Proposal: Dive Sites

[+DavidMac]

Would this make a good category?

 

I had planned to post a dive site I visited recently under the "shipwreck" category, but after consideration decided it wouldn't fit because the boat was intentionally sunk for divers. The "Swimming Hole" category already exists, but many sites wouldn't fit, since they can be out in the ocean or just off the shore, at places most people wouldn't want to just be swimming.

[Jeremy]

It's an excellent category. What kind of variables would you see in this category?

 

(I have no scuba experience, so this may not be useful)

 

For example, I found a location that shows artificial reef locations off the coast of South Carolina. It looks like things are intentionally sunk for scuba divers to check out.

 

Minimum Water depth (in feet)

Maximum Water depth (in feet)

Has shipwrecks? y/n

Has reef? y/n

water type (fresh/salt)

Access (boat/dock/shore)

Type (lake/river/ocean/quarry/cave)

[+DavidMac]

Minimum Water depth (in feet)

Maximum Water depth (in feet)

Has shipwrecks? y/n

Has reef? y/n

water type (fresh/salt)

Access (boat/dock/shore)

Type (lake/river/ocean/quarry/cave)

That's a pretty good list. Two others I can think of off the top of my head are:

 

1) visibility (although this can vary by day or season): terrible [0-10 feet], poor [10-25 feet], fair [25-40 feet], good [40-60 feet], excellent [60+ feet]

2)underwater life (fish, turtles, manatees, etc).

 

Maybe "Shipwreck" could be expanded to something more general like "wreck" or "sunken object" to include planes, cars, busses, etc.

 

Should one of the requirements for adding a waymark needs to be actually diving at the site (or having dove there in the past), not just visiting? This would keep folks from posting random lakes and saying, "that water looks interesting, I bet someone could dive there." Maybe snorkeling would fit the category also, since many shallow water sites are frequented by snorkelers as well.

[Jeremy]

Maybe "Shipwreck" could be expanded to something more general like "wreck" or "sunken object" to include planes, cars, busses, etc.

personally I like shipwreck and sunken object as two separate questions. Though I don't dive I would think that a shipwreck may be more interesting given the history of the wreck.

 

Should one of the requirements for adding a waymark needs to be actually diving at the site (or having dove there in the past), not just visiting? This would keep folks from posting random lakes and saying, "that water looks interesting, I bet someone could dive there." Maybe snorkeling would fit the category also, since many shallow water sites are frequented by snorkelers as well.

 

Unless you want to make it another variable I would require that it be a known diving location. Don't many of the locations like the link above have a marker for the dive site? I can understand the validation requirement but it would be a shame for someone who knew about a location to share but didn't go there him/herself couldn't mark it.

 

For visiting I can see a requirement though.

[+DavidMac]

Unless you want to make it another variable I would require that it be a known diving location. Don't many of the locations like the link above have a marker for the dive site? I can understand the validation requirement but it would be a shame for someone who knew about a location to share but didn't go there him/herself couldn't mark it.

 

For visiting I can see a requirement though.

Good point. The description will need to explicitly state that the site be known site regularly visited by divers, maybe with an exception for a little-known spot that the poster has visited. Many are not marked by anything but GPS coordinates or directions ("swim due north x distance from the shore and follow the bottom along a heading of..."), though I have seen a few with their own buoys and even a few with a line anchored to the bottom that floats to within a few feet of the surface to where it is visible, but does not quite reach the surface.

Edited January 16, 2006 by DavidMac

[+az_pistolero]

Additional variables:

 

Average Visibility (could be a variable of the waymark logs)

Drift Dive? (y/n)

Moorings? (y/n)

Accessibility (Shore, Day Trip, Live Aboard)

Fish Types (text field) -- this could perhaps be broken down with some work, perhaps into a series of check boxes. On the other hand that'd get kinda complicated. I vote a simple text field.

[+Bebop]

Diving should go under Sports and Recreation, and under Diving you could put Freshwater and slatwater, and under saltwater you can put, reef diving, shipwreck, freedive, and others.

[+DavidMac]

I'll bump this old topic. I'm currently looking for anybody interested in helping manage this category. I haven't been able to create the group yet, but I'll do so right away as soon as I can use the Waymarking site (why I can't is the subject of another thread...). Until the bugs are straightened out, anybody who is interested please let me know.

[+Crystal Sound]

I'll bump this old topic. I'm currently looking for anybody interested in helping manage this category. I haven't been able to create the group yet, but I'll do so right away as soon as I can use the Waymarking site (why I can't is the subject of another thread...). Until the bugs are straightened out, anybody who is interested please let me know.

 

Let me know when the work is complete. I would be interested in joining.

[+tiki-4]

Now that i am back in my home state of FL, i would be interested in this group as well in what ever capacity.