# State continues to block dive idea



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

But state continues to block dive idea 

http://www.mlive.com/news/muchronicle/index.ssf?/base/news-7/1121958941116530.xml&coll=8&thispage=1
Thursday, July 21, 2005 By John S. Hausman CHRONICLE STAFF WRITER

Scuba enthusiasts aren't giving up the ship on their plan to sink a cleaned vessel in Lake Michigan off Muskegon for divers to explore, despite two rejections by the state Department of Environmental Quality. 

A group called the West Michigan Artificial Reef Society is appealing the DEQ's February decision -- its second in three years -- to reject the group's application for a permit to intentionally sink a ship in the lake west of Laketon Township. 

Project supporters' goal is to create what they've called "The Muskegon Area Underwater Dive Park." They would like to sink a surplus federal ship in about 80 feet of water, two miles north and 11/2 miles west of the Muskegon Lake Channel.

Advocates say a new shipwreck would attract divers and other visitors to Muskegon County, creating a ripple effect of spending on tourism-oriented businesses -- hotels, restaurants, shops and such -- that they project at $2.5 million per year. 

"If you sink it they will come, and they'll bring their dollars," said Heather Bloom, vice chairwoman of the reef society and co-owner of West Michigan Dive Center, 2516 Glade. 

Supporters also say a sunken ship could be a research tool for scientists as the vessel attracts various forms of aquatic life. Hence the term "artificial reef." 

But state environmental officials are concerned that a sunken ship off Muskegon could degrade Lake Michigan's natural environment and harm fisheries, without providing a lasting benefit for divers or anyone else. They also note that the Muskegon area is outside any of the state's shipwreck-rich designated "underwater preserves," whose guidelines allow one intentional sinking per preserve. 

Project supporters, including some Great Lakes experts, respond that the environmental concerns are baseless and contend an artificial reef might even improve fisheries, or at worst would be neutral. They point out that the DEQ has approved two Lake Superior sinkings since 1989, note that many cleaned ships have been sunk in other states -- including one in Lake Michigan near Chicago in 2003 -- and consider the "underwater preserve" issue a meaningless bureaucratic obstacle. 

Now, the dispute is in the appeals process. At a hearing yet to be scheduled, a DEQ administrative law judge will let project supporters and the officials who rejected the plan state their cases. The appeals official will then come up with a recommendation to the DEQ's director, who will make the final decision. 

A long voyage

West Michigan divers have been working on the project since 1999. Inspired by similar intentional sinkings elsewhere -- Florida has many -- they formed the West Michigan Artificial Reef Society, with the goal of finding a government surplus vessel at least 50 feet long with some relation to Great Lakes maritime history. 

The plan was to sink a ship that had been thoroughly cleaned under the supervision of environmental experts, purging it of gasoline, oil, grease and other pollutants. After consulting with DEQ officials about what the application process would require, the group incorporated itself as a non-profit agency, with a steering committee including representatives of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Michigan State University's Sea Grant program and Grand Valley State University's Water Resources Institute.

The society then solicited and obtained letters of support from several local governments, including Muskegon County and the cities of Muskegon, North Muskegon, Norton Shores and Roosevelt Park. Fund-raising and public-relations work began. Research was done on the correct method of sinking by consulting successful artificial-reef organizations around the world. A proposed sinking site was selected. 

With the assistance of the U.S.S. Silversides Museum, a ship was identified: the Cisco, a steel, 60-foot, retired Great Lakes U.S. Geological Survey research vessel drydocked for many years in Sault Ste. Marie. 

In July 2001, the group applied to the DEQ and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the necessary permits. Approval by both agencies is required, but the state has played the lead role in evaluating the proposal. 

There, in 2002, the project halted. To the surprise of reef backers, the DEQ's Land and Water Management Division denied the request, citing environmental and fishery concerns. 

The reef society tried again in 2003 and 2004, lobbying for political support and winning the active backing of Republican state Rep. David Farhat of Fruitport Township. Farhat in December 2003 introduced a bill that would have required the DEQ to establish "Great Lakes recreational diving preserves" in which the department would authorize sinkings of properly cleaned ships for scuba divers if certain conditions were met. 

That bill never got out of committee, but Farhat in early 2004 chaired an amicable meeting between DEQ officials and reef proponents that led to a reapplication for a permit to sink a vessel. The Cisco was no longer available -- someone else had bought it -- but the reef society was still interested in an eventual sinking. 

Stuck on the reef 

One was the fact that the proposed sinking would be outside any preserve specifically designated for such activity -- a fact that several reef supporters believe is critical to the DEQ's disapproval. However, in a recent telephone interview, Graf said being outside a designated preserve area does not in itself bar a sinking; the issues are environmental, not geographic. 

Graf also wrote that the proposal did not meet guidelines for Great Lakes artificial reefs set out in a 1990 publication for the Great Lakes Fisheries Commission. That point was based on objections to the project first raised in 2002 by fisheries biologist Richard P. O'Neal of the Department of Natural Resources. 

O'Neal argued, among other things, that the Fisheries Commission guidelines required Great Lakes artificial reefs to provide "clear benefits to fisheries" -- something the Muskegon project backers could not prove, although artificial reefs do attract aquatic organisms including fish.

Project supporters counter that the 1990 report was published in response to proposals at the time to create artificial reefs using coal cinder blocks dumped from power plants -- with the questionable justification that such reefs would improve fishing -- and had nothing to do with plans for sinking a cleaned vessel as a recreational diving site. 

Graf's rejection letter goes on to say the proposed sinking may have a negative effect on existing recreational fisheries. Although supporters of the Muskegon project don't claim their goal is to enhance fishing, they insist their plan won't hurt it. 

"We're not trying to make a habitat for fishery," vice chairwoman Bloom said. "We're saying it will be neutral to the fishery environment. Will it attract fish? Probably. Anything that's out there, docks, sand dunes, will attract fish. Is it going to be a detriment? We don't think so." 

'No scientific basis' 

Among those supporting that position has been scientist Gary Fahnenstiel, a respected Great Lakes expert and senior ecologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Great Lake Environmental Research Laboratory in Muskegon. 

Fahnenstiel did not return a reporter's call seeking comment, but in a 2002 letter supporting the Cisco project he called the DEQ's and O'Neal's position "ridiculous" and wrote, "I can see no scientific basis for the denial of this permit." 

In addition to the fisheries issue, the DEQ's 2005 rejection letter said the ship "may release pollutants directly into the water when submerged and/or released over time." 

Supporters say that won't happen if the ship is properly cleaned, as the proposal has always intended. They point to the numerous artificial sinkings already done, including the Straits of Mackinac, a 200-foot former Michigan car ferry sunk two years ago off Chicago's Navy Pier; and two in Lake Superior earlier approved by the Michigan DEQ -- the former Coast Guard cutter Mesquite, intentionally sunk in 1990 in the Keweenaw preserve after running aground on a reef in 1989; and the Steven M. Selvick, sunk in 1996 in the Alger preserve off Munising. 

As an example, Graf said some pollutants had bubbled up from the Mesquite, but conceded that the grounded cutter could not be cleaned before sinking, unlike the Muskegon proposal. 

Another believer that the project can be done safely is Chuck Pistis, MSU's Sea Grant agent at the university's extension office in Grand Haven. 

"A wreck can be sunk and be environmentally benign, even beneficial, because it's done in other parts of the country," Pistis said. "It can be sunk safely, it can attract divers, it can generate biological production that could benefit fisheries." 

Finally, Graf said the Land and Water Management Division's position is that any sunken ship will quickly become encrusted with zebra mussels, "which will significantly degrade its attraction as a dive site but will remain on the bottomland for decades to come." 

The agency's point is not that a shipwreck is uniquely attractive to the invasive sea creatures -- any object on the lake bottom attracts zebra mussels -- but that its usefulness as a dive site would be short-lived, leaving only the pests behind after some years had passed.


----------



## lkmifisherman (Feb 4, 2004)

We can't have anything beneficial in the Great Lakes but we'll let them get full of nets...floating around aimlessly..just wating to grab a cannon ball or two..Makes no sense to me at all...

lkmifisherman


----------



## GTBUP (Apr 18, 2006)

The Grand Traverse Bay Underwater Preserve Council www.gtbup.org is making some great head-way with the support of elected officials from Sen. Carl Levin all the way to the local State Reps. 

Mrs. Bloom has a copy of our proposal and she'll tweak it to fit her location. While we have submitted our proposal to teh MDEQ, we'll start on teh intentional sinking proposal to submit by September, 2006.

"Finally, Graf said the Land and Water Management Division's position is that any sunken ship will quickly become encrusted with zebra mussels, "which will significantly degrade its attraction as a dive site but will remain on the bottomland for decades to come." 

Okay, yes, it will remain on teh bottom... But I WILL be diving it until I can't dive anymore. Find me one diver who dosn't want to dive because of zebra muscles and I'll show you a "pool" diver. 

Stay tuned! We will have ships sunk and promote tourism Michigan wide!!!!!!

Greg MacMaster
President
GTBUP


----------

