DNR Lands Commissioner on artificial reefs on the radio

[Gooch]

There is a long and bitter history with getting a ship up here, Pensacolaracer. I'm finding out that getting a ship is the least of the problem. The permissions and permitting from the governing bodies (city/state/fed/fish+wildlife/the pope/u-name-it) is the really hard part to get done. My discussion with Mike Racine really highlighted the pains of trying to work this thing and its really tough. Especially since this is the first one. As I said before, it looks like it will take a "town in need" to say
"We could sink a ferry here and make jobs for our community" and making that REALLY clear to their political delegations.

It great for guys like me and you to want a ship as a reef to dive on but it really is something that will have to be driven by a local community to get the first one done. Brinnon, Port Angeles and Townshend are all prime examples of places that could benefit (like Nanaimo, etc) from a ship.

Once the first one goes down and the impact can be seen for a few years, it will be easier to get more.

[Shaker100]

To sink a barge or other structure in Puget Sound you will likely need an HPA, an Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide permit, agreements and/or permits from WDFW, Ecology, DNR, ect. DNR will likely require a lease of the "land" were the structure is placed. As far as I know, DNR has not signed a single natural resource lease for anything anywhere in Washington since the previous Lands Commissioner was in office. So don't hold your breath.

ha.

I made a dive joke without really trying.

I am sorry. I just want you all to know what you are up against, but I wish your efforts the best.

Shake

[Gooch]

Mike R's thoughts are this guy is new and a different type (he thinks) than the previous (just-say-no) types. He, in other words, has hope that things will get better. Good joke-BTW

[CaptnJack]

They still issue leases (I have gotten one in the last year in fact) although I don't think places like Salt Water State park got one for their new reef. I would start with the local town and worry about DNR later, they are not leaders and will follow the political wind.

[whatevah]

Yeah, I think from a practical (recreational) perspective, something like the prepared wrecks would be more of an economic boon to the region.

While I can see that ships sunk as artificial reefs in BC bring in some money locally, I think that "boon" might be stretching it. The people diving those sites would likely dive elsewhere in BC if the ships weren't there, so where is the real benefit?

Otherwise, the training and equipment gets out of the financial reach of the typical diver ... and real wrecks present some hazards that recreational divers would not be equipped to deal with ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Hrm. Hulking chunks of garbage dropped into a natural environment with minimal current so there's little challenge - they'd be boring silt collectors with very little life on them like the Nanaimo "wrecks". We already have a lot of artificial reefs in Washington, with an amazing diversity and density of life on them - the Keystone "Jetty" is one, and the Diamond Knot is another. World class stuff. And they're nothing compared to the natural habitats available to divers in this area. Why people keep pressing to sink ships that would create another Cove 2 is beyond me.

[Grateful Diver]

Yeah, I think from a practical (recreational) perspective, something like the prepared wrecks would be more of an economic boon to the region.

While I can see that ships sunk as artificial reefs in BC bring in some money locally, I think that "boon" might be stretching it. The people diving those sites would likely dive elsewhere in BC if the ships weren't there, so where is the real benefit?

Hmmm ... I'm heading up to Victoria next week-end. I'll be spending three nights in a hotel, eating all my meals in local restaurants, paying the good folks at Ogden Point to take me out on their boat. And pay a little to BC ferries both ways.

I figure if those wrecks weren't up there I'd probably just stay home and spend that money on something local. But that's just me.

Otherwise, the training and equipment gets out of the financial reach of the typical diver ... and real wrecks present some hazards that recreational divers would not be equipped to deal with ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Hrm. Hulking chunks of garbage dropped into a natural environment with minimal current so there's little challenge - they'd be boring silt collectors with very little life on them like the Nanaimo "wrecks". We already have a lot of artificial reefs in Washington, with an amazing diversity and density of life on them - the Keystone "Jetty" is one, and the Diamond Knot is another. World class stuff. And they're nothing compared to the natural habitats available to divers in this area. Why people keep pressing to sink ships that would create another Cove 2 is beyond me.

Out of curiosity, when was the last time you dived those wrecks? I was in Nanaimo in May, and both the Breton and Sasketchewan are loaded with life.

Keystone Jetty is nice, to be sure. It's also very small, and very limiting. The Diamond Knot is only diveable by charter a few times a year ... otherwise you have to have access to a private boat to even get there ... I see that you do, but that doesn't work for the vast majority of Puget Sound divers. And the DK is not exactly amenable to diving most of the time due to current. It's also falling apart. Give it another 20 years and it'll hardly qualify as a wreck anymore.

To each their own. Obviously you wouldn't enjoy an artificial reef in Puget Sound. OK ... no biggie. Don't go. You have your own boat and live in a place with easy access to the San Juan Islands ... that opens oppportunities for you that only a tiny percentage of area divers can contemplate. But it's pretty obvious a lo of local divers would appreciate and benefit from having a prepared wreck to dive locally ... the same ones that keep going up to Canada to enjoy theirs. Personally, I'd prefer to keep my money circulating in our country. But if I have to go to Canada to enjoy the dives I want to do, then my money will be spent there and not here.

But that's just me ... I won't presume to speak for others.

And FWIW - although I've done hundreds of dives there over the years, I still enjoy Cove 2. Saw five GPO's there just the other night. For a lot of us, it's still an interesting place with easy access. Not everyone owns a boat and lives on an island, yanno ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Gill Envy]

I keep coming back to the same feeling that the best angle to go on this is that we have a right to recreate, that's it. the environmental side of it is too debatable to say artificial reefs are positive, the economic benefit to local economies is tiny in the grand scheme of things (the sport of flying kites probably has a larger market share in WA state, and lets face it, divers are thrifty) ... I think we have a right to recreation and all sorts of exceptions are made for that in other sports, why should ours be treated any differently?

g

[CaptnJack]

Hrm. Hulking chunks of garbage dropped into a natural environment with minimal current so there's little challenge - they'd be boring silt collectors with very little life on them like the Nanaimo "wrecks". We already have a lot of artificial reefs in Washington, with an amazing diversity and density of life on them - the Keystone "Jetty" is one, and the Diamond Knot is another. World class stuff. And they're nothing compared to the natural habitats available to divers in this area. Why people keep pressing to sink ships that would create another Cove 2 is beyond me.

Pretty much the rationale why I consider my RIB required dive equipment. Surpisingly, the spouse unit actually agrees. Whining on the internet about how ARSBC gets all the prepped scrap ships sunk up there and we have none seems to be a periodic exercise here. The reality is that we have a fair number of artificial reefs and the majority of them aren't served by commercial charters. Our non-prepped wrecks like the horizontal barge, vertical barge, Omar, Possession Point ferry, Taylor Bay, Tolmie, and 4 mile barges on top of a hundred+ wrecks in Lake WA are all underappreciated by both divers and charters. I guess whining is easier.

[whatevah]

While I can see that ships sunk as artificial reefs in BC bring in some money locally, I think that "boon" might be stretching it. The people diving those sites would likely dive elsewhere in BC if the ships weren't there, so where is the real benefit?

Hmmm ... I'm heading up to Victoria next week-end. I'll be spending three nights in a hotel, eating all my meals in local restaurants, paying the good folks at Ogden Point to take me out on their boat. And pay a little to BC ferries both ways.

I figure if those wrecks weren't up there I'd probably just stay home and spend that money on something local. But that's just me.

Wow. BC is definitely hitting the jackpot then eh? Be realistic Bob - the economic argument doesn't fly

Out of curiosity, when was the last time you dived those wrecks? I was in Nanaimo in May, and both the Breton and Sasketchewan are loaded with life.

I was on both those structures last year and found them very disappointing. Invertebrates were sparse, and there was no greater variety than I'd expect on an average visit to Mukilteo. There were patches of life here and there, separated by large areas of rusting steel under several inches of silt. This does not make for a compelling dive for me sorry. I understand that some people do get a kick out of seeing garbage under water - old toilet bowls, broken up fiberglass hulls, discarded steel vessels without any interesting stories behind their sinking, etc. That's fine - but I wish people would just say that instead of claiming that they want those things for the economic benefit of the region, or for enhancement of the natural environment.

Keystone Jetty is nice, to be sure. It's also very small, and very limiting.

And just one of many artificial reefs in this area. Accessible at very low cost.

The Diamond Knot is only diveable by charter a few times a year ...

Only because so few people are willing to put their money where their mouth is and book a charter. It is reasonable to dive it about as often as any of the prime deep pinnacle or deep wall dives in San Juan Channel, Rosario Strait etc - many many times a year. If the interest isn't there for a spectacular wreck with a fascinating history and a truly phenomenal coating of life, what makes you think that a boring, sanitized steel hull coated in silt with a few plumose anemones and a copper rockfish or two on it is going to be a major draw? Personally, I'd rather save my time and money by driving to Cove 2.

otherwise you have to have access to a private boat to even get there ... I see that you do, but that doesn't work for the vast majority of Puget Sound divers.

The vast majority of Puget Sound divers aren't diving much and aren't spending much money. There are plenty of web divers though. Most who do dive are shore diving because that's where they see their best value. Only a few are actually spending and diving, and many of them seem to direct most of their dollars to the latest gadgets and must-have diver accessories. A boat like mine doesn't cost much. I bet you've spent more on dive gear in the past few years than I've spent on dive gear and boat combined. Heck - my boat cost less than some of the DPVs I see people using.

It's also falling apart. Give it another 20 years and it'll hardly qualify as a wreck anymore.

Same can be said for the Saskatchewan etc. Slowly but surely they're going away. Better throw more garbage in. We certainly wouldn't want to just go dive some natural structure.

To each their own. Obviously you wouldn't enjoy an artificial reef in Puget Sound.

I have enjoyed them in fact. Fox Island Bridge is a pretty dive. So was the Edmonds Oil Dock. And the Kehloken is okay too. Still - they have their purpose and when they're gone they're gone. No biggie. There's plenty of natural habitat to explore. I don't expect to have more junky hulls sunk just so I can play wreck diver with the other three people who'd have an interest.

And FWIW - although I've done hundreds of dives there over the years, I still enjoy Cove 2. Saw five GPO's there just the other night. For a lot of us, it's still an interesting place with easy access. Not everyone owns a boat and lives on an island, yanno ...

A dive is a dive - Cove 2 is better than nothing of course. I like my muck dives - not much distraction and plenty of time with the macro lens produces good results. But I cannot understand why people keep going to the same place when there are plenty of other opportunities (and some of them produce a much more enjoyable dive for very little extra investment). Already covered the "I'd rather not spend a couple of thousand on a boat so interesting dive structure should come to me at everybody else's cost instead" stuff, and I don't live on an island. I wish I lived a little closer to one because the quarter mile of steep, winding gravel driveway followed by 45mins to an hour of trailering to a boat launch is far from convenient. But it's worth it :p

[Grateful Diver]

Yeah, OK ... no biggie. Ain't worth arguing about. I'll just go leave my money in Canada.

FWIW - I'm willing to pony up for the Diamond Knot ... but so far I'm one for six getting on it when I have. Either it's the weather, or it's the current, or it's boat problems. It's a nice dive ... but it's a real hassle to go all the way out to PA, blow a week-end and money on accommodations and restaurants only to not dive it. That's just not my idea of a good time.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[CaptnJack]

While I have done almost all of the ARSBC wrecks (except the RivTow and the 737), I am 2 for 2 on the Diamond Knot, 1 for 1 on the Capilano and 3 for 3 on the Gulf Stream - all real and big wrecks at recreational depths in The Strait or up along the Sunshine Coast of BC. I don't really think I'm especially lucky, just strategic. All of them have been far more rewarding dives than the prepared ships sunk in "friendly" terrain as diver jungle gyms. The artificial wrecks are fun, but their prepared and artificial nature (stripped insides and sitting upright - except for the Chaudiere) makes them historically depauprate and bland. And their sinking at generally easy and reliable access sites makes getting on them as easy as whipping out the Visa. We have a TON of wrecks in Puget Sound and Lake WA, its just that most require more than Visa swipping levels of effort to dive. But when you finally do dive them its a richer and more rewarding experience.

[Joshua Smith]

While I can see that ships sunk as artificial reefs in BC bring in some money locally, I think that "boon" might be stretching it. The people diving those sites would likely dive elsewhere in BC if the ships weren't there, so where is the real benefit?

Hmmm ... I'm heading up to Victoria next week-end. I'll be spending three nights in a hotel, eating all my meals in local restaurants, paying the good folks at Ogden Point to take me out on their boat. And pay a little to BC ferries both ways.

I figure if those wrecks weren't up there I'd probably just stay home and spend that money on something local. But that's just me.

Wow. BC is definitely hitting the jackpot then eh? Be realistic Bob - the economic argument doesn't fly

Out of curiosity, when was the last time you dived those wrecks? I was in Nanaimo in May, and both the Breton and Sasketchewan are loaded with life.

I was on both those structures last year and found them very disappointing. Invertebrates were sparse, and there was no greater variety than I'd expect on an average visit to Mukilteo. There were patches of life here and there, separated by large areas of rusting steel under several inches of silt. This does not make for a compelling dive for me sorry. I understand that some people do get a kick out of seeing garbage under water - old toilet bowls, broken up fiberglass hulls, discarded steel vessels without any interesting stories behind their sinking, etc. That's fine - but I wish people would just say that instead of claiming that they want those things for the economic benefit of the region, or for enhancement of the natural environment.

Keystone Jetty is nice, to be sure. It's also very small, and very limiting.

And just one of many artificial reefs in this area. Accessible at very low cost.

The Diamond Knot is only diveable by charter a few times a year ...

Only because so few people are willing to put their money where their mouth is and book a charter. It is reasonable to dive it about as often as any of the prime deep pinnacle or deep wall dives in San Juan Channel, Rosario Strait etc - many many times a year. If the interest isn't there for a spectacular wreck with a fascinating history and a truly phenomenal coating of life, what makes you think that a boring, sanitized steel hull coated in silt with a few plumose anemones and a copper rockfish or two on it is going to be a major draw? Personally, I'd rather save my time and money by driving to Cove 2.

otherwise you have to have access to a private boat to even get there ... I see that you do, but that doesn't work for the vast majority of Puget Sound divers.

The vast majority of Puget Sound divers aren't diving much and aren't spending much money. There are plenty of web divers though. Most who do dive are shore diving because that's where they see their best value. Only a few are actually spending and diving, and many of them seem to direct most of their dollars to the latest gadgets and must-have diver accessories. A boat like mine doesn't cost much. I bet you've spent more on dive gear in the past few years than I've spent on dive gear and boat combined. Heck - my boat cost less than some of the DPVs I see people using.

It's also falling apart. Give it another 20 years and it'll hardly qualify as a wreck anymore.

Same can be said for the Saskatchewan etc. Slowly but surely they're going away. Better throw more garbage in. We certainly wouldn't want to just go dive some natural structure.

To each their own. Obviously you wouldn't enjoy an artificial reef in Puget Sound.

I have enjoyed them in fact. Fox Island Bridge is a pretty dive. So was the Edmonds Oil Dock. And the Kehloken is okay too. Still - they have their purpose and when they're gone they're gone. No biggie. There's plenty of natural habitat to explore. I don't expect to have more junky hulls sunk just so I can play wreck diver with the other three people who'd have an interest.

And FWIW - although I've done hundreds of dives there over the years, I still enjoy Cove 2. Saw five GPO's there just the other night. For a lot of us, it's still an interesting place with easy access. Not everyone owns a boat and lives on an island, yanno ...

A dive is a dive - Cove 2 is better than nothing of course. I like my muck dives - not much distraction and plenty of time with the macro lens produces good results. But I cannot understand why people keep going to the same place when there are plenty of other opportunities (and some of them produce a much more enjoyable dive for very little extra investment). Already covered the "I'd rather not spend a couple of thousand on a boat so interesting dive structure should come to me at everybody else's cost instead" stuff, and I don't live on an island. I wish I lived a little closer to one because the quarter mile of steep, winding gravel driveway followed by 45mins to an hour of trailering to a boat launch is far from convenient. But it's worth it :p

Yeah. Like Bob said, it ain't worth arguing about. Gotta say, though- I do love wreck diving trips up to Vancouver island. The Cape Breton is a blast. It's hard for me to understand why we shouldn't be turning all the rusted out hulks in Bremerton into artificial reefs.

[Burntchef]

on top of a hundred+ wrecks in Lake WA are all underappreciated by both divers and charters. I guess whining is easier.

bravo!! more or how about any charters in the lake would be great. quick to motor out to, easy to plan, need more lake

[Grateful Diver]

on top of a hundred+ wrecks in Lake WA are all underappreciated by both divers and charters. I guess whining is easier.

bravo!! more or how about any charters in the lake would be great. quick to motor out to, easy to plan, need more lake

... but the lack of commercial charters isn't because they're underappreciated ... it's that most of 'em are beyond recreational depths, which limits the size of the diver community that's able to dive 'em. And I don't understand how someone can call the ARSBC wrecks lifeless and silty and then suggest the ones in the lake are somehow better.

Being at 200 feet in 3 to 5 foot vis has its own charms ... but let's face it, there really ain't much to look at on those wrecks.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[whatevah]

Yeah, OK ... no biggie. Ain't worth arguing about. I'll just go leave my money in Canada.

Okay. I don't understand why you'd go to all that trouble when there are many better dives to be had closer to home (and many amazing natural sites in BC), but whatever blows your skirt up man. Toss the BC dive industry a few bucks - why not?

FWIW - I'm willing to pony up for the Diamond Knot ... but so far I'm one for six getting on it when I have. Either it's the weather, or it's the current, or it's boat problems. It's a nice dive ... but it's a real hassle to go all the way out to PA, blow a week-end and money on accommodations and restaurants only to not dive it. That's just not my idea of a good time.

Welcome to diving in the PNW. Remember my disappointing trip to Nanaimo? That was my third attempt - two prior dates had to be canceled. I've fallen back to plan B or plan C many times on chartered trips and on my own boat outings - crying about it doesn't help Bob. If low risk low reward is your thing, embrace that - stick with pools, or shore diving Cove 2. Sinking garbage to disrupt the natural environments that some of us appreciate is not going to resolve the problems of weather, visibility, etc.

[Grateful Diver]

Yeah, OK ... no biggie. Ain't worth arguing about. I'll just go leave my money in Canada.

Okay. I don't understand why you'd go to all that trouble when there are many better dives to be had closer to home (and many amazing natural sites in BC), but whatever blows your skirt up man. Toss the BC dive industry a few bucks - why not?

FWIW - I'm willing to pony up for the Diamond Knot ... but so far I'm one for six getting on it when I have. Either it's the weather, or it's the current, or it's boat problems. It's a nice dive ... but it's a real hassle to go all the way out to PA, blow a week-end and money on accommodations and restaurants only to not dive it. That's just not my idea of a good time.

Welcome to diving in the PNW. Remember my disappointing trip to Nanaimo? That was my third attempt - two prior dates had to be canceled. I've fallen back to plan B or plan C many times on chartered trips and on my own boat outings - crying about it doesn't help Bob. If low risk low reward is your thing, embrace that - stick with pools, or shore diving Cove 2. Sinking garbage to disrupt the natural environments that some of us appreciate is not going to resolve the problems of weather, visibility, etc.

Dude ... I don't know who you are, or why you choose to conduct yourself in such an insulting manner.

It's a friggen discussion board. Most of us here are friends, and like to assume we're talking to friends. If you can't do that, you're in the wrong place. Perhaps you'd be happier over at The Deco Stop.

Believe it or not, different people are attracted to different types of diving. That doesn't make them better or worse than you ... just different.

Now please, either tone down the insulting language or go post somewhere else. This ain't the place for it.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[DiverBob]

As long as I have a job and continue to enjoy recreational diving, I would spend money to have a local dive charter boat take me out to dive a sunken ship in the Sound. And I would not consider it "garbage". But that's just me.

[CaptnJack]

Welcome to diving in the PNW. Remember my disappointing trip to Nanaimo? That was my third attempt - two prior dates had to be canceled.

I don't know what charter you're using or who you are booking through but getting blown out at Nanaimo is pretty darn difficult. You might not get out to the Cape Breton (which is a fun jungle gym) but there's always something to dive.

[Joshua Smith]

Okay. I don't understand why you'd go to all that trouble when there are many better dives to be had closer to home (and many amazing natural sites in BC), but whatever blows your skirt up man. Toss the BC dive industry a few bucks - why not?

Welcome to diving in the PNW. Remember my disappointing trip to Nanaimo? That was my third attempt - two prior dates had to be canceled. I've fallen back to plan B or plan C many times on chartered trips and on my own boat outings - crying about it doesn't help Bob. If low risk low reward is your thing, embrace that - stick with pools, or shore diving Cove 2. Sinking garbage to disrupt the natural environments that some of us appreciate is not going to resolve the problems of weather, visibility, etc.

This thread is taking on a mean-spirited flavor. Please keep a civil tone here.

[airsix]

Hey, I thought I told you...

And I'm, like, "yeah, whatever!"

[whatevah]

I don't know what charter you're using or who you are booking through but getting blown out at Nanaimo is pretty darn difficult. You might not get out to the Cape Breton (which is a fun jungle gym) but there's always something to dive.

If I recall correctly, one of the cancellations was due to weather (major snow storm with heavy wind) and the other was because the authorities had closed things down for a body search/recovery - none of the other divers in the group were interested in nearby alternatives to the "wrecks".

[CaptnJack]

none of the other divers in the group were interested in nearby alternatives to the "wrecks".

Find more adaptable buddies.

Every one of my "big dives" has a backup plan that we establish if a few days before but sometimes possibly weeks before the trip. Sometimes the backup is a fairly big dive too just with different exposures so its do-able under different conditions.

[Grateful Diver]

I don't know what charter you're using or who you are booking through but getting blown out at Nanaimo is pretty darn difficult. You might not get out to the Cape Breton (which is a fun jungle gym) but there's always something to dive.

If I recall correctly, one of the cancellations was due to weather (major snow storm with heavy wind) and the other was because the authorities had closed things down for a body search/recovery - none of the other divers in the group were interested in nearby alternatives to the "wrecks".

Snake Island Wall can be an interesting dive. Dodd's Narrows is always exciting, but limited to periods of very low exchange (and timing). Clarke Rocks is boooring ... once you've seen the two resident wolf-eels there's no reason to continue the dive. Jesse Island can be interesting ... nice structure, and if you're taking pictures it offers some opportunities.

There's plenty to do there besides the wrecks.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Gooch]

The ARSBC has a lot of documents from their own studies and 3rd party info on their resources page that show how much the sinking of artificial reefs in BC has stimulated the dive tourism dollars for those communities.

http://www.artificialreef.bc.ca/Resourc ... 0Reefs.pdf

Speaking for myself; I agree with Grateful Diver. The wrecks in Nanaimo are really full of life and a lot of fun to dive. IMHO, they only compliment the other fine diving in the area (Snake Island Wall, Dodd's Narrows, etc) to help create a "destination dive". After all, the places those wrecks were put were just mud/sand flats to begin with.

I'd like to have things like that in our back yard too so we can keep those dollars in the U.S.A. Florida has already seen the fiscal reasons to do that.

The Sound, Hood's Canal and Lake Washington do have a lot of great natural beauty and some fine historic wrecks. There are also a lot of good sites that have been created by man. I see no problem continuing that if it's done in good taste. The site I dove this weekend had little (o.k. call it no) natural reefs but due to a few small boats, some steel plates, concrete and the biggest anchor I have seen underwater, there was tons of really cool critters to see (3 big GPO's on one dive to name a few).
That's what I'm there for - to see cool stuff and get my daily dose of nitrogen.

[Grateful Diver]

Okay. I don't understand why you'd go to all that trouble when there are many better dives to be had closer to home (and many amazing natural sites in BC).

Well, they have the wrecks and walls I want to dive. That's part of the reason. The other part is social.

Toss the BC dive industry a few bucks - why not?

Why not indeed ... it's my money, I worked for it, and I can spend it any way I damn well please. If Washington state doesn't offer the product I want to buy, I'll buy it elsewhere. That should be simple enough to comprehend.

If low risk low reward is your thing, embrace that - stick with pools, or shore diving Cove 2.

Dunno where you got that idea. I know nothing about you, and apparently you know nothing about me either ... so what say we leave personal comments out of it ... they only make you look bad.

Sinking garbage to disrupt the natural environments that some of us appreciate is not going to resolve the problems of weather, visibility, etc.

How does a wreck, prepared and cleaned up for diving, differ from the ones you profess to love to dive? In truth they create a lot less disruption, because before they're sunk an awful lot of work goes into cleaning them up and removing anything that would pollute the water. I'd betchya the Diamond Knot made an unholy mess when it went down. At least the prepared wrecks don't put bunker fuel and other such pollutants into the water.

If these wrecks are such "garbage" ... why do places like California and Florida spend big money lobbying to get ahold of them so they can sink them off of THEIR shores? How many divers do you think fly to California and Florida each year to visit ships like the Yukon and the Oriskany? I know quite a few who have.

It may be garbage to you ... and you're entitled to your opinion. But not everyone shares your opinion ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)