Truth, lies and ancient custom

Date: 09/03/2007

Heavy weather off the coast of Devon (United Kingdom) continues to hamper the bid by salvage teams to safely remove the remaining containers from the stricken vessel MSC Napoli and serves to remind us of the very real dangers that surrounded the whole incident, despite the light-hearted way in which many treated events as they unfolded in recent weeks

The 62,000-ton British flagged vessel, built in 1991, was on a voyage from Belgium to Portugal when it suffered engine room flooding in storms on Thursday 18th January. Its 26 crew members were winched to safety by helicopter, the vessel taken in tow by French and British authorities and then beached deliberately in order to prevent her breaking up in continuing heavy seas. Not long after, the first of many containers slid from the decks, beached and scattered their contents along the coastline while others remained bobbing in the surf.

This proved to be the trigger for a set of events which saw scavengers crawling all over the area and raising considerable debate over what is and isn’t acceptable when a vessel spills its ‘booty’. Thinking about it, even the term ‘booty’ implies that it is fair game.

The lure for some members of the public was a cargo of items including wine, car parts, haircare products and pet food. Some ‘wreckers’ at Branscombe Beach, near Seaton, used a tractor to carry off new BMW motorbikes, still partially wrapped in cardboard. Portrayed as ‘good sport’ to some but potentially disastrous, and ultimately illegal.

It was at this point that Securewest International were appointed by the vessel’s owner to assist in securing the recovery operation, the cargo of the vessel washed ashore and enforcing the access restriction orders on public footpaths. Witnessing at close hand the dangerous scramble over the beach by members of the public was not a pretty sight and the risk of injury from the contents as well was high.

There was some degree of criticism aimed at the authorities (coastguard and police) who, it was thought, were inactive for too long after the ship was grounded. What was not immediately clear to those dissenters were certain contributing factors, and in particular the fact that the police certainly do not have the powers to close off a village just because they feel like it and in terms of the strict application of salvage laws, were powerless to stop the removal of goods from the beach. The situation was confounded even further since the immediate beach area was privately owned. The police are reliant on the behaviour of people, and ultimately have to follow the law. Until someone committed an offence or there was a Breach of the Peace, there was little that could have been done at this stage.

Devon & Cornwall Police issued several statements requesting that people should stay away from the site area itself, adjacent roads and beaches in the vicinity of Branscombe, and permit the recovery operation and those professionals involved with the task to continue to work at the area. But these were largely ignored. But until a member of the public actually broke the law (and the issue at this stage was one of law vs ethics) there was little that could be done.

Despite the rumours circulating (some based on weird and wonderful tales from yesteryear) the realities were that it was not technically illegal to take goods from the beach at that stage. This still does not mean that it was either ethical or safe to do so. The majority, who seemed fuelled by the urge to reassert the mythical rights established by relatives from centuries past, left common sense at home. Some even brought their children to the scene.

Whether this is right or wrong, the fact remains that far from being a playground for scavengers, the site provided enormous risk to human life and to the environment, and those flooding onto the beach served only to increase risks to themselves and others.

As if it weren’t dangerous enough, amazingly people used torches to search beaches off the Sidmouth coastline at night. A small proportion of the containers held hazardous substances such as battery acid, pesticides and perfume. Some of the cargo would have rolled several times before crashing onto the beach and any unauthorised person ripping open the doors of one of these containers could not know what was inside or what state the contents were in.

There seems also to be some notion that those taking goods from the beach had wandered down from surrounding villages in scenes reminiscent of the film ‘Whiskey Galore’. This was not the whole truth either. Officials were appalled by scores of calculating individuals from as far away as Yorkshire and Manchester, who flocked to the scene, and claimed their 'free' goods.

Risk to life aside, what exactly are the rights and wrongs in this kind of situation? Incidents like these do not occur that often around the coast of the UK anymore, and it seems that the long gaps in time between them only serves to perpetuate the disparity between the romantic notions of the rule ‘wreckers rights’ and the actuality of the law.

The law states that anyone finding or taking possession of wreck material (regardless of size or value) they are obliged by law to report their salvage report it to the official Receiver of Wreck. Failing to do so within 28 days is a criminal offence - effectively, they are stealing from the owners and this carries a fine of up to £2,500 per offence. Those who then report a recovery could be entitled to a reward if they completed the appropriate paperwork.

Granted, this law entitles people to salvage goods from wrecks (if they want to risk life and limb), but it is illegal for them to keep such goods. The whole point of this law is that it is regarded as saving them from the elements - provided they are later returned to the rightful owner. Once these goods were no longer ‘at risk’ even their removal becomes and illegal act.

It soon became apparent that the actions of many of the people who came to Branscombe after the beaching of the MSC Napoli clearly showed that what they were doing could not be categorised as salvage and was essentially looting. This compelled the Receiver of Wreck, MCA colleagues and the Devon and Cornwall Constabulary to reassess the situation and to invoke the Receiver’s power under section 237 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, to use force if necessary against anyone who refused to hand over recovered wreck material or attempt to conceal it or keep possession of it.

At this point our role in events changed. Even the normal arrangements in terms of recovery of wreck material through voluntary salvage ceased to apply. The reason for this was that that comprehensive salvage contracts had already been placed by the owners of the ship (and the consignors) to recover all items from the vessel, including those lost overboard and washed ashore.

Therefore, members of the public had no legal authority to recover items as wreck or salvage them from the shoreline. Legal argument to one side, the environmental impact of such a wreck loomed large over the scene, and still does to this day. 200 tonnes of oil leaked from the ship during the first weeks, and fears over pollution to this internationally famous Jurassic coastline (Britain's first natural World Heritage Site) are still very real indeed.

The bounty hunters played their part here too. By invading the site, blocking roads to salvage teams trying to reach the scene, ripping open shipping containers and even lighting fires beside them, these people had succeeded in quadrupling the scale of the clean-up task. The number-one priority in this situation is to take the hazardous materials from the wreck and anyone who hinders this process makes the job that much harder.

UK Coastguard officials condemned these treasure hunters for ignoring their statements to stay away from the beaches and pointed out that all the goods taken from the containers and then subsequently discarded, were being swept back out to sea.

So, if and when the next incident of this kind occurs, perhaps we should all take a good look at ourselves and think long and hard about the modern day realities of such a situation and not just about the romantic images conjured up in largely fictional accounts of wreckers from past centuries. Blaming the authorities is simply a ‘red herring’ propagated by those who knew that they were acting illegally but were using loopholes in the law to their advantage. Even this doesn’t make it ethically right to take the belongings of other human beings, some of who looked on in horror as TV pictures beamed images of their personal effects being pocketed by looters.

The Maritime and Coastguard Agency says it will take a year to salvage all the Napoli's 2,300 containers and the knock on effect of loss of a vessel like this should not go unmentioned. Recently a factory in South Africa moved onto a three day working week due to the failure of its consignment of car parts arriving via the Napoli. This was a small vessel (tiny in comparison to some) and one can only imagine the effects of the loss of three or four ships at one time or a major route being blocked. Its a cautionary note and reminds us all of the reliance by world’s economy on shipping and how essential it is that the maritime element of the global supply chain be as secure as possible.

Will people continue to engage in such activity again? A few will, but lets hope that the lessons of the MSC Napoli persuade others that helping yourself ultimately helps no one.