Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 185,000 divers from around the world discussing all things related to Scuba Diving. To gain full access to ScubaBoard (and make this large box go away) you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
Participate in over 500 dive topic forums and browse from over 5,500,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from well over 100,000 user submitted images.
Gain access to our free classifieds marketplace to buy, sell and trade gear, travel and services.
Use the calendar to organize your events and enroll in other members' events.
All this and much more is available to you absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the ScubaBoard Support Team.
When I did my OW & AOW cert in Thailand, many full moon parties ago, there was one outstanding dive that burned an image onto my brain and made me seek out similar wherever I went.
The dive was the King Cruiser; a shipwreck
There is a certain something about a wreck dive. A feeling hair of excitement as your glide down corridors once patrolled by seafarers. A sense of fear as your torch probes into the darkness of an engine room and you wonder what awaits you inside. A notion of insignificance as you see these mighty beast of the ocean beaten into submission.
Yeah, I love wrecks.
.... but what I don't like is trophy hunters. In England we call it collecting 'spidge' and its a jolly past time, where you crowbar off a porthole and take it back home to sit on your mantlepiece.
Seriously? You people are an embarrassment to the sport I love. The sad thing is we glorify it. Practically every dive magazine in circulation has an article about some Bell recovery by a group of 'keen; wreck divers. Personally these people are not 'keen' wreck divers they are spoilsports ruining it for the rest of us. The dive media should not be glorifying it.
And it is only in this part of diving where it is permissible. We don't get pictures of cave divers bringing home a lump of stalagtite or reefers coming home with slipper coral. No it is some members of the wreck diving community who casually forgot probably the most important motto of the diver 'take only pictures leave only bubbles'.
Proponents of the habit will argue; that it is just junk. Well I agree, a shipwreck is arguably just salvage. However I do not see these same people down the local scrapyard ripping off old Miata headlights to hang on their wall.
I could argue well that a piece of coral will grow back in 50 years so I may as well break off a piece.
Proponents will also argue that it will only rust to nothing on the bottom of the ocean.
Again, this is true, but we are taking about enjoying these sites on a week to week basis. Imagine if everyday a boot disappeared from the SS Thistlegorm, then when they were all gone they started on the Motorcycles, then the trucks, then the guns. In the space of a few years we'd have a shell instead of a tourist destination. Don't forget its been down there near 70 years, longer than the career of most divers so don't give the 'rusting to nothing speech', it doesn't happen in a single lifetime.
So when you dive, do you prefer the camera or the crowbar?
Last edited by the wart; February 7th, 2012 at 04:22 AM.
Reason: spelling
Yes, that's true... but I've been to several rather fantastic displays of wreck-salvaged treasures. There's a great collection, on public display, here in Subic Bay.
If the arguement is about take or leave... then I stick to my prior opinion.
Now... if the arguement was about the display and sharing of recovered artefacts, then I'd have opinions on that too
Yes, that's true... but I've been to several rather fantastic displays of wreck-salvaged treasures. There's a great collection, on public display, here in Subic Bay.
If the arguement is about take or leave... then I stick to my prior opinion.
Now... if the arguement was about the display and sharing of recovered artefacts, then I'd have opinions on that too
General focus here is on trophy hunters who leave little for the rest of us to enjoy. Not commercial operations or items procurred for public display, just for the selfish who want the brass for themselves.
Ahhhhh when I lived in Jeddah the reputation of BSAC divers was that of crowbar divers.
When I worked for the National Guard in Saudi we had one Brit BSAC diver that has so much from the "Mecca Wreck" in his apartment we used to joke that there was no need to dive the wreck as most of it was in his apartment. He had more portholes that you could shake a stick at, I really wonder what he did with it all when he returned to the UK.
When I worked for a salvage company back in the 80s I did pick up a few bits and pieces but as Andy points out, nobody was going to be diving these wrecks ever again as they were well beyond recreational limits.
I'm not very consistent in my attitude toward this.
If the artefacts are of archaeological value, as the ones which are on the Mars ship found off Sweden are, they should be brought up for the perusal of researchers.
If they answer a significant question about the ship -- proof of identity or something like that -- they should be brought up.
If they are of no scientific or archeological value, they should be left in place for the enjoyment of the next set of divers.
Unless the items are intended for real research or to be displayed in public place they should be left in place.
Diving to 300ft these days are considered a "easy" dive, thus the statement around recreational depth limit is a load of BS and only justified by greed. Leave the stuff alone!!!!!!!!!
I have mixed feelings about this subject. However, I don't think that a "person" should remove any trophies for his own collection. Rather, such items should be in a place that can be enjoyed by the public. When I see videos and pictures recently taken of the wrecks in Truk Lagoon I'm startled by of growth and degradation since I dove there around 1990.
Someday the sea will make diving these wrecks meaningless. I'd like to think that before this happens a generous sample of the artifacts are brought up and displayed for future generation to appreciate. The tricky part is deciding when.
Last edited by couv; February 7th, 2012 at 03:08 PM.
Diving to 300ft these days are considered a "easy" dive, thus the statement around recreational depth limit is a load of BS and only justified by greed.
If you're referring to my statement, then I'll point out:
Originally Posted by Devondiver
A wreck beyond recreational depth - seldom, if ever, visited by divers
Two clauses. Thank you
I wasn't suggesting that wrecks below rec limits weren't regularly visited by divers. Some are, some aren't. The more remote ones - that are typically 'expeditionary' in nature, might provide artefacts that have research significance and/or public interest.
Greed only comes into it if those artefacts end up on someone's mantelpiece or under the stairs.
There's also the issue of artefact value. If I dove an Asian pottery wreck... I wouldn't be leaving any Ming Dynasty behind etc etc. Yes, there'd be profit for me... but that stuff would also end up in the right hands.
31Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Take Only Pictures, or just take,take,take?
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by DevonDiver
