To sink an artificial wreck- Yes, No, Maybe?

[friscuba]

It looks as though they've extended the poll into the new newsday. I opened my e-mail today and had the link mailed to me from about 5 different sources.

If activism is what it's all about, I'll go ahead and try to make a "basic discussions" post worthy of it. That's the busiest forum on this site and has the broadest chance of finding people interested in the topic.

Sorry for hijacking the thread, the moderators can delete it if they want.

Aloha,

Steve

 

[Doc]

Sometime, opposition is cloaked in green.

The dislike of green.

I am not talking of ecology. No, the green money found in development.

If you sink a reef, the vacationers will arrive and change your little paradise.

Many groups co-opt others that have the same end goal. The reasoning is irrelevant.

Saw it happen in Roatan.

 

[Wayward Son]

In the Florida panhandle, if we don't sink things we don't have much to see when we dive. unless you like sand dives. I have no idea what you need in Kona, but sealife likes artifical structure that get sunk.

 

[diveman7683]

I completely support sinking a wreck. We are in the process of doing the same thing.

In our neck of the woods, all the wrecks are from weather of course and Lake Superior can get rough without notice. We need to have a wreck in a sheltered area so we can still take divers out if the open water gets too rough to dive.

Hope all works out for you.

Good Luck.

 

[AndyNZ]

If it's going to be done, it should be done properly!!

There's a thread in the Aus/Pacific forum about the sinking of the F69 in Wellington harbour. Only be down a few months and it's already broken into three pieces - fundamental mistake was sinking it to shallow in an area prone to big storms. I reckon in another couple of years this is going to be a very dangerous wreck to dive..... but will probably be an awesome artificial reef with lots of life on it.

Two other wrecks have been purpose sunk here, the Waikato and the Tui. It's interesting that the Waikato has been down a lot less time than the Tui, but has ten times the life on it thanks to it being sunk in an estuary. The Tui was the first purpose sunk ship in NZ and was a learning experience, the Waikato went perfectly. Just a shame that the F69 was such a ballsup. Fingers crossed for getting the next ship, the Canterbury, sunk properly in Omaha Bay.

I'm obviously for the sinking of ships! There's a lot that can be learnt from places that have been through this process in order to get the right spot, not cause too many environmental concerns etc.

 

[www.scubamazing.com]

friscuba, what's the link in the basic scuba discussion? This is an awesome to promote scuba, I'm glad you brought it up cuddlefish.

 

[www.scubamazing.com]

I'm all for it. I hope this is able to go through. I like the comments about tourism increasing and local people in the areas not being excited about that though. Kind of interesting.

 

[friscuba]

friscuba, what's the link in the basic scuba discussion? This is an awesome to promote scuba, I'm glad you brought it up cuddlefish.

I had links to an article in the paper about a recent public meeting and a link to todays front page. You may have to sign up to see their article, I've found they don't spam. I guess that's what you are asking.

 

[HarveyO]

I voted for it

 

[SwimJim]

Lake Michigan has a whole lot of nothing on the bottom. Where there is a wreck or structure of some sort there is life. I personally would like to see a few artifical reefs. I think it would help as the more structure the more fish. it would also bring more divers to dive it and spur the local economy. A win win situation.

Jim