The Use of Artificial Reefs for Recreational Diving

Abstract

Scuba diving has become a burgeoning branch of the tourism service. Various activities of recreational diving do not especially necessitate natural reefs-any varied vehicle such as ship, plane and other large structures may be adequately attractive. Coastal groups are turning to these structures by the way of supplying new locations for scuba diving tourists. Despite the lack of a global database, our literature review indicated extensive use of artificial reefs for recreation in the United States, currently viewed as the pioneering puissance and professional in the field. Moreover, the Canadian and Australian governments have both promoted several “ships to reef” programs focused on recreation. However, the used of three-dimensional structures (ships, planes etc.) as artificial reefs in sensitive ecosystems such as the Mediterranean and Red Sea is not a common practice. Although scuba divers are interested in such type of structures, ships to reef is a matter of debate especially in the Mediterranean region. In Turkey, a National Artificial Reef Program was drafted in 2008, however there is no regulation at present about intentionally sinking a ship for the creation of recreational diving destinations. The aim of this review was to investigate the use of man-made structures as artificial reefs for recreational diving around the world.

Keywords

• Ships to reef, diving tourism, artificial reef, Mediterranean Sea, Turkey

Yapay Resiflerin Rekreasyonel Dalış için Kullanımı

Abstract

Aletli dalış, turizm sektörünün gelişen bir kolu haline gelmiştir. Çoğu rekreasyonel dalış aktivitesi özellikle doğal resiflere gereksinim göstermemekte, gemi, uçak ve diğer büyük yapılı araçlar da dalış için yeterince cazip olabilmektedir. Kıyısal alan kullanıcıları dalış yapan turistlere yeni yerler sağlamak için bu yapılara yönelmektedirler. Küresel bir veri tabanı olmamasına rağmen, literatür incelememiz günümüzde bu alanda öncü ve uzman olarak görülen ABD’nin rekreasyonel dalış için yapay resifleri yaygın şekilde kullandığını göstermiştir. Ayrıca Kanada ve Avustralya hükümetleri rekreasyon üzerine odaklanan “gemi resifi” programlarını geliştirmişlerdir. Ancak Akdeniz ve Kızıldeniz gibi hassas ekosistemlerde üç boyutlu yapıların (gemi, uçak vb.) yapay resif olarak kullanılması yaygın bir uygulama değildir. Her ne kadar dalgıçlar bu tür yapılara ilgi duyuyor olsalar da, gemi resifleri özellikle Akdeniz’de tartışma konusudur. Türkiye’de bir “Ulusal Yapay Resif Programı” 2008 yılında hazırlanmıştır, fakat programda rekreasyonel dalış alanları oluşturmak için kasten gemi batırma hakkında bir düzenleme bulunmamaktadır. Bu derlemenin amacı, dünya çapında rekreasyonel dalış için insan yapımı yapıların yapay resif olarak kullanımını araştırmaktır

Keywords

• Gemi resifi, dalış turizmi, yapay resif, Akdeniz, Türkiye

References

1. Dimmock, K. (2007). Scuba diving, snorkeling, and free diving. In: G. Jennings (Ed.), Water-based Tourism, Sport, Leisure, and Recreation Experiences, pp. 128-147, Amsterdam, Elsevier.
2. Musa, G. & Dimmock, K. (2013). Introduction: scuba diving tourism. In: Scuba Diving Tourism, (G. Musa & K. Dimmock eds), pp. 1-13, London, Routledge.
3. Dimmock, K., (2009). Comfort in adventure: the role of comfort and negotiation in recreational scuba diving, Doctor of Philosophy, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW.
4. Edney J., Spennemann, D. H. R., (2015). Can artificial wrecks reduce diver impacts on shipwreck? The management dimension. J. Mari. Arch. 10: 141- 157.
5. Lew, A. A. 2013. World geography of recreational scuba diving. In: Musa, G. & Dimmock, K. (Eds) Scuba diving tourism (Contemporary geographies of leisure, tourism and mobility). Routledge, Abington, Oxon, pp. 29-51.
6. Garrod, B. & Gössling, S. (2008). Introduction. In: New Frontiers in Marine Tourism: Diving Experiences, Sustainability, Management, (B. Garrod & S. Gössling eds), UK.
7. Garrod, B. & Wilson, J. C. (2003). Marine Ecotourism: Issues and Experiences. UK. Kirkbride Smith, A. E. (2014). The economic, Social and Conservation Benefits of Recreationalorientated Atrificial Reefs, PhD Thesis, School of Biological Sciences in the University of Hull, U.K.
8. Harrioutt, V. J., Davis, D., Banks, S. A., (1997). Recreational diving and its impact in marine protected areas in eastern Australia. Ambio. 26(3): 173-179.

9. Barker N. H. L., Roberts, C. M., (2004). Scuba diver behaviour and the management of diving impacts on coral reefs. Biological Conservation 120(4), 481- 489.
10. Hawkins J.P., Roberts, C. M., Kooistra, D., Buchan, K., White, S., (2005). Sustainability of scuba diving tourism on coral reefs of Saba. Coastal Management 33: 373-387.
11. Shackleton, M., (2010). Kenyan reefs: loving them to bits, a coral reef community and diver behavior assessment, University of Hull, Scarborough.
12. Fabi, G., Scarcella, G., Spagnolo, A., Bortone, S.A., Charbonnel, E., Goutayer, J.J., Haddad, N., Lök, A., Trommelen. M., (2015). Studies and Reviews: Practical guidelines for the use of artificial reefs in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. FAO-GFCM, Rome.
13. Pendleton, L.H., (2005). Understanding the potential economic impacts of sinking ships for scuba recreation. Marine Technology Society Journal 39(2): 47-52.
14. Van Treeck, P., Schuhmacher, H., (1999). Mass diving tourism – a new dimension calls for new management approaches. Marine Pollution Bulletin 37(8-12): 499-504.
15. Zakai, D., Chadwick-Furman, N.E., (2002). Impacts of intense recreational diving on reef corals at Eilat, Northern Red Sea. Biol. Conserv. 105: 179-187 Hasler, H., Ott, J. A., (2008). Diving down the reefs? Intensive diving tourism threatens the reefs of the northern Red Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin 56: 1788-1794.
16. Van Treeck, P. & Eisinger, M. (2008). Diverting pressure for coral reefs: artificial underwater parks as a means of integrating development and reef conservation. In: New Frontiers in Marine Tourism, (B. Garrod & S. Gössling eds), UK.
17. Polak O., Shashar, N., (2012). Can a small artificial reef reduce diving pressure from a natural coral reef? Lessons learned from Eilat, Red Sea. Ocean and Coastal Management 55: 94-100.
18. Johns, G.M., Leeworthy, V.R., Bell, F.W. & Bonn, M.A., (2003). Socioeconomic Study of Reefs in Southeast Florida: Final Report 2001. Report prepared for Broward County, Palm Beach County, Miami-Dade County, Monroe County, Florida Fish and Wildlife and Conservation Commission: Hazen and Sawyer, p. 348.
19. Leeworthy, V.R., Maher, T., Stone, E.A., (2006). Can artificial reefs alter user pressure on adjacent natural reefs? Bulletin of Marine Science 78(1): 29- 37.
20. Jones, A. T., Welsford, R. W., 1997. Artificial reefs in British Columbia, Canada. Oceans 97, MTS/IEEE Conference Proceedings, 6-9 October 1997 Halifax, NS, Canada.
21. Dowling, R. K., Nichol, J., (2001). The HMAS swan artificial dive reef. Annals of Tourism Research 28(1): 226-229.
22. Schaffer, V., Lawley, M., 2007. Sink it: but who will come? Economic value of artificial reef tourism and who benefits. Working paper presented at CAUTHE Conference, Gold Coast.
23. Lukens-Ronald, R. 1997. Guidelines for Marine Artificial Reef Materials. Final report of the Artificial Reef Subcommittee of the Technical coordinating committee Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission. Government of Albania & World Bank 2006. Pilot fishery development project. Marine Eco-tourism planning&development (phase 1)-wreck Evaluator’s report, p. 18.
24. Jensen, A. C., (2002). Artificial reefs of Europe: perspective and future. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59: 3-13.
25. Milon, J.W. 1998. The economic benefits of artificial reefs: An analysis of the Dde county, Florida reef system. Gainesville, Fla.: Sea grant extension program, University of Florida, Report Florida Sea Grant College; no. 90.