Prehistoric fossil beds, flooded villages, forests, up to 10,000
shipwrecks - the bottom of the Great Lakes is a diver's dream. And
now there's a political battle over the best way to ensure it all stays
there.
By Mike Randolph ©
"Think of the Royal Ontario Museum" says Tim Legate, president of Save Ontario Shipwrecks, "except that it's open to the public 24 hours a day, lights are off, there are no guards, and nothing is in cases. That's what shipwreck sites are like."
At least that's what they are like now. But, if a piece of controversial new legislation drawn up by MPP Toby Barrett goes through, things could be a lot different. While nobody wants protection for shipwrecks more than Tim Legate and the wreck divers he represents, Bill 13, he says is not the way to go about it. "This could really hurt the industry."
Industry? you ask. It may come as a surprise, but when it comes to exploring underwater shipwrecks, there's nowhere quite like the Great Lakes.
While estimates vary, experts believe there are somewhere between 4,000 and 10,000 shipwrecks in the Great Lakes. Not all of them are museum quality, but many are, especially the older wooden hull wrecks. The deep, cold water of the Great Lakes helps preserve wooden-hulled wrecks, whereas the same wreck in the ocean would deteriorate much faster, thanks to the detrimental effects of salt water, and wood-boring organisms. Two of the finest wooden-hull wrecks are the Hamilton and Scourge, which lie on the bottom of Lake Ontario, just east of the city of Hamilton.
" The Hamilton and Scourge," says Legate, "were fully laden, ready for action in the War of 1812. They're incredible time capsules from that era. There are still sabers tied to the rail and skeletons all over it." Many people believe the Hamilton and Scourge are the two best examples of warships from that era in the world, and the United Nations has bestowed upon them the status of World Heritage Sites.
While the Hamilton and Scourge sit in a hundred metres of water - beyond the range of sport divers - they are within the range of technical divers. And as John Karry, a wreck diver and chairman of the Erie Quest Marine Heritage Committee says, not all technical divers share the same ethics of a hands-off approach. Or sport divers for that matter.
"I've seen it before," says Karry. Ten years ago, the anchor on a Lake Erie wreck called the Tasmania went missing. Karry and fellow divers did some calling around and got the name of a man from Michigan, who some locals had overheard bragging about the artifact.
"We called him up and said 'We want our anchor back, this is cultural property and you broke a bunch of laws.' We even told him we'd pay for all the shipping, but he basically told us to go to hell."
Instead of taking the Michigan man's advice, Karry went to the RCMP, who contacted U.S. Customs authorities. The anchor was forcibly retrieved, the man lost possession of his boat, and now, thanks to Karry and other concerned Erie divers, the anchor is back where it belongs, on the bow of Tasmania.
Karry points this case out as an example of why there needs to be protective legislation. Just not Bill 13. The problem, says Karry, is that Bill 13 is ambiguous, and he is also concerned that access to shipwrecks will be arbitrarily restricted. And then there's the matter of the search and seize provision.
"It gives the Ontario Provincial Police the power to seize your boat if they simply believe that you've damaged a shipwreck. They don't have to have reasonable cause." Karry says this could lead to bad and selective enforcement.
The answer, according to Karry and Legate, may be in the classification of shipwrecks. Not all of them are as delicate and culturally important as the Hamilton and Scourge, and divers say they have a right to explore these wrecks. "Perhaps", says Legate, "the answer is for police to monitor sensitive sites while allowing the diving community to regulate the other ones with a little help from the government."
That way, if responsible divers see or hear of someone doing damage to a site, says Legate, the preservation groups such as Save Ontario Shipwrecks (which has been around for almost 20 years) could go to the police and help lay a charge. The situation is further complicated by the reality that even if the police wanted to, they don't have the resources to monitor all the heritage sites. As Legate points out, marine heritage sites include more than just shipwrecks.
"You name it, it's down there," says Legate. "There are prehistoric fossil beds, 10,000 year-old forests, native village sites flooded long ago, and by the town on Ingleside near Cornwall, there are seven or eight entire villages flooded by Ontario Hydro."
The idea of divers regulating themselves may seem like a conflict of interest to some, but the truth is that the diving community is the group that stands to lose the most. "Divers want to see things," says Karry. "If all the wrecks get stripped, nobody will want to dive on them anymore."
Karry also points out that wrecks are an important tourism resource for many small communities. "The town of Leamington had a study done and found that if the shipwrecks were promoted properly, within five years the economic impact from tourism would translate into 75 full-time jobs, and $4 million in direct revenue."
Without the police resources to enforce the laws, divers feel the only answer is proper education, which is what groups like Save Ontario Shipwrecks and Erie Quest Marine Heritage Committee - to name just two - are all about. "We do need legislation that has some teeth", says Legate, "for those idiots that just don't get it. We want to have something for our kids to see. But we don't want this Bill as it stands now."
While Legate believes the intent of the legislation was not to directly discourage divers from exploring wrecks, that is what will happen if the Bill goes through in its present form.
"We need to have a discussion that includes everybody, something that hasn't happened so far", says Legate. Whether it happens or not is subject to the whims of the Standing Committee on General Government, something that Dave Britnell, special assistant to Mr. Barrett, says is beyond their control.
But will Toby Barrett himself include stakeholders in talks before Bill 13 makes it to a third reading, which could happen as early as April? Tim Legate hopes so.
"The search for the middle ground should involve all stakeholders, including non-diving citizens. This is our heritage. It's the story of Ontario that's down there.