Posted by Dustyn Farrow on December 28, 1999 at 17:10:09:
I cannot believe that someone would even propose something so dumb as Bill 13. I
am 13 years old and I just passed my diving course this summer. Now I'm am being told
that I will not be able to dive on any wrecks with my dad, Rob Farrow. I didn't go through
all the trouble of studying and open waters so that I could swim around on the bottom admiring the fish!
My dad has written a letter opposing Bill 13 and has sent it to many MP's (members of
parliament) and divers, I hope many other divers have and will do the same. As for Bill
13, it says it will preserve shipwrecks by prohibiting people from diving in them, but my
question is, exactly who are they preserving these wrecks for? Prohibiting divers from
doing what they love is not going to save a wreck. Wrecks, both wooden and steel, will
eventually collapse on their own. An example of this is the Whale back Barge 115 wreck,
it has already started to collapse under its own weight. Another example is the Mary Mclachlan,
whose deck collapsed sometime over the winter of 96/97. With its deck gone it will eventually
collapse and we will lose a part of our heritage, not due to diver carelessness, stripping,
or damage but due to weather and time. There are those few divers who do strip wrecks,
about 1% of the entire diving public, but why should they ruin it for the rest of us. I think
that Bill 13 should be scrapped, for the sake of all divers.
Thanks for reading,
Dustyn Farrow