Northwest Dive Club

SHB 1378 - Concerning the removal of derelict aquatic structures and restoration of aquatic lands. (Remote Testimony Available).

On its face it seems ok, but they can come in and condemn anything, no appeal, nothing.

While it might be a privacy concern, it would be interesting to know what particular structures inspired this bill.
Presumably those behind it went through the trouble due to specific examples?
Is there not already a legal process covering derelict aquatic structures?

Someone should apply this to Mukilteo ... The Muk is My dive site... Its the place that I call home and the place that I have done 80% of my Dives because Mukilteo is my backyard... But now for some reason a person has decided to make Mukilteo their own private dive excursion

Wait what's happening at Mukilteo?

Someone has been investing their retirement on adding attractions, some of which I think are pretty great. One is a rock path from the dolphins at the entry point all the way to the dome. Recently a deep buoy has been re-added (my last two have disappeared), we dived it last Wed and it's pretty great. It's a dive master training tube with a handle around the entire thing, so nice to hold onto while waiting to descend.
I think many can be found guilty of adding "attractions" to Mukilteo so kinda hard to fault them for spending the time to do the work. It is certainly my home too and I dive there a LOT. I am mixed on some of the things they are attempting to add, but at the same time I can certainly appreciate the effort.

Now I want to dive Mukilteo.

More underwater habitat/park sounds nice, but is someone altering a popular dive site without warning?
Is that how it works at Mukilteo?

How did the Edmonds Underwater Park happen? Some approximate community consensus brainstorm by alpha locals?
I'd love to make a proper little dive park off a local beach and sink boats etc but I shudder at the inevitable detection & politics :jail:

People like the dome, the mini boats, the guide lines and the deep horror clown. There is not much else besides steep sand and crab pots (cue old video plug)

I'm somewhat ambivalent about the adding of structure, as long as we're not just adding garbage.

One idea that's been floated however is making Mukilteo an MPA in the area next to the silver cloud. I'm pretty firmly against that. The number of sites to shore dive for crab in the area is already severely limited, and it's not like Muk is a hot spot for people taking anything other than crab.

eh.haole wrote: ↑Mon Apr 24, 2023 7:07 pm More underwater habitat/park sounds nice, but is someone altering a popular dive site without warning?
Is that how it works at Mukilteo?

Yes, currently that is how it "works" in Mukilteo. I agree with Jake where as long as garbage is not being added and called an attraction, and people are being respectful to safety, as well as not crowding the area, then I appreciate the effort. Personally I hope Mukilteo never gets as popular as Cove 2 or Edmonds, parking is already super limited at the Muk.

eh.haole wrote: How did the Edmonds Underwater Park happen? Some approximate community consensus brainstorm by alpha locals?
I'd love to make a proper little dive park off a local beach and sink boats etc but I shudder at the inevitable detection & politics :jail:

That has been an ongoing project for many years. The city of Edmonds holds Bruce in very high regards. In terms of just sinking boats at your favorite local beach, I believe this would be considered littering without the proper permisssion/dive site plan. Truth be told, no one is sinking boats at Mukilteo.