Important - Everyone in Diving should read!

[obxdivemaster]

We are gearing up for a battle and it's going to take your help to win. NOAA is currently making a big push to expand the size and scope of its control. If they get their way, wreck diving in North Carolina and other locations will be a thing of the past - an end to my livelihood and an end to your freedom to explore.

As Gary Gentile puts it in his Feb. 2009 newsletter:

Now I must issue a dire warning that NOAA, archenemy of the American public and destroyer of democracy, is continuing its efforts to expand its dictatorial jurisdiction over shipwrecks. Because Congress placed a temporary hold on the creation of new marine sanctuaries, NOAA implemented a movement to extend the boundaries of the present sanctuaries in order to take over domination of more shipwrecks.

An eightfold expansion is already underway in the Thunder Bay sanctuary. Next on NOAA's nefarious agenda are two other expansions: doubling the size of the Stellwagen Bank sanctuary, and a thousandfold increase in size of the Monitor sanctuary. That's right - a thousandfold increase, at least.

NOAA wants to expand the one-mile-diameter Monitor sanctuary to cover all the shipwrecks on the Diamond Shoals and along the Outer Banks. This will encompass two U-boats and scores of merchant vessels, all of which could be placed off-limits or be severely restricted in access. This expansion has nothing to do with historic preservation, but with control.

Now is the time to write to your congressional representative and file notice of your objection.

You can find a link to local press coverage here: Outer Banks Diving

Voice your opinion to Congress and the President! Let's be heard.

 

[DennisS]

When they start asking for stakeholders input, you'll know it's already too late.

 

[Thunder Bay Minnow]

I am a committee member of the Thunder Bay Underwater Preserve and received this email of Friday.

Mind you the Underwater Preserve is a State organization and as it says the Marine Sanctuary is National.


Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary's Draft Management Plan will be
available for public comment from February 24, 2009 to April 10, 2009.
The sanctuary will hold public hearings to receive comments on the Draft
Management Plan on March 18th (6:30 p.m.) in Rogers City, March 19th
(6:30 p.m.) in Harrisville, March 20th (2:00 p.m.) in Lansing, and March
24th (6:30) in Alpena. Written comments will also be accepted and may be
sent to Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary (Management Plan Review),
500 West Fletcher Street, Alpena, MI, 49707, faxed to (989) 354-0144, or
emailed to TBMPR@noaa.gov.

The Draft Management Plan is available for download at
Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary Home Page and hard copies are also available at the
Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary office or by request by phone
(989-356-8805 ext.38) or email (TBMPR@noaa.gov).

The draft is the result of the sanctuary's managment plan review process
that began with public scoping meetings in Alpena, Alcona, and Presque
Isle Counties and Lansing and a 30-day written comment period.
Twenty-two working group meetings of the Thunder Bay Sanctuary Advisory
Council were held to assist the sanctuary in addressing public comments
and developing four action plans (resource protection, education and
outreach, research, and sanctuary operations and administration).

For more information, please visit Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary Home Page.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

More government interference and control. Exactly what the founding fathers warned against. And if my history lessons were correct too much government control and interference in the lives of citizens is what prompted a little thing called the American Revolution. Why does NOAA care where we dive? Unless they have something they do not want us to find. Wrecks that will turn into nothing but piles of rust if not explored and in some cases objects recovered from. Is there any way to start a petition to stop them from doing this?

 

[Thunder Bay Minnow]

Putting it in simple terms. I believe In the Thunder Bay Marine Sanctuary that NOAA welcomes Wreck Divers with Open arms. It is the Treasure Hunters that they prefer stay away.

And Yes, There is a proposed expansion of the Sanctuary identified in the plan.

 

[ComputerJoe]

I do not know what negative expirences others have had in other National Marine Sanctuaries but what follows is my expirence in Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary.

As a lifelong resident of Alpena Michigan, the home of Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, I have seen the Thunder Bay Underwater Preserve formed in 1982 and followed the designation of Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary in 2000. Whereas I do have my problems with the responsiveness of the Sanctuary to local concerns, overall I think it has been a good thing for Northeast Michigan and our "Shipwreck Alley."

Facts about Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary:

- has never limited or regulated anything to do with fishing
- has never required a permit or fee to dive anything in the Sanctuary
- has never classified a shipwreck "off limits" or arrested a wreck
- has brought some world class archelogists to document our shipwrecks
- has upgraded and, I hope, will be expanding buoy placements
- has brought this world class resource to world wide recognition

As a matter of fact, most of these requirements were present in Thunder Bay's first Action Plan created pre-designation. The first designations orginal plan was to place Thunder Bay's northern boundry at Presque Isle Lighthouse in Presque Isle County and its southern boundry at Sturgeon Point Lighthouse in Alcona County. Each of these proposed boundries are respectively 22 and 12 miles short, on a north/south axis, of what is now proposed. The big difference is the expansion out to the mid-lake International border with Canada. At the time both Presque Isle County and Alcona County turned down National designation due to concerns of the fishing community. NOAA then restrained the Sanctuary to the Alpena County borders. Since then new referendums were held in both Presque Isle and Alcona Counties and the voter passed them. Our experience show that you votes do count so use them!

If you don't know it, Lake Huron along the shores of Northeast Michigan contain a remarkable collection of 19th Century shipwrecks. The number of known, completely intact, wooden schooners is easily a dozen add to that the intact steamers and the less pristine shipwrecks and I have more than 60 charted along a 50 mile shoreline.

In the 60's and 70's it was a salvors free for all and anything worth anything was stripped from all the known wrecks, usually in 130' or less. Then came the State Preserve which initially did little to change old habits, although they did change slowly, partly due to lack of anything of value to take but the wood our shipwrecks are made of. The Great Lakes are a freshwater time capsule, sunken forests 110' deep in Lake Huron have been found to be 5000 to 6000 years old, so our shipwrecks do not follow the same timeline as they would in the ocean. Lately Wreck Hunters have been looking deeper and finding untouched shipwrecks. These shipwrecks still contain the Captains Pockwatch, compasses, flint lock rifle's, whiskey jugs and all the everyday items found on an 1850's ship, an era when there were no roads in Northern Michigan. Shipwrecks just outside of the Preserve/Sanctuary are being pilliaged still, partly because National Sanctuary designation does not protect them, and I look to NOAA to stem these activities as the State has accomplished little in court.

Joseph Sobczak
Owner: Thunder Bay Scuba
President: Thunder Bay Underwater Preserve Committee
Member: Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council

 

[covediver]

Hard to believe TBNMS is already revising its management plan. Time surely does fly.

My interest in Alpena is both personal and professional. I won't comment as to the politics of the NMS as that would not be appropriate. My great grandfather's ship sank just outside the present sanctuary boundaries, but she was refloated only to sink a few more times before being scrapped. That was a fairly common life for Great Lakes steamers around the turn of the 19 to 20th century. I have written about wrecks in state preserves, but not in Alpena. While the opportunity to do that did present itself a few years ago, I had to decline.

Please allow me to share these points with anyone who is considering commenting on this or any other management plan, environmental impact statement, etc. They previously appeared on another thread, but seem appropriate here.

Comments should be on content of the plan. The comment period is not a referendum on the proposed action or alternatives. Preferences as to outcomes may be expressed, but only substantive comments on the content will be analyzed. Agencies are looking for substantive comments that modify alternatives, develop and evaluate alternatives not previously given serious consideration, make factual corrections, or supplement, improve, or modify the analysis.

Written comments are most common way to express concerns, are not restricted in length and allow full development of the point you want to make.

Oral comments allow you to share your concerns in public and for exchange of ideas in the community but may be time constrained.

Both types are included verbatim in the record and given equal weight. Commenters may submit detailed comments in writing and summarize main points in oral presentation.

Make sure comments are submitted by deadline.

Content can be on any aspect of the proposal or alternatives.

Goal should be to communicate your concerns in an understandable and believable manner. Decide what you want to say before you begin. Group multiple comments in a logical order. Do not jump back and forth between topics. Specific page, figure, or table references analyst respond to your comment. Explain why, give as much factual support to your comment as possible. Compare or refer to similar projects or experiences to put your points into context. Identify possible solutions and suggest reasonable mitigation that reduces effects.

Particularly helpful comments are those that point out inaccuracies in the content, potential environmental impacts that have not been identified or environmental impacts that have not been adequately addressed, possible mitigation measures for the proposal, reasonable alternatives to the proposal, the need for additional studies, the merits of the alternatives and mitigation measures considered, the issues raised in scoping that should be but are not addressed, and additional relevant information.

 

[Scubakevdm]

So, are we supposed to be up in arms about the government protecting the wrecks from guys with crowbars?

 

[Thunder Bay Minnow]

It comes down to different interest. If you go to the outer Banks link above and then look in artifacts, it is a bit alarming to me. TO ME!! It is a lot like the hunters and PETA. One loves the animals and one loves to eat them! I love wreck diving but I don't take trophies.

In salt water everything is going to rust away anyway so I couldn't tell you what is right and what is wrong in that situation.

Here in the Great Lakes there was the trophy hunt mentality years ago but I don't see a lot of that now days with our low deterioration rate many understand that a lot of our wrecks will be there for many generations to see.

Treasure hunt or not is always going to be debated. There was huge controversy when family of victims of the Bradley asked someone to remove the bell for the museum in Rogers City.

With many of those who were doing the treasure hunting passing away I only hope that if their heirs don't want the artifacts that they get in the hands of the right people rather than junked. I heard of one salvage yard that bought some anchors and chains for salvage!! After "Dad" died and nobody wanted them.

Supposedly the red/green navigation lights from the Cedarville are in an attic in Alcona County!! Please! Please! Find a reputable museum and donate any trophies that are collecting dust and in most cases the contributors names are attached to the items for future generations to see.

Sort of funny, the Nordmeer is just out side Thunder Bay and is a German ship that ran aground and sank in the mid 1960's and I just heard a guy tell me he was buying a porthole from the wreck on eBay from a guy in Texas! Sort of a twist for a porthole that today I can stand on shore and see the wreck just offshore.


Now that is my spiel on wrecks. What about finding an anchor and chain that was lost by a ship years ago? Or stumbling on some artifact discarded by the crew? Bottles, clay pipes, dishes, etc. If it can not be associated with a wreck or "orphaned", I have another opinion. Who is going to base a ÅÅive site around a bottle?!?!? Who is going to go to the trouble to find, let alone see a ships lost anchor, or a broken dish? Even in the Marine Sanctuary it is a no, no to take a stray artifact! So I guess I will have to make a trip to the St. Clair and Detroit Rivers!!! If not my home, I am sure a museum somewhere would appreciate them!

I heard someone say once, "there's a place for everthing and everyone, that's why we have strip clubs". Maybe the Sanctuary's should be for the do not touch activities, but there is a heck of a lot more other area out there for the plundering.

My 2 Cents.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

I agree with preserving the freshwater sites. My favorite dive to date is the St James in Lake Erie. Still intact rigging on her. Saltwater is a different story. I see nothing wrong with taking treasures from blown up WWII era freighters. What is historically significant about a dish or even a WWII bayonet. You can buy them on ebay. I'd just rather get it myself. A few more years and there will be little left anyway. My goal was to get to the Doria. I'm hoping when I do there is enough of the ship left to find something cool. I'm glad all those guys salvaged what they could and are still bringing up. No museum is doing anything. So why not. And if you want to see it you pay for it.