artificial reefs at Whytecliff

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Location
West Vancouver
Any chance of this ever happening? I have no idea of the politics and environmental issues involved, but it sure would be nice to have some small wrecks like porteau. There are lots of bare sandy areas between 60-100 feet that would be perfect for this. If the wrecks were properly prepared then environmental impact would be good, creating more homes for fish etc. Ok...am I being silly? Has anybody else thought this would be a good idea? It seems that all the big wrecks go to &%$#ing Vancouver island! Can't we have some small ones here that DON'T need a boat to be accessed?
 
Laughing Swordfish:
Any chance of this ever happening? I have no idea of the politics and environmental issues involved, but it sure would be nice to have some small wrecks like porteau. There are lots of bare sandy areas between 60-100 feet that would be perfect for this. If the wrecks were properly prepared then environmental impact would be good, creating more homes for fish etc. Ok...am I being silly? Has anybody else thought this would be a good idea? It seems that all the big wrecks go to &%$#ing Vancouver island! Can't we have some small ones here that DON'T need a boat to be accessed?
I think you need a way to raise a couple of $100K then buy an old ship. HMCS Huron should be available soon. Then several thousand man hours to strip and environmentally clean, then ocean dumping permit, then insurance, then....
It's a great idea but I understand it's a much bigger undertaking than it seems.
 
Laughing Swordfish:
It seems that all the big wrecks go to &%$#ing Vancouver island!

Build it and they will come... :D

These was a small discussion about liability in the 737 thread. It starts at the bottom of page 3.
 
SeanQ:
Build it and they will come... :D

These was a small discussion about liability in the 737 thread. It starts at the bottom of page 3.

I remember reading this before. This hasn't been a big problem at Porteau Cove. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think only one person died penetrating the Nakaya. Keep in mind that I'm talking about smaller wrecks, like the Granthall, not monster huge destroyers that will cost huge $$$$$. Are small barges and sailboats really a big problem for cost and liability?
 
Laughing Swordfish:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think only one person died penetrating the Nakaya.
At least one person died last season.
 
gchapman:
At least one person died last season.

It was my understanding that only one person ever died penetrating the Nakaya, after which a guide line was installed inside and an extra exit cut. I don't think any of the other deaths at porteau involved entrapment. I've been google searching to see if there are any more penetration accidents but only came up with the one in the eighties. Anyone else have more info?
 
Well, there was definately a fatality at the Nakaya last year. A very avoidable one...
And I'm sure there's been a couple more over the years. The Nakaya is not fit to penetrate no matter what breadth of training you have or what kind of gear you carry. It is crumbling and it's just too fragile to chance disturbing anymore.
I love the dive, don't get me wrong...
 
Laughing Swordfish:
It was my understanding that only one person ever died penetrating the Nakaya, after which a guide line was installed inside and an extra exit cut. I don't think any of the other deaths at porteau involved entrapment. I've been google searching to see if there are any more penetration accidents but only came up with the one in the eighties. Anyone else have more info?

Perhaps you meant only one person died "inside" the wreck? There has been 3 death by my count "at" the Nakaya and possibly more. The very first death happened back when the wreck was still intact. 3 divers had gone down and 2 experienced divers told the 3rd and less experienced diver to wait on the wreck while they penatrated. The was the penatration was done back in those days was you would swim through 3 sets of off set doors to get in to the 3 and innermost room. The 3rd diver got tired of waiting and went in after them. Because the doors were offset, he couldn't find his way out of the 2nd room. The 2 other divers exited the wreck missing their buddy completely due to the silt they were all kicking up. Didn't find their buddy on the wreck and surfaced to look for him. By then, it was too late.

You are right, after that incident, extra exits were cut. But the boat has since all fallen apart.

Add that one to the "remove my fin" guy from last year, that makes two. Add the guy that was OOA at the surface from the NAkaya, that would make it three.

That's my count.
Henry
 
Henry:
Perhaps you meant only one person died "inside" the wreck? There has been 3 death by my count "at" the Nakaya and possibly more.

Yes, I meant inside. As tragic as the other deaths are, they have nothing to do with the liability aspect of an artificial reef. What I was really looking at is how liability is a supposed concern for shore dive artificial reefs vs boat dive reefs. I think it's a load of BS.
 
pusser:
I think you need a way to raise a couple of $100K then buy an old ship. HMCS Huron should be available soon. Then several thousand man hours to strip and environmentally clean, then ocean dumping permit, then insurance, then....
It's a great idea but I understand it's a much bigger undertaking than it seems.
The Huron has been decommissioned, but I don't think it has been determined whether or not she will be sunk as an artificial reef.

As to whether or not Whytecliff Park is a feasible site, as much as I'd like to see a wreck within driving distance, I think the Huron is far too large. The Iroquois class is 130 m in length. From the bottom of the keel to the top of the funnels is around 23 m. (Assuming the radar mast is completely removed.) Like other similarly sized vessels, the sink depth should be minimum 100 fsw.

Whytecliff Park doesn't have a flat bottom at 100 fsw, but rather at that depth, the bottom has a substantial incline which only gets worse with depth. Even if a ship could be sunk in a controlled manner, I doubt it would be stable so I can't imagine it happening. But hey, you never know!
 

Back
Top Bottom