Just found 12 more cannons and 3 new wrecks...we need HELP! That's 35 sites so far!

[Diver Dennis]

I receive a reply that since we are disturbing the bottom of the ocean that I may be in the wrong somehow. It even quotes some source that: "or sand just above or below the surface of the sea"? Would that be levitating sand above the water or would that be what most of us call a beach? So, when I walk on a beach I'm killing a reef? What about the bacteria that live on the bottom of my feet? Am I murdering them too when I walk? Should I stay in my bed? WAIT! I could kill Innocent Mites! Should scientists not try and discover how to kill viruses or cancer? Should any one NOT touch anything under the water? Probably not because it may kill it if they don't have a good reason to touch it. If they are doing research to see how to prolong its life, then maybe so.

The quote was the definition of a reef from a dictionary. You posted you don't dig into reefs but the photos and video on your website show otherwise. That's explanation enough.

I'd be interested to hear what your marine biologists have to say about the excavations you're doing. I'm quite open to a civil discussion about it.

 

[Rick Murchison]

I'd be interested to hear what your marine biologists have to say about the excavations you're doing. I'm quite open to a civil discussion about it.

If your position is that artifact recovery must be accomplished without disturbing or killing any critters, then no method will suit, and there's no point in having a discussion. Just the simple act of pulling something out of the water that's been down for any time at all will sacrifice those critters living in/on it -at the extreme end there's no telling how many little critters have attached themselves to your dive gear and perished there after every dive you've made.
The ocean is so rich with life there's simply no way to excavate for artifacts without disturbing and killing critters.
Any discussion on any interaction with the ocean must accept the premise that it can't be done without some impact... a discussion of how to minimize the negative impacts is worthwhile, but any position that demands "no impact/no death" is pointless... and throwing stones in a glass house.
Rick

 

[seaducer]

If your position is that artifact recovery must be accomplished without disturbing or killing any critters, then no method will suit, and there's no point in having a discussion. Just the simple act of pulling something out of the water that's been down for any time at all will sacrifice those critters living in/on it -at the extreme end there's no telling how many little critters have attached themselves to your dive gear and perished there after every dive you've made.
The ocean is so rich with life there's simply no way to excavate for artifacts without disturbing and killing critters.
Any discussion on any interaction with the ocean must accept the premise that it can't be done without some impact... a discussion of how to minimize the negative impacts is worthwhile, but any position that demands "no impact/no death" is pointless... and throwing stones in a glass house.
Rick

I am not speaking for Dennis here, I don't know exactly what he means. But for me, I am not ok with someone taking a sledge hammer to a reef to get at a canon, or coins or most anything else equally un-profound.

Pulling something up with some encrusted corals on it is one thing, but breaking apart a reef is another.

As for vacuuming the seafloor, where is the sand going? Hopefully down current of a reef system so as not to bury it. Are there any endangered critters that live on the bottom where you are searching? And what are your gains? If you are pulling artifacts for money or fame I am less inclined to support you. If you are doing the same for acedemic purposes, then what is the potential gain in that? Is it worth the strain you put on that area ecologically?
Bear in mind these are just my opinions, I would rather look at a piece of coral on a reef than a dusty metal tube in a museum, that is where I am coming from. I have no power to stop anybody. Nor should I.

But I hope that whoever does is watching, and is taking into consideration the effect on the local ecology vs whatever the potential gain may be. History tells me however this will likely not be the case. I just hope whatever is down there is worth the price, not just some rusty old cannons and rotted wood.

 

[Rick Murchison]

... I am not ok with someone taking a sledge hammer to a reef to get at a canon, or coins or most anything else equally un-profound...

And this, sir, is the core of the issue... "One man's trash is another man's treasure."
Does the temporary destruction of a couple cubic meters of coral - which will grow back in a few decades - outweigh the recovery of a chest full of Louis d'or that will either be recovered or lost forever?
Some folks say yes, some no... I doubt you'll ever get agreement.
If we were talking about the thirteenth cannon off a wreck where we'd already recovered twelve I'd definitely side with the coral. If it were me doing the digging and we were talking the Louis d'or, I'd most likely go for the gold.
Rick

 

[seaducer]

And this, sir, is the core of the issue... "One man's trash is another man's treasure."
Does the temporary destruction of a couple cubic meters of coral - which will grow back in a few decades - outweigh the recovery of a chest full of Louis d'or that will either be recovered or lost forever?
Some folks say yes, some no... I doubt you'll ever get agreement.
If we were talking about the thirteenth cannon off a wreck where we'd already recovered twelve I'd definitely side with the coral. If it were me doing the digging and we were talking the Louis d'or, I'd most likely go for the gold.
Rick

Well let me be abundantly (hypocritically) clear. I would cut off your airsuply to go for the gold myself

But that doesn't make it right. So it goes to motive. If I were to donate all that I recovered to feed to poor, I am a hero. Were I to finance my own private liveaboard, a zero. Thus the question what do they hope to learn, and does it benefit the greater good?

I suppose that is philisophical and impossible to answer the same for everybody.

 

[doczerothree]

I'm interested.

 

[Diver Dennis]

If your position is that artifact recovery must be accomplished without disturbing or killing any critters, then no method will suit, and there's no point in having a discussion. Just the simple act of pulling something out of the water that's been down for any time at all will sacrifice those critters living in/on it -at the extreme end there's no telling how many little critters have attached themselves to your dive gear and perished there after every dive you've made.
The ocean is so rich with life there's simply no way to excavate for artifacts without disturbing and killing critters.
Any discussion on any interaction with the ocean must accept the premise that it can't be done without some impact... a discussion of how to minimize the negative impacts is worthwhile, but any position that demands "no impact/no death" is pointless... and throwing stones in a glass house.
Rick

I should have explained myself better Rick. I'm not against Marine Archaeology but it depends what you are looking for and I not naive enough to think it can't be done without some destruction of the marine environment. Personally, I don't think it's worth strip mining reefs for little or no return. Finding a single object under the sand, like the perfume bottles they have on their site, should not mean that that area should be subject to destruction. I'm also willing to bet it is far more than a couple cubic feet of coral as this has been going on for years. If they don't find anything else then it just an "Oh well" and on to the next site? How many of the same objects do you need to pull out before you have enough? I am certainly not against going for the gold or historically significant wrecks but I think there is a limit. Would the government not provide some form of monetary help for historically significant finds? The helpers that are being solicited can keep their share of what they find so it can't be excavation for only museums.

In the first line of this thread it says there is gold there. Is that the real target? They are asking for help here and that first line is telling. Obviously if they had found it then asking for help would not be an option. This gentleman was asking for a 40+ vessel and crew to come down and help. Where do you think the operating expenses are going to come from? I would think that there would have to be a significant chance of finding gold or other artifacts for any business person in their right mind to send their vessel to help in the search.

Again, I may be way off base and I'm no historian but the lure of gold has been used here a number of times. Maybe that is what it takes to get people involved in "archaeology".

 

[Rick Murchison]

I should have explained myself better Rick. I'm not against Marine Archaeology but it depends what you are looking for and I not naive enough to think it can't be done without some destruction of the marine environment. Personally, I don't think it's worth strip mining reefs for little or no return. Finding a single object under the sand, like the perfume bottles they have on their site, should not mean that that area should be subject to destruction. I'm also willing to bet it is far more than a couple cubic feet of coral as this has been going on for years. If they don't find anything else then it just an "Oh well" and on to the next site? How many of the same objects do you need to pull out before you have enough? I am certainly not against going for the gold or historically significant wrecks but I think there is a limit. Would the government not provide some form of monetary help for historically significant finds? The helpers that are being solicited can keep their share of what they find so it can't be excavation for only museums.

In the first line of this thread it says there is gold there. Is that the real target? They are asking for help here and that first line is telling. Obviously if they had found it then asking for help would not be an option. This gentleman was asking for a 40+ vessel and crew to come down and help. Where do you think the operating expenses are going to come from? I would think that there would have to be a significant chance of finding gold or other artifacts for any business person in their right mind to send their vessel to help in the search.

Again, I may be way off base and I'm no historian but the lure of gold has been used here a number of times. Maybe that is what it takes to get people involved in "archaeology".

I expect that on any given project we'd come down on the same side of the go/no-go question just about every time.
Rick

 

[In10se]

Fact is, if it's been sunk and it's worth something someone is gonna go find it. We can be as environmentally conscientious as our morality will motivate us to be but that will change nothing. If it's down there it's coming up sooner or later. SO am I gonna sit it out while someone with less ethics than I have does the deed? Nope. How about people with a moral base collectively involve them selves in something that is both outstandingly fun and maybe ... just maybe ... even good for the piggy bank in a way that works for the environment. Taking the moral high ground is pointless if all you do is sit on it and watch the rest of the world work the trenches.

If we were talking about the thirteenth cannon off a wreck where we'd already recovered twelve I'd definitely side with the coral. If it were me doing the digging and we were talking the Louis d'or, I'd most likely go for the gold.
Rick

Well said Rick. Human nature will prevail. Rick has dependents, so do I. I want my grandchildren to think what a wonderful ol' grandpa they had as they spend what ever's left of my fortune on bubble-gum and go-carts.

 

[Diver Dennis]

I expect that on any given project we'd come down on the same side of the go/no-go question just about every time.
Rick

Yup.

You can still be morally and environmentally responsible as well. A monetarily significant find can buy a lot of $3 domes to rebuild the reefs, sort of like re-planting trees after harvesting. Now that would cover all the bases as I see it. Check this thread...


http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/ph...i-bay-5-000-artificial-reef-dome-project.html