Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Message Display

John Heimann wrote:

>Hank Garvin came up with a porthole and I brought up a cage lamp, but none 
of
>the really serious artifacts have come up yet.

Now I don't want to flame anyone, but here we have a wreck which has hardly 
been dived and  which is out of range of most  divers, so why do we feel a 
need to take 'artifacts' from it?   At the moment there seems to be only one 
skipper who knows the numbers for it, so couldn't there just be some sort of 
'no taking' policy, so that all this stuff is left for other people to see? 
 I know this may sound like some sort of 60s hippy ideal, but I get 
extremely annoyed by some divers I know of who will rip porthole after 
porthole off a wreck only to leave them rotting in their back garden.  Some 
guys go down tooled up for destruction rather than exploration - chisels, 
air tools, hacksaws, hammers - not only do these prevent other people from 
seeing the wreck as it should be - they also disturb all of the life that's 
built up on these wrecks in the years they've been down there.

Like I said, this isn't a flame - more a question of philosophy. Some people 
may have perfectly valid reasons for removing objects - and some things 
(like bells!) should probably be removed for their own protection - but why 
do we need to rip everything else off?  To prove that we've been there?

We've already trashed everything in 'normal' air range - do we really have 
to do the same to the new deeper wrecks?

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]