Quote: (Originally Posted by
trimix)
Yes I agree there are some wrecks that have no apparent historic significance - but who decides what is significant?
Locally we have many wrecks that, at time of sinking, were anonymous and unremarkable -
the huge majority of wrecks are and will always be anonymous and unremarkable -period. Yes there are exceptions - but the huge majority are historically insignificant and no museum in the world would ever want any tat off any of them ever.
Quote:
As a charter operator, you and your fellow operators are probably the only real line of defense for these wrecks you visit - please explain to your clients why they should not remove anything from the wrecks,
This was exactly what Jamie says to anyone who dives the Lagarto - because he respects a) its historical significance, b) its a war grave.
Quote:
And if you see 'booty' coming up from the bottom, demand that it goes back - it's just going to rot faster now that it's at the surface,
nonsense. Wrecks are scrap. Abandoned scrap. over time that scrap will be buried and lost as wrecks collapse and currents spread the contents. whats romantic or responsible about leaving it there where nobody will ever see it. Wrecks have a finite life, they tend to stand looking relatively intact for decades then suddenly in a short period of time they collapse. The rate of deterioration is fast once it starts. I have seen wrecks that have been standing for 40 years fall apart in a matter of a few years. What is the point in leaving stuff on wrecks that will collapse soon anyway? Other that some misguided romantic ideals.
Quote:
You say you protect the USS Lagarto - that's great. But the protection should extend to all the sites you visit, not just the contentious ones.
The lagarto is a war grave crammed full of the dead bodies of her courageous crew. A modern steel cargo boat is just a modern steel cargo boat. Not all wrecks are created equally just as not all are historically or in vast majority of cases
will ever be historically significant
I'm diving the Repulse next weekend. Ive dived it probably around 100 times. Never during that time have I felt I didn't enjoy diving it because I didn't see items (such as the bells or stepping plate) because
1) its a 700foot long 40,000 ton wreck bristling with huge guns and a bell and stepping plate in comparison size wise are nothing
2) Even if the bell and stepping plate were there chances are high 99.9% of divers would never notice it (because its buried under crap of hidden in dark silty rooms) - as is evident by the fact the last bell was found about 10 years ago and yet hundreds of divers had visited before then (and not seen the bell)
People (often those that don't do much wreck diving) often have a very rosy idea of what artifacts look like in situ. 99% of the time the average passing diver wouldn't even know that under all that crud and shell growth is anything more than more crud and shell growth.
IMHO what motivates many divers who complain about salvage is jealousy. They want to see the bells, the telegraphs, helms and portholes. they live in countries where (they think) they can never do that - but this is often not the case. There are heaps of virgin marks off coast of UK just as there are many parts of the world - but somepeople are plain lazy, they expect/want things to be laid out for them. They (unlike people like Jamie, myself, KevinD, the likes of Leigh Bishop and his mates in UK) are prepared to put the effort (financial, time wise and physical) to get off our asses and go looking for virgin wrecks because we too want to see this stuff. If you really want to see this stuff, instead of waiting to be nannied and taken there by the hand why don't you spend the time and money we do and go find it yourself?
And when you do that (and you find some historically insignificant commercial vessel laying buried under heaps of fishing net at 70m, a vessel in the arse end of nowhere that only you and your mates will ever dive, a vessel that's collapsing. When you enter into the deepest darkest part of that wreck and buried under a mound of silt you find a beautiful piece of porcelain....will you leave it there? Will you put it back into that silt mound where nobody will ever ever see it again, deep in darkest recesses of the wreck in 70m of water. In a room there's a 99% certainty not a single other diver will ever enter (and dig and find that pottery) ?...be honest now
Jamie and his divers would likely take it - as I have little doubt you would
Maybe you would find a historical WW2 wreck, perhaps even a submarine. Would you report the find immediately to the USN? would you refuse to allow anyone to do any salvage at all on that wreck? would you protect it? would you work with USN to document it, work with the relatives, the museums?
Just like Jamie and his divers did?
The point is not all wrecks are created equal. Jamie knows that as does anyone who applies a bit of logic and sense to the discussion.
A sensible person recognises that fact and recognises that each wreck should be and can be treated seperately according to its status (war grave, historically significant, modern commercial etc)
Warships remain property of the Military in perpetuity. Not true with non warships that become officially 'abandoned' by their 'owners' (usually insurance companies) unless salvage is undertaken or planned to be undertaken by said owners. So the argument that taking something of all wrecks is thieft is not always true.