other than mis-management and buffonery
The Juno Beach 'site' was first discovered back in 1977 by Nelson Wait, when he found an anchor in 74 feet of water. Nelson didn't know he had found a wreck site-just an anchor-and the area was only sporadically explored during the next 10 years.
Finally, in October of 1987, Nelson started a company with Victor Benilous called Artifacts/Treasure Services Inc. One month later the company was voluntarily dissolved. That same month, ARS, Archaeological Recovery Services, was started. (When trying to get permits from the government, it helps if you use terms like "archaeological" and not "treasure" in the company name) That business lasted until 1993.
However, from 1989 to 1992, Nelson and his wife had their own company to explore the site called The Last Galleon Ltd. Jud Laird may have been involved at this time but his name doesn't appear in company records. Despite many, many exploratory dives made, NO TREASURE OR CANNONS OR ANY SIGNIFICANT ARTIFACTS WERE EVER FOUND BETWEEN 1977 AND 1992. Mr. Wait was still living in the West Palm area when I talked to him about this myself.
In 1993, Tulco Resources, under Jud Laird, was started. A mag survey was done, with over 1400 "targets" identified. Most of these are junk targets, old lobster traps, metals cans, fishing gear, dredge pipes, etc, as the wreck site is in a major boating/shipping lane. A number of interesting artifacts were found from 1993 until 2009 but again, NO TREASURE. NO CANNONS. Why? It wasn't carrying any treasure and thus it didn't need many cannon to arm itself.
It is an old ship indeed. But the minority of old wooden sailing ships, not the majority, were treasure ships. Another tell-tale clue is its distance from shore-just a little more than a mile. Ships using the strong, northerly flowing gulf stream current traveled much further offshore-usually at least 2 leagues (6 miles) in this part of the Florida straits. Vessels traveling south hugged the coast to avoid the northerly flowing currents, as this one was doing when it sank.
The Juno Beach wreck is much more likely to be a trading/merchant vessel traveling between St Augustine and Havana.
I haven't only done my research on the Juno beach wreck site, I have explored it via hundreds of dives since the late 1980s. I have talked to many other people who have personally investigated the site since it was "first discovered in 1977."
I put that last part in quotes because there is very strong evidence (again through research), that the site was actually found back in the 1950's. That would be shortly after the Aqualung was invented. Where else to try a new invention that allows you to breath underwater than the crystal clear and warm waters off Palm beach county?
Those divers from the 1950/60's found an anchor and lots of artifacts associated with a 16th century wooden sailing ship, but no gold, no silver, no coins, no cannon. The anchor they found was of the same size and period of the one sitting on the bottom right now at the wreck site. I have many other supporting doccuments but will only post this one:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,369940.0.html
Saltydog1733
Yes, I have dove a number of the 1733 wreck sites.
By the way, per my link in my previous posting, for those of you not from Florida, Riviera Beach is the area to the north of the Palm Beach (Lake Worth) inlet. Riviera Beach was incorporated in 1922 and that stretch of coast north until almost Jupiter was referred to by that name.
Juno Beach was not incorporated until 1953, so no one prior to about 1960 referred to the area by that name.
Northofadollar posted:
"I'm 99% sure we will get treasure from Juno"
Really? Other than a fantasy of yours, what sir, do you base that on? (I already know the answer...until today, 12/17/2010, there isn't any archival, archaeological, geological, or other physical proof of any treasure being at the Juno site)
The only one legitimately making any money on this deal is Mr. Laird, who basically rented out a barren area of seafloor for $60K
I think they had Seafarers in mind when they made the movie "The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything."
The 1715 fleet wrecks were 1st discovered in the late 1950's and salvors are still finding incredible treasures to this day.
The Atocha, part of the debris trail first discovered in 1970, still yields treasure on an almost daily basis.
Hundreds of coins have been found on the Jupiter wreck, discovered in the early 1980's, over the last few years.
Even a pirate in the Bahamas, working clandestinely, can find treasure from the worked out Maravilla wreck, found in 1972.
And on the Juno Beach wreck, first discovered in 1977.....NADA. ZIP. ZILCH. NOTHING. Hmmmm.
But it's definitely a treasure wreck!!!! (or so goes the cry) We know this because of all the treasure that has been found. Well wait, that can't be right. Oh, because we have a copy of the ship's manifest. Wait, we don't have that either. We don't even have ship name. Or even a potential name. But you know those darn Spaniards, they were terrible record keepers. I know, It must be buried under 30 feet of sand! How convenient!
So "allegedly" a handful of days were spent last year digging with the m/v Virgilona. They couldn't hit bottom using that vessel. Nothing was found. And now the Virgilona is going away-Mr. Keith Webb has much better use for it on the productive Santa Margarita shipwreck. So that leaves the permit-less Seafarers, on a treasure wreck without treasure with the rust bucket vessel Iron Maiden, which couldn't dig it's way out of a wet paper bag. Good luck to yer!
And has anyone bothered to read the drivel at the top of this forum? Is a 14 year old kid writing those "releases?"
What are they feeding the Virgalona...it keeps getting longer every year? When I worked on her back in the early 80's, she was only 51 feet long.
Isn't ol' Salty a gem.
Call him... he knows.30+++ years experience
Richard you are so close to NAILING this.
your quote
"Don't worry this will be 20 cents again real soon!"
16.5 U.S today
Where are we going from 20? 6? or 45?
Strictly tequila, its known I have a collection and after 3 long dry years, I finally restocked it a bit.
Ole'
Fanduel sucks, I just tried Angry Birds.
OOpps
12 cent close today.
OOpps
20 cents coming real soon
your quote
"Don't worry this will be 20 cents again real soon!"
You could be right this time
Blowback and downer? 21st century stuff
Is that related to that 70's term blow
job?
1. I know you and others feel old posts have no relevance. Are you kidding?
2. You and Hangover sort of 'lit your hair on fire' when I posted about the video and someone torpedoing Juno (thanks to those correcting me, NOT Lantana)and upon reading my absolute favorite SFRX poster "Saltydog1733" its pretty obvious the wrong torpedo was used. They pretty much need the navy with real torpedos and depth charges to go thru 30 to 50 ft of sand. 40ft X 100ft X 100ft is 15,000 yards to displace.
3. Saltydog's posts below are grouped and start in 2009, dates removed and might be out of order. His profile has them all. Some are responses to other posts.
4. I know the SFRX judgement has been posted repeatedly and "they will defend against posters" blah blahing on the internet.
5. Fact is Salty's first post is August 18th 2009, I don't see Seafarer taking him to court over his posts and IMO they are smart enough to leave this old rattlesnake with over 30 years experience alone.
6. Hangovertrading, your response to me "bring on the DD", hopefully this is a start of what you expected?
7. Everyone should determine what they want to believe.
Saltydog:
The fact is that the Junobeach wreck was first discovered back in the 1950's, that an admiralty arrest was issued in 1988 and various groups have worked the site ever since, including some very successful salvagers, AND NO TREASURE HAS BEEN FOUND. McKee, Marx and Molinar all unsuccessful. Yes, there is a shipwreck there. Every scuba diver in Palm Beach county has been on it. But unfortunately the ship was not carrying treasure. Even though it took Mel Fischer 18 years to find Atocha motherlode, he was still finding bits and pieces of treasure right from the beginning.
The identity has never been determined, which is pretty much the norm for shipwrecks this old and scattered. Some people think it may be the Santa Margarita, which Potter listed as a "ghost ship."
first, treasure has to exist on the wrecksite and then the divers have to find it, and finally they can photograph it. but sense the first scenario is not a reality, the second and third never will be.
I don't own any sfrx stock. My money would be better served given to the homeless guy sitting on the curb at the Kwiky-Mart.
I am a native Palm Beach county resident and former commercial diver and spent many years exploring in the vicinity of the Junobeach wreck, before I moved on down to salvage in the keys.
Keep wishing and maybe after 30 years of looking, the treasure galleon will mysteriuously appear
go to sebastion and vero and ft peirce for treasure. go to jupiter inlet. go to the keys. go to cape canaveral. but there isn't any at juno beach-just a supply boat sailing from havana to st augustine.
other sites? like????
you obviusly have no idea what is going on in politics regarding treasure hunting all over the world but esp. in the US. restrictive laws, Spain claims all their ships are never abandoned, archeologists screaming "looters" etc...
there are no more sites to choose from unless they get off there butts and start searching in Federal/Intl waters themselves and they better find a pirate ship because as soon as you say SPANISH GALLEON you are in deep doo-doo.
do some research before you make foolish statements.
and all the shipwreck sites that have been "grandfathered in" are all worked to death. Bits and pieces left.
Why they settled on the Juno site which facts not judgement show was NOT a treasure wreck and thus has never produced any treasure...oh wait, I think I know why..................Do YOU know the ship's name? If someone told you they have identified the ship off Junobeach, they are lying to you.
I registered here because someone alerted me to what I feel is misinformation about the shipwreck.
I am glad you realize it is speculative, but there are a number of "surer bets" available in the same industry....DO YOUR HOMEWORK
paperboy wrote: Show me reasearch that says it is not a treasure wreck.
I can do better than that. I can show you no treasure! None has ever been found after 33 years of exploration of the site. How many more years of no treasure being found do you need to convince you?
paperboy wrote: Magnotometer readings as you know are inconclusive at best. They just give you a rough estimate of where some metal may be.
It's spelled magnetometer. And the results from a proper mag survey are not "inconclusive at best." It is obvious you have never used such a device and know nothing about them. The software on today's magnetometers will PINPOINT the exact location of any ferrous anomaly. There is nothing inconclusive about that. All you have to do is dig it up
1) I read somewhere (was it here?) that Seafarers signed a 3 year agreement with Mr. Laird. They did not. It is a 1 year agreement that expires in 2011. (tic-toc)
2) If Seafarer did have permission to just go "explore," why aren't they doing so? I work at the marina located not even 1/4 of a mile south of the Seafarer dive house on US1. The boats never leave the dock, and when they do, it is to go party on Peanut Island or the Loxahatchee river sandbar. No one is doing any exploring and hasn't for many, many months. They do have lots of parties and riff-raff hanging out there however.
3) FTC could be right. Many people within the treasure hunting community have speculated that the anchor and other artifacts found on the Juno Beach site are what fell from the bottom of the ship as it started breaking up, before it hit shore about 3 miles to the north. This is not unheard of. The Atocha scatter trail is 11 miles long and some 1715 fleet wrecks have 3-4 mile long scatter trails. The Juno Beach site is not as old as Seafarer leads you to believe. The Jupiter inlet wreck is from 1659 and may of the objects found there are similar to the Juno site.
There wasn't any treasure on the Juno Beach wreck when Nelson Wait first discovered the site in 1977. There wasnt any treasure on it when a extensive salvage operation was started in 1988 (see link to article) and guess what folks...there isnt any treasure on it now, 33 years after the site was discovered. Because there isn't any
From the Motley Fool, 17, Oct., 2010. (It's as if they had SFRX specifically in mind when writing this)
"The penny stock universe is an exceptionally dangerous place to be. Con artists can manipulate penny stock prices easily, since the companies involved are small, with relatively few shares. The online world has made it easier still, as stocks can be hyped via email, forums and elsewhere, sending share prices up sharply as naive investors pile in. Then the hyper sells his shares, before the price collapses. You're best off simply steering clear. Many penny stocks are trading on promises and possibilities (oil or gold discoveries are around the corner; imminent cures for cancer), not on robust balance sheets and track records of profitability. Remember that great investments don't go trolling for buyers."
Oh, then there are those nagging facts that never go away like 1) no treasure has EVER been found on the Juno site 2) there is no archival or archaeological evidence to support the site as being a treasure wreck 3) the sand covering the site is 30-50 feet deep in many places 4) Seafarer has no permit and gloomy prospects for a permit in the future 5) even with a permit, they do not have & will never have the equipment to excavate that deep or ever get Army Corp permission/permit to dig that deep 6) they have no proven track record of anything other than mis-management and buffonery
The Juno Beach 'site' was first discovered back in 1977 by Nelson Wait, when he found an anchor in 74 feet of water. Nelson didn't know he had found a wreck site-just an anchor-and the area was only sporadically explored during the next 10 years.
Finally, in October of 1987, Nelson started a company with Victor Benilous called Artifacts/Treasure Services Inc. One month later the company was voluntarily dissolved. That same month, ARS, Archaeological Recovery Services, was started. (When trying to get permits from the government, it helps if you use terms like "archaeological" and not "treasure" in the company name) That business lasted until 1993.
However, from 1989 to 1992, Nelson and his wife had their own company to explore the site called The Last Galleon Ltd. Jud Laird may have been involved at this time but his name doesn't appear in company records. Despite many, many exploratory dives made, NO TREASURE OR CANNONS OR ANY SIGNIFICANT ARTIFACTS WERE EVER FOUND BETWEEN 1977 AND 1992. Mr. Wait was still living in the West Palm area when I talked to him about this myself.
In 1993, Tulco Resources, under Jud Laird, was started. A mag survey was done, with over 1400 "targets" identified. Most of these are junk targets, old lobster traps, metals cans, fishing gear, dredge pipes, etc, as the wreck site is in a major boating/shipping lane. A number of interesting artifacts were found from 1993 until 2009 but again, NO TREASURE. NO CANNONS. Why? It wasn't carrying any treasure and thus it didn't need many cannon to arm itself.
It is an old ship indeed. But the minority of old wooden sailing ships, not the majority, were treasure ships. Another tell-tale clue is its distance from shore-just a little more than a mile. Ships using the strong, northerly flowing gulf stream current traveled much further offshore-usually at least 2 leagues (6 miles) in this part of the Florida straits. Vessels traveling south hugged the coast to avoid the northerly flowing currents, as this one was doing when it sank.
The Juno Beach wreck is much more likely to be a trading/merchant vessel traveling between St Augustine and Havana.
I haven't only done my research on the Juno beach wreck site, I have explored it via hundreds of dives since the late 1980s. I have talked to many other people who have personally investigated the site since it was "first discovered in 1977."
I put that last part in quotes because there is very strong evidence (again through research), that the site was actually found back in the 1950's. That would be shortly after the Aqualung was invented. Where else to try a new invention that allows you to breath underwater than the crystal clear and warm waters off Palm beach county?
Those divers from the 1950/60's found an anchor and lots of artifacts associated with a 16th century wooden sailing ship, but no gold, no silver, no coins, no cannon. The anchor they found was of the same size and period of the one sitting on the bottom right now at the wreck site. I have many other supporting doccuments but will only post this one:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,369940.0.html
Saltydog1733
Yes, I have dove a number of the 1733 wreck sites.
By the way, per my link in my previous posting, for those of you not from Florida, Riviera Beach is the area to the north of the Palm Beach (Lake Worth) inlet. Riviera Beach was incorporated in 1922 and that stretch of coast north until almost Jupiter was referred to by that name.
Juno Beach was not incorporated until 1953, so no one prior to about 1960 referred to the area by that name.
Northofadollar posted:
"I'm 99% sure we will get treasure from Juno"
Really? Other than a fantasy of yours, what sir, do you base that on? (I already know the answer...until today, 12/17/2010, there isn't any archival, archaeological, geological, or other physical proof of any treasure being at the Juno site)
The only one legitimately making any money on this deal is Mr. Laird, who basically rented out a barren area of seafloor for $60K
I think they had Seafarers in mind when they made the movie "The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything."
The 1715 fleet wrecks were 1st discovered in the late 1950's and salvors are still finding incredible treasures to this day.
The Atocha, part of the debris trail first discovered in 1970, still yields treasure on an almost daily basis.
Hundreds of coins have been found on the Jupiter wreck, discovered in the early 1980's, over the last few years.
Even a pirate in the Bahamas, working clandestinely, can find treasure from the worked out Maravilla wreck, found in 1972.
And on the Juno Beach wreck, first discovered in 1977.....NADA. ZIP. ZILCH. NOTHING. Hmmmm.
But it's definitely a treasure wreck!!!! (or so goes the cry) We know this because of all the treasure that has been found. Well wait, that can't be right. Oh, because we have a copy of the ship's manifest. Wait, we don't have that either. We don't even have ship name. Or even a potential name. But you know those darn Spaniards, they were terrible record keepers. I know, It must be buried under 30 feet of sand! How convenient!
So "allegedly" a handful of days were spent last year digging with the m/v Virgilona. They couldn't hit bottom using that vessel. Nothing was found. And now the Virgilona is going away-Mr. Keith Webb has much better use for it on the productive Santa Margarita shipwreck. So that leaves the permit-less Seafarers, on a treasure wreck without treasure with the rust bucket vessel Iron Maiden, which couldn't dig it's way out of a wet paper bag. Good luck to yer!
And has anyone bothered to read the drivel at the top of this forum? Is a 14 year old kid writing those "releases?"
What are they feeding the Virgalona...it keeps getting longer every year? When I worked on her back in the early 80's, she was only 51 feet long.
8. Yup, my absolute favorite arrrrgggh poster here.
1Center, looking at your pic here, put a: skull and cross bone bandana, an eyepatch, couple missing teeth on ya and Seafarer could put you on the front of their website. arrrgh
To answer your other question yesterday. No I haven't called...yet
Just waiting to see if anything happens and doing a little reading.
To the other PM I can't answer. Yes I know, I have another buddy on another thread I tell DON'T be drinking grog and pressing SEND.
On a separate note, there was a post by SGirl? a while back about 34M shares for $5000 that just won't go away. Can you provide a link to that?
Was that shares for debt?
Was that the only one of that calibre?
Thanks in advance.
Sorry for taking so long. You discredit this? Uhhh you do know its from SEAFARER"S ARMY CORE APPLICATION??????
I didn't apply, they did. I just pointed out things that the ARMY CORE says has to happen to get a permit issued. I also have no idea on how easy or tough or time to approval. I never changed a word of it.
Are you going to guarantee its done by tomorrow as posted here?
You just stated you discredit SFRX Army Core Application.
(In part)
In the AEC application there are some requirements noted:
CULTURAL RESOURCES: The Corps is aware of historic property/properties within or in close proximity of the permit area. The Corps will initiate consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office and those federally recognized tribes with concerns in Florida and the Permit Area, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation as applicable pursuant to 33 CFR 325, Appendix C and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, by separate letter.
Endangered SPECIES: The Corps has determined the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the west Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus), and will have no effect on manatee designated critical habitat. The applicant will adhere to the FWS Manatee Construction Conditions for In-Water Work. The Corps will request U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concurrence with this determination pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has determined the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the endangered small toothed sawfish (Pristis pectinata), or the endangered/threatened swimming seaturtles (Chelonia mydas, Eretmochelys imbricate, Lepidochelys kempii, Dermochelys coriacea, Caretta caretta, Lepidochelys olivacea) or adversely modify its designated critical habitat. The project will have no effect on Acropora sp. or on Acropora sp. critical habitat. The Corps will request National Marine Fisheries Service's concurrence with this determination pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH): This notice initiates consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service on EFH as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 1996. . The proposal would impact approximately 23 acres of sand bottom utilized by various life stages of penaeid shrimp complex, reef fish, stone crab, spiny lobster, migratory/pelagic fish, and snapper/grouper complex. Our initial determination is that the proposed action would not have a substantial adverse impact on EFH or Federally managed fisheries in the South Atlantic Region. Our final determination relative to project impacts and the need for mitigation measures is subject to review by and coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service.
NOTE: This public notice is being issued based on information furnished by the applicant. This information has not been verified or evaluated to ensure compliance with laws and regulation governing the regulatory program. The jurisdictional line has been verified by Corps personnel.
The decision whether to issue or deny this permit application will be based on the information received from this public notice and the evaluation of the probable impact to the associated wetlands. This is based on an analysis of the applicant's avoidance and minimization efforts for the project, as well as the compensatory mitigation proposed
IMPACT ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Preliminary review of this application indicates that an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. Coordination with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Marine Fisheries Services, and other Federal, State, and local agencies, environmental groups, and concerned citizens generally yields pertinent environmental information that is instrumental in determining the impact the proposed action will have on the natural resources of the area. By means of this notice, we are soliciting comments on the potential effects of the project on threatened or endangered species or their habitat.
EVALUATION: The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefits, which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including cumulative impacts thereof; among these are conservation, economics, esthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historical properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food, and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the people. Evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest will also include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, EPA, under authority of Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act of the criteria established under authority of Section 102(a) of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. A permit will be granted unless its issuance is found to be contrary to the public interest.
The US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other Interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity.
I have been here YEARS, not months like some, YEARS and few have guessed right as to time to permits issued, they have treasure IN HAND or stock price variances.
Thanks for the reply.
I'll wait for this magical absolute guaranteed date of the 11th to happen
Here's an intriguing chat thread 2010 permits and leases
http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/shipwrecks/177245-permits-leases.html
Big Twin, your response is mucho appreciated. So moving thru all the requirements of the permit aren't as tough as the permit reads?
Another question for you from Seafarer's press release.(in part)
TAMPA, Fla., Feb. 21, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Seafarer Exploration Corporation (Seafarer) (OTCQB: SFRX) announced today that they have completed phase I on a shipwreck site located near Lantana Beach, FL and are moving into Phase II, a dig and identify permit which allows Seafarer to dig and determine various artifacts to help identify the ship. The final phase of excavation will be Phase III, full salvage.
Seafarer received a permit from the State of Florida for a shipwreck site located off of Lantana Beach, Florida in 2012. The site has recently been surveyed using a Geometrics 882 Cesium Vapor Magnetometer and this survey work showed compelling evidence that a large part of the ship lies buried in a relatively compacted area. Having completed phase I of the mapping survey and underwater video, Seafarer is preparing to begin digging and identifying the wreck. Items found and documented on this site in past explorations by third parties suggest the wreck could be a French or Spanish ship from the late 1600s. It will require more work to determine with accuracy.
Kyle Kennedy, Seafarer's CEO, stated "While we have dig sites currently under permit, the Lantana Beach site represents one of our more intriguing ventures. In many cases historic shipwrecks are spread out over wide areas which can cause exploration and recovery to be very time consuming and expensive but this particular site looks very compact. We are very excited by what we discovered in Phase I and are eagerly anticipating Phase II which will begin immediately after obtaining our Department of Environmental Protection and US Army Corps of Engineers permits."
Is the DEP permit in place, not needed? as stated they need both.
What is the difference in level I compared to dig and identify II?
The application was posted here, I just read all the clauses. It pretty much stated all the requirements for an approval, but someone else here posted it could be 60 to 120 days for approval for a standard permit.
So the 21 day comment period could end soon, but could go to 30 days and then any interested parties are sent notice? then its 60 to 120 days to process "non-controversial" projects?
In the AEC application there are some requirements noted:
CULTURAL RESOURCES: The Corps is aware of historic property/properties within or in close proximity of the permit area. The Corps will initiate consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office and those federally recognized tribes with concerns in Florida and the Permit Area, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation as applicable pursuant to 33 CFR 325, Appendix C and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, by separate letter.
Endangered SPECIES: The Corps has determined the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the west Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus), and will have no effect on manatee designated critical habitat. The applicant will adhere to the FWS Manatee Construction Conditions for In-Water Work. The Corps will request U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concurrence with this determination pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has determined the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the endangered small toothed sawfish (Pristis pectinata), or the endangered/threatened swimming seaturtles (Chelonia mydas, Eretmochelys imbricate, Lepidochelys kempii, Dermochelys coriacea, Caretta caretta, Lepidochelys olivacea) or adversely modify its designated critical habitat. The project will have no effect on Acropora sp. or on Acropora sp. critical habitat. The Corps will request National Marine Fisheries Service's concurrence with this determination pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH): This notice initiates consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service on EFH as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 1996. . The proposal would impact approximately 23 acres of sand bottom utilized by various life stages of penaeid shrimp complex, reef fish, stone crab, spiny lobster, migratory/pelagic fish, and snapper/grouper complex. Our initial determination is that the proposed action would not have a substantial adverse impact on EFH or Federally managed fisheries in the South Atlantic Region. Our final determination relative to project impacts and the need for mitigation measures is subject to review by and coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service.
NOTE: This public notice is being issued based on information furnished by the applicant. This information has not been verified or evaluated to ensure compliance with laws and regulation governing the regulatory program. The jurisdictional line has been verified by Corps personnel.
The decision whether to issue or deny this permit application will be based on the information received from this public notice and the evaluation of the probable impact to the associated wetlands. This is based on an analysis of the applicant's avoidance and minimization efforts for the project, as well as the compensatory mitigation proposed
IMPACT ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Preliminary review of this application indicates that an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. Coordination with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Marine Fisheries Services, and other Federal, State, and local agencies, environmental groups, and concerned citizens generally yields pertinent environmental information that is instrumental in determining the impact the proposed action will have on the natural resources of the area. By means of this notice, we are soliciting comments on the potential effects of the project on threatened or endangered species or their habitat.
EVALUATION: The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefits, which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including cumulative impacts thereof; among these are conservation, economics, esthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historical properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food, and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the people. Evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest will also include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, EPA, under authority of Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act of the criteria established under authority of Section 102(a) of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. A permit will be granted unless its issuance is found to be contrary to the public interest.
The US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other Interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity.
So if correct, the above states the first 21 day notice ends in a few days and then notices get sent out by the Army Core to parties who could be involved, then an evaluation to determine a permit being issued?
Has Seafarer received forward notice that the permit will be issued this week? Or do the 'bold' notations above have to happen first?
Hearing from someone with "actual experience in this type of application" would be most appreciated in advance or MGland would that be you?
they lied to you... and in turn...
So you are implying....?
Axis has nothing to do with Intellimax or any fantasy sports, so if you want to post about those subjects, do it on that board.
As moderator you should know better.
Why would anything be mentioned about Libya... yet?
There isn't anything new to report on Libya....yet.
There is only the beat of the oasis drums.
Anybody watched the series Strike Back? Lots of intriguing filming done in Africa. 3 seasons of bullets, sex and blood...if that interests you.
So speaking of us
"YOU CAN"T TEACH AN OLD DOG NEW TRICKS" dadada doo da ....da
that has to go on the CD as well.
Good for you. I have had my experiences with this type of deal and in our case Axis is years overdue. Every dog has its day and this will too. It may not be in 2 weeks, but its now showing life after 3 years of bad timing.
And really, who would have wanted to be heavily invested (with equipment as well) in Libya from January 2011 until now?
Well you have 2 options.
keep being patient, like some of us and I mean LOOOOONNNG patience
or
sell your shares at these levels and move onto something else.
Someone got sold out today IMO after this showed some life after 3 years of coffin crawling.
this will look like some famous whore's drawers for the next few months..again IMO
Looks like someone is getting sold out today.
3 to 4 cents is quite a buy
Tier Change for Axis.
Just read this and I guess Axis/AXGC moves up in class.
Fri, Nov 09, 2012 12:00 - Axis Energy Corporation (AXGC: OTC Link) - Tier Change - The symbol, AXGC, no longer is classified as OTC Pink No Information. As of Fri, Nov 09, 2012, AXGC resides in the OTC Pink Limited tier. You may find a complete list of tier changes at otcmarkets.com
and absolutely NO posting any photos of his daughter here!!
Talk about a dad's worst nightmare...an icon with an extremely hot daughter who likes to get in trouble in public.
back to 6 now
The redline @ 18 is cute.
This .099 open is kool this morning, so now the rumour can start that Gretzky is buying today?? Or daughter of Gretzky?
Looks like we just keep on chugging. Nice close Friday.
I might have made a mistake with the "Moses" thing.
We are in Mohammed country, not "Moses".
It was Mohammed who wanted Axis to "go forth and multiplies (X)"
Too late to change the other post.
Do you mean our turn after 7 years of being in this turn?
Or your turn to buy this at .075 to .095?
I know you have heard this exact phrase "you should be buying"
250,000 may put this to 30 cents, but
the next 100,000 after that could put it back to 7 cents.
I don't remember reading any posts here over the last few days saying this would tank to .027 from .04.
"In the overall picture, means nil"
So when the SP goes up .002 cents in 3 days, it causes 1000 posts here, but when it drops .012 cents in 24 hrs, means nil.
Interesting.
Ouch, looks like full retreat this am on a 15 min delay.
You and daddio need to step up and buy this back to 15
And Moses said " Arise, my Axis, Arise, yee are back from the dead!!" "Go forth and multiplies...and again"
Too funny, or not so funny, with that last trade Axis is now 3 X the SP of IMD IXMD.
Yes Mike I said 3 X
Can I speak for you??
M&%UDN DJD&%M%^$#*&&&%^@#@$$^&PLICK.
Now back to our little lost in the desert for years, back from the Pink's grave, oiley deal.
I think the name 'Moses' fits well here, but just have to check if anybody has a foot long beard now.
Bid 10 ask 18 today. The party rolls on.
Mikey, I see you are BACK from your party days @ Ixmud.
Howz the hangover?
What, too choked up, or you can't type because the steam coming out of your ears is messing with your keyboard?
Altho this closed @ 7 cents, the 09 blinked for 50,000 first.
The 83,000+ that traded was nice.
Unfortunately for me this is the 2nd time around. this was supposed to be a big deal, all the usual buying, gold, blah blah blah, heard it all before trading in the 15 to 20 cent range with minimal shares out.
Completely dead money for years, so if it does a dime, it becomes house money to me and others, if they still hold
Sorry, just catching up 300 posts behind. IMO the intent is to show "the company you keep", but after todays run, its obvious if anyone read thru all the links they don't care.
5.5M shares trade today starts to legitimize this.
So who is blinking first today
.065 or .09 ????
The Desert Fox: The Story of Rommel is a 1951 biographical film about Field Marshal Erwin Rommel in the later stages of World War II. It stars James Mason in the title role, was directed by Henry Hathaway, and was based on the book Rommel by Brigadier Desmond Young, who served in the Indian Army in North Africa.
Ahhh the beat of jungle drums..
THUMP thump thump THUMP thump thump
Ahhhh so relaxing.. palm trees, sand... miles and miles and miles of sand, oil pumping, burnt out tanks
Now back to watching The Desert Fox takes Tripoli.(in B&W)
How do 2 companies claim the exact same debt and receive the exact same amount of shares?
Does that involve the Transfer Agent?
Other than the link to SFRX being involved that I can't see, the rest is solid.
Wow, talk about connecting the dots. this is some serious reading
You better hurry with my offer, someone buying @ 9 today is scaring me.
Well Kasking, looking at the market today, Axis is now trading almost DOUBLE the 5 cent PP here.
Maybe a full double tomorrow.