Kittiwake site closed. Ship listed in Tropical Storm Nate

[Doctorfish]

Big surprise. Sink a ship in shallow water onto a sandy bottom with a reef 50 feet away. Eventually the ship will end up on the reef and both will be in pieces. The original project was a stunt to attract more divers on the west side. I guess the reefs and walls were't enough for some people. As the Easterbrooks took a lot of credit for the project originally, maybe they should also face some of the blame when the reef eventually gets bashed. Looks pretty close on the Divetech video.

 

[tomfcrist]

That's all fine - but I still don't get or agree with describing the wreck as an oversized reef ball.

What does a reefball do? Attracts wildlife and stimulates coral growth.

What is an artificial reef wreck supposed to do? Same as above. Thus the artificial reefball analogy. Now if it's true that there is still no growth on it, someone did a piss poor job preparing it.

 

[mcohen1021]

Why is it closed? What if it moved and either landed on a diver or trapped one? Is it worth that risk? Let them fix the issue and re-open when it's safe

 

[Joneill]

What does a reefball do? Attracts wildlife and stimulates coral growth.

Seems like all wrecks do this, regardless of why/how they were sunk - so, in your book, I guess that all wrecks are then reef balls.

BTW - you can disagree with the sinking of the Kittiwake to create an artifical reef where there were already fantastic natural reefs, but I personally find it disrepectful to the ship and the sailors who served on her to refer to the Kittiwake as a reef ball.

 

[tomfcrist]

Disrespectful to the sailors that served on it? You are talking to a Chief my friend....sailors are well aware that our old ships become reefs, razor blades etc...and we aren't easily offended.

Unintentional wrecks are just that...purpose sunk wrecks are for all intents and purposes...giant reef balls. Just like Speigel, and oriskany and bradford...etc. Most sailors can appreciate that their former home is serving a new purpose other than making bic razors.

 

[Bison]

The Kittiwake is so "clean" after being down more than 6 1/2 years, nearly nothing growing on it, why is that?

Earlier this year I dove the Kittiwake a couple days after being on the Duane and I kept thinking the same thing. I wonder if the depth, nutrients and or the number of divers on it play into this.

 

[scubadada]

Earlier this year I dove the Kittiwake a couple days after being on the Duane and I kept thinking the same thing. I wonder if the depth, nutrients and or the number of divers on it play into this.

The Kittiwake looks almost sterile, I would love to hear why.

 

[Bison]

Video report from our evaluation dive yesterday morning. All looking good!

Thanks for the update. Think I'm looking forward to diving the Kittiwake again.

 

[Joneill]

Earlier this year I dove the Kittiwake a couple days after being on the Duane and I kept thinking the same thing. I wonder if the depth, nutrients and or the number of divers on it play into this.

The Duane was sunk almost 30 years ago (Nov 27, 1987) while the Kittiwake was sunk less than 7 years ago (Jan 5, 2011) - that’s a HUGE difference in the amount of time they’ve been submerged to allow for marine growth to accumulate...

 

[Drew Sailbum]

And the site is open again. Not sure what additional measure may be in the offing, if any, to securely anchor the wreck again. Another move or two like this one and she'll just drop over the wall to a depth too deep to dive.