Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Message Display

I believe the draft plan calls for looking into whether the turret and prop
can be raised along with many smaller artifacts.  Dive operations plan has
not been determined and is purely conjecture on the part of NBC.

Although NOAA will seek some funding through Congress, the estimated cost at
$22 million is more than the entire NOAA budget for 1997 ($14m).  The plan
calls for a private-public partnership in which a significant portion of the
funds would be raised through non profits that have an interest in
historical artifacts.  A few significant orgnizations have indicated their
interest and support,  but until the successful completion of an engineering
design to be conducted this summer no one knows whether recovering any of
the large artifacts is even possible.

The interest in recovering artifacts does not come from the dive community
as much as it does from civil war and history buffs, many of whom are not
divers and thus have little chance to see much of that era of the history of
naval warfare since relatively few ships still exist.  NOAA recognizes that
the Tecumsa (sp?) is much more accessible (<30') and is in much better
condition to recover, but the lack of name recognition is such that few
people are interested in recovering this wreck even though the costs would
be significantly less.  Same design tho.

As to the debate on whether any attempt should be made to recover any
artifacts is an age old argument in which there will never be a consensus.

I'd agree that the ironies in NOAA's current position vs that of 10 years
ago are a bit perplexing, but since that time I imagine a lot has been
learned both about restrictions on access to sites and the rate of
detrioration of the wreck.

Regards, John

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Lindblom 
To: techdiver@aquanaut.com 
Date: Wednesday, April 29, 1998 10:53 AM
Subject: Monitor story


>Interesting little segment at the end of the NBC 6:00 news tonight (tues)
>about an upcoming bill in congress to appropriate money to "save" the
>MONITOR. What they have in mind apparently is a plan to raise the turret,
>propellor and a bit of the hull, using saturation divers and a habitat
>anchored at the site, and costing 22 million dollars!
>
>Then they had Rod Farb on saying it sounded like a incredible boondoggle to
him.
>
> Funny after all the fuss about how those nastly sport divers are going to
>ruin the wreck, that the "preservationists" are basically proposing ripping
>the thing apart to get a few souvenirs.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
>Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
>

--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]