Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 100,000 divers from around the world discussing all things related to Scuba Diving. To gain full access to ScubaBoard 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 3,000,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from 80,000 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.
I still can't figure out why we are protecting wreck sites as grave sites? So what if people died there? I mean, don't go and monkey around with remains, but how many bus accidents are we going to leave on the side of the road as a grave? Or plane wrecks? Train wrecks? Why just shipwrecks? If they were in plain sight they would have been cleaned up and demolished decades ago. If they were in a shipping lane do you think they moved the channel? NO, they dynamited the wreck and wire dragged what was left.
I think we should leave jumpers remains on the sidewalks, and no touching their wallets folks ...
I still can't figure out why we are protecting wreck sites as grave sites? So what if people died there? I mean, don't go and monkey around with remains, but how many bus accidents are we going to leave on the side of the road as a grave? Or plane wrecks? Train wrecks? Why just shipwrecks? If they were in plain sight they would have been cleaned up and demolished decades ago. If they were in a shipping lane do you think they moved the channel? NO, they dynamited the wreck and wire dragged what was left.
I think we should leave jumpers remains on the sidewalks, and no touching their wallets folks ...
Captain Mark
Of course, this issue has pretty much been hashed over a million times in the past few years and a search will get you all the answers you could ever hope for. I come from an area where a well-treated wreck essentially lasts forever and we are, perhaps, more sensitive to not trashing them than might be the case in some other areas. That doesn't mean that access to some wrecks isn't pretty tightly controlled (or prohibitedf) but it doesn't happen very often.
It's my suspicion that most people wouldn't object to divers visiting the site of fatal wrecks if they felt like the divers were going to treat the site with respect and dignity.
We clean up the sites of car, plane and train wrecks (because we can), recover the bodies and often mark the site of the accident for posterity. It's hard to do much of that with wrecks and most non-divers don't feel the sting of being denied access to the wrecks. Of course, blustering insensitivity (not to mention pilferage, desecration and general loutishness) on the part of some overly dramatic divers spoiling for an argument doesn't help our cause, either.
__________________
This is going to end badly but at least it will end.
A fatal shipwreck is generally considered the final resting place of the individual(s) lost in it. A car wreck is not. A wartime wreck (ie war grave) is considered even more sacred. I believe that's the thinking behind the argument.
Personally I think that diving these sites with the appropriate degree of respect and consideration can be a tribute to those lost on it the same as if one were visiting a topside memorial or a wartime cemetery. I have done so and will do again.
__________________
So, I'm eccentric? Who wants to be run-of-the-mill?
"If it's stupid but it works then it ain't stupid." - Unknown
"It's up to you now if you sink or swim" - Great Big Sea "Ordinary Day"
i belive it is a means to an end
a way to protect the wrecks from being stripped
i also agree that it is a shame that we cannot dive on some of these wrecks
unfortunately it only takes one, to spoil it for the rest of us
... I come from an area where a well-treated wreck essentially lasts forever and we are, perhaps, more sensitive to not trashing them than might be the case in some other areas. That doesn't mean that access to some wrecks isn't pretty tightly controlled (or prohibitedf) but it doesn't happen very often....
I know in the fresh, cold waters of the Great Lakes and other fresh water bodies that some wreck sites will pretty much last forever. In the North Atlantic wrecks dissolve and are smashed by the elements rather quickly. Look at the Andrea Doria, the first time I went in the 80's it was down for 30 years or so and still looked like a luxury liner. Now she's dropping decks like a tree loses it's leaves. The china, crystal and other "goodies" divers are bringing up will ultimately be the only things saved from these wrecks. Most of the rest will be destroyed and lost forever. Even Dr. Ballard is now noting the rapid decay on the Titanic, noting the inevitable loss of many artifacts. At the same time he criticizes the French & Russian team from bringing a bit of the Titanic up for people to see and experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian1968
A fatal shipwreck is generally considered the final resting place of the individual(s) lost in it. A car wreck is not. A wartime wreck (ie war grave) is considered even more sacred. I believe that's the thinking behind the argument....
If you consider how we have treated war graves since our founding you really can't support that statement. The battlefields of the Revolutionary War, War of 1812 & the Civil War are mostly suburbs and industrial parks now-a-days. And as I stated in the first post, if the "war grave" is in a shipping channel or some other inconvenient location, we dynamite it, wire drag it and other wise demolish it. The Gaspee was one of the first British ships sunk in the run-up to the Revolutionary War. Undoubtably the most historically important shipwreck in Rhode Island. It's site was dredged to make the Providence shipping channel.
I personally wouldn't mind some oversight on artifacts recovered, maybe like South Carolina does. There are countless stories of divers bringing things up only to have them rust and disintegrate in their backyard. But there are many more divers that would love to show their finds and educate people of the wonders of wrecks and local maritime history.
My $.02
Captain Mark
Plan your Dive, Dive the Wreck, Wreck your Plan
I can't speak to how war cemeteries are treated in the USA. Of that I have no knowledge. If they are treated in the way you speak then I would say that it is shameful.
__________________
So, I'm eccentric? Who wants to be run-of-the-mill?
"If it's stupid but it works then it ain't stupid." - Unknown
"It's up to you now if you sink or swim" - Great Big Sea "Ordinary Day"
I think the issue requires a large degree of balance as there is no clear right or wrong.
As noted above, we tend to play fast and loose with the war grave argument when applied to battlefields in general, as they are not immune to being turned into money in the form of strip malls and housing developments for up scale types who want a great view.
The point noted above that shipwrecks and sunken warships in shipping channels have trraditionally been dynamited or broken up and drug essentially flat with wire cables (by the government no less, normally with no public hearing) that certainly do not respect the remains exposed and then scattered in the wreckage.
In contrast, a diver visiting a wreck with the approprioate degree of respect is no worse than a Sunday afternoon in a cemetary or on a battlefield.
Where it gets a little greyer is where you have divers going down with tools for the express purpose of looting the wreck for artifacts that are then displayed on private mantels. To some extent you can argue that with salt water wrecks the artifacts are being preserved for posterity, but when they are tucked away in private collections, stuffed in boxes in garages, or even worse, sold on e-bay, that argument gets a little thin. Donating or even loaning artifacts to museums for temporary or permanent display display would go along way toward supporting that argument, but I have not met many divers who actually do that.
In deep, cold, fresh water, environments where wrecks can last several hundred years in a very well preserved condition, the argument that the artifacts are being "preserved" by being recovered has virtually no merit at all unless they are being recovered for the express purpose of being displayed in a museum or for officially sanctioned archeological purposes.
__________________
Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but rather by the number of moments that take your breath away.
It's interesting how differently people look at things.
We have a shipwreck that is a fantastic dive. It went down in 1918 and 344 people died on it. It's an unbelievable dive in terms of visability, marine life and just the wreck in general. I would dive this wreck everyday if I could, it's that good.
My brother on the other hand refuses to even dive it. Says it's a gravesite and shouldn't ever be disturbed.
Personally, IMO, dead is dead and memorial sites are a waste of valuable ground but, I wouldn't deface the local graveyard and I don't deface the wreck. I swim around the wreck as I would walk through the graveyard with respect which is a requirement of the living not the dead.
If I die in a wreck feel free to dive my wreck and If you come across my bones do something useful with them.
Personally, IMO, dead is dead and memorial sites are a waste of valuable ground
If I die in a wreck feel free to dive my wreck and If you come across my bones do something useful with them.
Dave
I'm a sailor (stoker, actually - and we always seem to have bad luck when a ship goes down) and I feel the same way.
Linear Mode
