Bucket List Diving

[danvolker]

Years ago I heard about a dive site off of Puerto Rico, off an island -- Mona Island....There was an area called the Mona Passage, that could only be dived during about 3 months out of the year, due to huge waves the rest of the year....boat sinking size waves....This is an area with no commercial fishing for huge distances, and pristine conditions for corals....much like diving before mankind was on the ocean 3000 years ago, and the decline of the environment had commenced.

Current on this Mona passage dive site is big, and so are the fish

One day I have to dive this place!

 

[bowlofpetunias]

Sounds amazing Dan. We are so lucky to be able to dive and see the things we do!

When I first started diving I had a very small bucket list of dive sites I wanted to do. I wanted to do Fishrock Cave, the Yongala and the President Coolidge. I was too intimidated by the stories I heard about the dangers of the Yongala for my first few years of diving. I think that was a wise choice then. Now I would still like to do it but it doesn't really draw me as much as some other places. Same with the President Coolidge. Now I look at the expense of getting there and measure it against other options.

I've come to realize I am really not that much into wrecks. I've done a few but it is the critters that draw me. Hubby did the Coolidge before I met him and has said he'd like to do Truc. I've told him if he wants to go, he should but I wouldn't go with him. Too expensive a trip for two when one isn't that keen to do it I'd rather he went and enjoyed it and didn't have me to worry about.

We did a dive on a Mitchell Bomber that was shot down in PNG. I found it disconcerting in a different way than other wrecks where lives were lost. The dive operator had shown us pictures of the crew and even the bombing run where they were shot down. They told us if we wanted we could sit in the cockpit and that the controls could still move. I found that eerie and disrespectful. Somehow knowing that young men had died trying to defend the freedom of strangers they would never know really got to me. Other wrecks where I knew there was loss of life, people going about their normal work or travel life and having something take their life was different. somehow that seems less tragic to me

I've done Fishrock, I would still like to do the Yongala and the Coolidge but not as much as I would like to get to Siladin to dive with friends. Poor Knights Islands is a site that keeps being brought up by friends... maybe...

 

[CAPTAIN SINBAD]

Dude...do you really want to come across as a pompous jerk with your business website in your signature? How do you want others to perceive you?

I dont think he was trying to mislead anyone. An experienced diver stands to gain nothing by claiming to be non-certified. Had it been the other way around (a profile showing more diving experience than the person actually has in real life ) then I would feel cheated.

As for Truuk lagoon, there were a few wreck diving destinations that were on my bucket list once. Truuk, Bikini Atoll and Scapa Flow. Then I realized that I live close to the GREAT LAKES! To me this is the among the top Wreck diving destinations because the age of those wrecks beats anything that Truuk, Bikini and Scapa Flow have to offer. The preservation of those ancient wrecks is so much superior to these recent wrecks that everyone raves about. It made me think that had the Great Lakes been located in some less accessible part of the world with the same shipwrecks in the same preservation level,then as a wreck diving destination it would be ranked much higher than Truuk. Since this is the American and Canadian divers own backyard no one seems to care about them and they are more fascinated by less ancient less preserved wrecks like Truuk fleet.

I am noticing that you are from Marshall Islands and you are dreaming about diving Truuk. Personally I would rank your wrecks in the Bikini Atoll higher than Truuk because there are plenty of world war wrecks all over the world but not a lot of places where you can dive a nuclear bomb site. I am sure you would attach more value to Truuk because Bikini Atoll is your backyard.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

So you feel no compunction to be correct with yours? You just shrug and are happy to ignore accuracy? Why should anyone believe anything you say?

I stopped counting dives years ago at about 300, so I have no idea how many dives I actually have. It would be less accurate for me to make something up and pick one of the choices. If there was a way to eliminate it completely I would, but since the control setting won't let you do that, that was the only one I liked.
There ya go.

---------- Post added October 29th, 2015 at 09:41 AM ----------

Dude...do you really want to come across as a pompous jerk with your business website in your signature? How do you want others to perceive you?

Why are you so worried about my dive profile description?
How does it affect you?

 

[drrich2]

It made me think that had the Great Lakes been located in some less accessible part of the world with the same shipwrecks in the same preservation level,then as a wreck diving destination it would be ranked much higher than Truuk. Since this is the American and Canadian divers own backyard no one seems to care about them and they are more fascinated by less ancient less preserved wrecks like Truuk fleet.

I've got a buddy attending medical school in Chicago, so I did a little minor checking into the Great Lakes dive scene. I, too, was surprised it doesn't seem to get as publicized on the forum. Then I watched some video footage of diving there.

Compared to diving, oh, say, the Spiegel Grove in Florida, the Great Lakes wreck dive footage looked...dead. Being freshwater, well of course we're not going to see corals or jacks, sharks, rays, octopi, barracuda, etc...but if there were several big large mouth bass, pike or musky, walleye, etc..., in numbers and some good sized...that would be at least partial compensation. Maybe some people are seeing lots of those on their dives?

My point is, even amongst divers who like diving wrecks, I think many enjoy the sea life as a big part of the experience. With the Great Lakes, IIRC, you've got dark, cold freshwater diving that life-wise seems to look barren compared to popular salt water sites.

Is there more to it? Does the Great Lakes dive scene see much dive tourism? (Note: to me, dive tourism means > 6 hour one way drive or plane tickets).

Richard.

 

[CAPTAIN SINBAD]

I've got a buddy attending medical school in Chicago, so I did a little minor checking into the Great Lakes dive scene. I, too, was surprised it doesn't seem to get as publicized on the forum. Then I watched some video footage of diving there.

Compared to diving, oh, say, the Spiegel Grove in Florida, the Great Lakes wreck dive footage looked...dead. Being freshwater, well of course we're not going to see corals or jacks, sharks, rays, octopi, barracuda, etc...but if there were several big large mouth bass, pike or musky, walleye, etc..., in numbers and some good sized...that would be at least partial compensation. Maybe some people are seeing lots of those on their dives?

My point is, even amongst divers who like diving wrecks, I think many enjoy the sea life as a big part of the experience. With the Great Lakes, IIRC, you've got dark, cold freshwater diving that life-wise seems to look barren compared to popular salt water sites.

Is there more to it? Does the Great Lakes dive scene see much dive tourism? (Note: to me, dive tourism means > 6 hour one way drive or plane tickets).

Richard.

In terms of marine life I think you are absolutely right. Great Lakes wrecks are not teeming with fishlife so they will not have the appeal that Spiegel Grove or Caribsea have. What makes them unique is that wooden ships from 1800s are lying in much better condition than the Nazi u boats that sank in 1940s. I love u-352 and made a TV film on it too but I was told that a lot of world war wrecks have decomposed a whole lot and some of the best features have actually gone into the sand. I was looking at the video of Eber Ward wreck and was totally mesmerized. It seems like time just stood still when it sank. I have spoken to some divers from Canada and they tell me that you can see peoples boots, leather diaries and all sorts of things that are so personal that you will never see them if the same wreck sank in the ocean water.

 

[gkrane]

I can see both sides to that point of view as I grew up spending summers in a cottage off of Lake Michigan. The Great Lakes have absolutely fantastic wrecks that are preserved extremely well. The Eber Ward is a great example of this and like Sinbad stated it looks like it was sunk recently. However, there are quite a few you tube videos of the Eber Ward that I have seen and I don't recall seeing 1 fish in any of them. This is amazing to me since growing up we literally caught thousands of Salmon, Trout, and Pike in the Great Lakes. If one were to dive the NC wrecks they would see historical wrecks plus unique life such as Sand Tigers. I guess it depends on what you are after ultimately. The Eber Ward sure would be one hell of a dive if you got there with good vis. Too bad the Edmund Fitz is in 500+ ffw.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

What happened to all the fish in the Great Lakes?
Has it always been like that or is there a sharp decline?
gkrane mentions salmon trout and pike but is that only in certain locations or has the whole thing dropped off in populations?
For us we have Lake Tahoe as a fresh water place to dive. There are some perfectly preserved wrecks also but many are too deep to dive.
The vis is about 75' on average. They do a pretty good job of trying to keep the lake from getting polluted.
About the only fish life I've seen are thousands of little minnows and lots of crawdads. I saw a trout once about 12" long cruising along and that's it. They do however catch some pretty big lake trout (imported originally from the Great Lakes) but they are deep and you have to troll for them.
There is some nice structure in Lake Tahoe, and the other nice thing is you don't have to rinse your gear.

Would it ever be considered a "bucket list" dive? no probably not. I sure wouldn't fly to get there just to dive it. The only reason I dive there is because we go there in the summer and rent a house just to hang out. I bring my dive gear because I can. I've never seen another diver there. People do come up and converse quite often when they see me geared up. The narrative goes something like "I'm a diver too but I had no idea people dive this lake. Is it worth me bringing gear next time?",...or... "If I only knew".

 

[gkrane]

I dont think Lake Michigan is location specific as I have caught large Salmon and Trout from both Door County Wisconsin and the Chicago land area of Lake Michigan.

 

[drrich2]

Be mindful fish may not choose to live equally at all depths. In a coral reef ecosystem, you've got an ecosystem at depth; 30 - 200 feet or so? In a kelp forest, you've got plant production with food & habitat at depth. In a freshwater body...well, I don't think much plant growth happens at depth. If you quarry dive an area with some emergent vegetation around the perimeter, you see quickly that rooted green plants don't extent to all that much depth. I used to dive a shallow quarry that was around 30+ feet deep; it had some plant growth on the bottom, but you need pretty good viz. to sustain that I imagine.

And how much of a thermocline effect is there in the Great Lakes? I ask because if at depth you've got much colder water & less food, why would trout & other fish hang out down there?

In the local quarry I dive occasionally, I see many bluegill, plus some catfish & bass, in the shallows. But at 90 feet deep almost no life, & a dead fish on the bottom looks free from scavenging.

Richard.