Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: wreckdiver

Message Display

Jim Cobb writes:
> Well, the problem is that in salt water steel rusts away in a matter of 
> years. And wood is gone in a matter of months from the teredo worms. You 
> could pass a law not to touch a wreck, but how do you stop the ocean from 
> taking it?

I'm aware of the arguments that "you might as well take it before the
ocean does".  And I've gone diving on a freshwater wreck that went down
in 1867.  There's that big difference there.  Both countries have
frontage on the Atlantic, the Pacific, and the Great Lakes, but I'm not
aware of any legal differences regarding wrecks in fresh water.  Fresh
vs. salt should make a bigger difference than Canada vs. US.

Any American lakes divers or Canadian salt water divers care to comment?

There are specific preserves in both countries, and they do their bit to
preserve wrecks in those locations.  Certainly patrolling an area and
having the charter operators onside in not letting divers bring artifacts
back helps keep area like Fathom Five or Kingston a bit closer to how
they were originally.

> Only a huge, mindless bureaucracy like Canada's would pass a 
> pointless law like that.

Yeah, I know.  But I'm doing something about it; I'm an active member of
the Reform Party.

> In fresh water it is another story, where the wreck is preserved. And I 
> agree to leave them alone there.

Jim, we've been over this before.  You don't even dive in fresh water,
remember?  :-)

-- 
Anthony DeBoer <adb@on*.ca*>

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]