Collecting during dives

[Jim Lapenta]

Such as the Oriskany and the Speigel Grove?

Those are not wrecks. They are artificial reefs. There is a difference.

 

[atedeschi]

Completely agree

 

[Kingpatzer]

Or saltwater wrecks that are not war graves. I'm am so itching to do a dive with a hammer, chisel, and crowbar!

There are very few wrecks in my area that are war wrecks. But there are also very few which are not graves as well. I've never figured out why a diver thinks the family of a victim of a torpedo deserves more respect than the family of the victim of a storm.

 

[seaducer]

I don't take stuff off the wrecks, couldn't be bothered. I have also seen people get the fever, and fight over some rusted piece of junk on the boat. What a way to end a nice couple of dives. I have also met several people who know several people who went down for garbage and stayed there.

If it is your thing, I guess that is ok. Still makes the wreck less enjoyable for other divers though.

Organic material is something else. I don't take anything unless I am going to eat it, or am sure I can keep it alive in a tank. I have brought up shells in the past, and I guess I am ok with that, though many are used by other animals as shelter.

Seeing dried seahorses, sea stars and the like makes me ill. I buy nothing from those stores.

 

[vinegarbiscuit]

If it's garbage, I pick it up (I have seen some garbage that's been commandeered by a critter or has growth on it...in which case, I leave it). I'm a big believer in leaving wrecks, critters and shells alone. Even a groovy dead shell might provide shelter for a critter that's in need of a hiding place, and I don't want to mess with that. For example, I've seen many octopuses decorate their dens with the shells of their 'kills'. Maybe it also provides a hiding place, who knows? For that and many other tree-hugging and hippie-ish reasons that are very dear to me, I try to leave everything under the water just as it is.

 

[seaducer]

There are very few wrecks in my area that are war wrecks. But there are also very few which are not graves as well. I've never figured out why a diver thinks the family of a victim of a torpedo deserves more respect than the family of the victim of a storm.

Veterans. One died fighting for a cause, the other to make money.

I don't have much of an opinion of "defiling" dead bodies, especially if they have been there a long time. Don't much care what happens to mine when I am done with it either.

But many other people do, and I respect that.

 

[Teamcasa]

I'm no fan of taking stuff unless its trash, a hazard or a chunk of gold.

 

[highdesert]

Yup, the "strippers" are right ...

If it's edible, eat it. If it's pryable, pry it. If it's sellable, grab it. Lets get all of this crap off the bottom, so we don't have to have this discussion anymore!

 

[TMHeimer]

As many know, I am a shell collector-live or dead. My collection is somewhat scientific, as I don't collect shells simply as souveniers of where I've been, and I am not a retailer who collects them live for profit. A search will find many posts-- "Shell Collecting vs. Scuba Diving" for one. Most shell populations are in no danger of dwindling (see Felix Lorenz-Cowries -one study), as opposed to what we've done with the world's fish populations (90% of big game fish gone since 1980). Spearos are at times frowned upon, but not like us shell collectors. The argument that it is OK to collect anything if you eat it is interesting, but consider this: If we took half the fish from the oceans that we do now and stuffed them or dumped them in the desert, the oceans would be in a whole lot better shape. And that doesn't count "by-catch". Queen Conch are strictly regulated (illegal to collect) in the U.S. because the eating of Conch Fritters is big business. The shells are sold as is as by-products, or are made into lamps. The big problem I face (understandably) is that almost all charters in Southern waters take divers to the same attractive places. Of course they prohibit collecting live, as the shells in those areas would disappear if everyone took them. Maybe this would also affect business, but probably not a lot. An interesting sidelight is that most divers have very little interest in shells anyway, as they are mostly interested in fish, octopi, etc. When I ask if they saw any shells down there they say "Gee I don't know, I wasn't really looking". But come up with a live one and I get raked over the coals if it's discovered. Divers should ask "What do I really know about mollusk populations, conservation, and what factors affect them?" (pesticide run off, mangrove destruction, hotels on the beach that often house divers--all the stuff that kills reefs, where some mollusks live). Most serious shell collectors are very conservation minded and don't take barrells of them like the commercial operations for the shops where you can buy them buy the thousands. There is no point to having a hundred of one species on display. Another interesting thing is I've rarely encountered charters/divers who care about taking shells in Northern waters--Maybe they aren't as pretty? I have managed to find one country and dive op (PADI yet) in the Southern Caribbean where it is permitted, and will be heading there this winter. It is, of course, off the beaten diver tourist route.

 

[Sas]

Some things are obvious: you don't pry things off a wreck to take home with you.

Some things are not. Or at least are not to me. And so I ask:

What's the consensus opinion on collecting things like shells during a dive. Obviously, I'm not talking about shells that have anything living in them.

I would take treasure and rubbish and Northern Pacific Sea Stars. The rest I leave alone.

I used to get scallops and abalone, and my buddy crays. But I was shucking the scallops one day and one started clapping at me so I felt really bad because then I realised they were little critters and stopped collecting things. I don't eat any seafood myself but I don't judge other people collecting scallops, crays, abalone, things like that and eating seafood though.