Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Message Display

Would you maybe consider running for President?

On Wed, 6 Apr 1994, Carl G Heinzl wrote:

> 
> >much as they are the primary users of these sites.  Shipwreck divers have a
> >large actual and potential impact upon these public resources through their
> >dives.
> 
> While I'm not usually one to cast a gleering eye this post hit me
> the wrong way.  I would like to know *why* the government thinks that
> these shipwrecks are "public resources".  The whole question of
> admiralty law/etc just riles my feathers and every time I even hear 
> of this I just think - time to downsize - my money is *not* being
> well spent.
> 
> First, who *other* than wreck divers will ever benefit from these
> ships.  Why does the damn government think that *it* can claim
> whatever is down there for it's own use - this sounds pretty much 
> antithetical to the ideas that founded this government hundreds
> of years ago (I bet they're rolling in their graves so much these 
> days they look like spinning tops!).
> 
> There was an excellent session at the Boston Sea Rovers by Peter
> Hess - noted wreck diver and admiralty attorney.  It took *8*
> years to get permission to dive on the Monitor - why?
> 
> >to examine shipwreck diver motivations.  I anticipate that the information
> >obtained by the study will help to build a foundation of data on shipwreck
> >divers that could be utilized by individuals responsible for managing as well
> >as selecting sites and resources for inclusion in shipwreck parks as they 
> 
> Shipwreck parks - what a euphamism for "government controlled".  Most of
> these ships are sitting down there rusting away and the government acts
> as though it's a piece of gold that's going to be there forever.  In
> the past couple of years that dives have been allowed on the Monitor,
> signifigant deterioration has been noted.  Indeed, divers could have
> been viewing, taking pictures and enjoying this wreck for many years
> but the government in it's infinite stupidity forbode it.  I would like an 
> answer as to why diving *anywhere* should be limited this way (well, a freshly
> downed nuclear vessel would be a different story), but the Monitor
> certainly plays no part in national defense.
> 
> I'd suggest that a better research topic is why government is a
> neverending struggle to limit individual rights and freedoms
> (you can focus on wreck divers if you wish).  Use the Monitor for one 
> example, and the marine "park" down in Florida as another one.
> 
> To everyone else, I apologize for this uncharacteristic posting -
> I have to go throw up.
> 
> -Carl-
> --
> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@opal.com'.
> Send subscription/archive requests to `techdiver-request@opal.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]