You miss the main point: many of the "technical divers" are wreck gutters and cultural heritage killers. You see it in this forum: some operators make PR for their diving trips showing the pictures of themselves (or their customers) with the material they "salvage" or the animals they've killed. A truly disgusting practice carried out by ignorant people who dont see beyond their noses. Diving became to be regulated in many places because of the many abuses: the "take a piece home" philosophy many of you either practice/d or allowed others to practice (divers, operators, etc.) is leading to the limitation of basic freedoms for civil citizens. Destruction of cultural heritage is a kind of terrorism which denies the knowledge of history and the identity to many people. I hope UNESCO succeeds in its cooperation with governments to regulate access to both natural and cultural heritage worldwide. You can still go to your US Parks and see bears, salmons, millenium trees, fossils, etc. BECAUSE the US Gov had the vision to create the park service in the late 1800: they saved the good for the future. Cheers, ---- aldo.solari@ho*.se* (fisheries biologist) Home page, www.ccbb.ulpgc.es/fish-ecology/solaris ---- aocfishman@ho*.co* MB> The following is a reply I made to an archaeologist on MB> another list-serv who apparently does not understand why MB> divers may be opposed to the UNESCO Convention on Underwater MB> Cultural Heritage (UCH). For those of you unfamiliar with the MB> UNESCO Convention on UCH, I strongly suggest you read it. You MB> can find the .pdf file at: MB> http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001232/123278e.pdf MB> As you will see, it may have very important repercussions on MB> technical diving. To date, I have not been worried about the MB> government regulating technical diving activities. However, MB> upon reading this Convention and noticing an innocent looking MB> rule, I saw a potential open door for regulation. This MB> troubles me greatly. MB> Anyway, here is the reply which helps to describe the potential problems... >>So please tell me, what's the big problem? MB> I have read the document and, since you asked, here is a list of what MB> troubles me: MB> Rule 28. HUGE issue here that I felt needed to be mentioned first (from my MB> perspective). Since they included safety as an issue, this alone could MB> preclude my diving activities that include mixed gasses and inwater MB> decompression to depths easily exceeding 200fsw. This really opens the door MB> for increased regulation in technical diving by those that have no MB> background or clue to those activities. They may simply prevent it "for the MB> sake of safety." That is not acceptable. MB> Article 2, Item 5. As stated earlier "in situ" preservation is not an MB> effective management measure if, as stated in Item 3, your objectives are to MB> conserve UCH for the "benefit of humanity." MB> Article 2, Item 10. You are correct there is a provision to encourage MB> non-intrusive access, however the final words are what is troubling. Who MB> decides when non-intrusive access becomes incompatible with UCH protection MB> and management? Call me a pessimist, but I have a feeling that in some MB> (many) instances, prohibiting all access may be easier for managers than MB> having to monitor diving activity. This has already happened in National MB> Parks and elsewhere. *THAT* is what troubles me and fellow divers. MB> Article 5. Potential repercussions from fishermen. Do they even know about MB> this document??? I have witnessed how the prohibition of one group (e.g., MB> fishermen, due to incidental damage to UCH) will impact other activities due MB> to political pressure and perceived equity issues amongst user groups. When MB> fishermen were recently prohibited from a marine protected area, they saw MB> that their inclusion was not possible so they went after divers. Even MB> though the impacts of non-consumptive divers were negligible, they were MB> prohibited to appease the other user groups. So, while there are statements MB> that encourages access on UCH (Article 2, item 10), the document also leaves MB> an "escape clause" that can be utilized by other user groups that can easily MB> prevent access. MB> Article 9, Item 1. I enjoy researching, diving, and documenting new MB> shipwrecks as I see fit. I don't want to have to be faced with red tape and MB> bureacracy. MB> Article 10, Items 2, 3, 4. I question who will be making these decisions MB> and their rationale. MB> Article 11, Item 1. Same as Article 9, Item 1. MB> Article 12, Item 1. My diving activities are exclusively (with minor MB> exceptions) directed at deepwater wreck sites from 200-400+fsw. Many times MB> we have no idea what we are diving on and will be the first to document the MB> site. It is possible that these activities may be preceived to run counter MB> to this Convention and, at best, I may get static and be hassled, and at MB> worst, my diving activities may be prohibited. MB> Article 18, Item 1. The artifact police. This item does not indicate MB> whether or not the artifacts collected before the implementation of thic MB> Convention is included. I do not like the potential open-endedness of this MB> Item. MB> Article 18, Item 4. It is hard enough to get access to view and photograph MB> artifacts (you know, for the "public benefit") recovered by archaelogists MB> (in some instances). This reminds me of the last scene from "Raiders of the MB> Lost Ark" MB> Annex MB> Rule 1. See above. MB> Rule 6. MB> Rule 7. See above. MB> Rules 9-13. MB> Rules 22-23. MB> In short order, I plan to have a link on the main page of the AUE website MB> with e-mail addresses so that you can contact those (U.S. representatives) MB> involved with the UNESCO Convention to urge them not to ratify this treaty. MB> Please check the AUE website Monday morning. MB> Regards, MB> Mike MB> Michael C. Barnette MB> Association of Underwater Explorers MB> Because it's there...somewhere...maybe. MB> http://www.mikey.net/aue MB> _________________________________________________________________ MB> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp MB> -- MB> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. MB> 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]