Editor's note: This story was produced for the ear and designed to be heard. If you're able, WCMU encourages you to listen to the audio version of this story by clicking the LISTEN button above. This transcript was edited for clarity and length.
AJ Jones: As the 50th Anniversary of the Edmund Fitzgerald sinking approaches, shipwreck enthusiasts say they wish they knew what the vessel's current condition looked like.
But dives haven't been allowed to the wreck since 1994.
WCMU's Tina Sawyer recently spoke with Michigan shipwreck researcher and diver Ric Mixter about the last sonar images that were captured 30 years ago.
Ric Mixter: We could not see any definition in the first eight hatches on the forward section. And in fact, there was no definition. So it makes me believe that it was a problem with the sonar and not the fact that the ship had actually collapsed inwards. But I think by going back and doing a quick survey, we could determine what that is. And my guess is it's in much better shape than what that scan showed.
Tina Sawyer: How many feet down is it in Lake Superior?
RM: 550 feet to the very back of the stern. It's within diveable range, and certainly within robot range.
TS: Should divers be allowed to dive it, now that you were saying that most direct descendants of those who are crew members are no longer with us?
RM: Yeah, and I'll tell you, for me, all shipwrecks should be open to dive. We have over 10,000 shipwrecks and over 25,000 people lost on the Great Lakes. And the only three shipwrecks that are limited... are by the Canadian government. So the United States does not limit the Great Lakes for us to dive these wrecks where bodies have been known forever, from the emperor to the Kamloops that was lost in 1927. We know these people are there and even the museums have filmed the Superior city. They found a ring on a skeleton. The precedent isn't though to always do the right thing... ethically... on what we do with that footage. And I think that's more the question, not sealing off the wreck because someone died there, because that has not been how we handle these shipwrecks. It's, you know, making sure that ethical divers who go down there don't turn it into sensationalism. And that's what we've seen in the past.
TS: And after 30 years of interviews and research, what have you learned? Anything new?
RM: I'm embarrassed that the only thing I knew in 1994 was Fred Stonehouse's book and, of course, Gordon Lightfoot's song. I was totally unprepared to dive the Fitzgerald, but so many things had to be uncovered. And in the scope of what was uncovered became my 30-year legacy of interviewing the guys that built the ship, the guys that sailed the ship, of course, the people that found it, the people who searched for survivors, and then ultimately the divers who went down from the Coast Guard to Jacques Cousteau's son, Jean-Michel. I'm now armed with so much more information and of course, access as a board member at Whitefish Point. So I have now, after 30 years, so many more questions and so much better time could be spent on that shipwreck, really figuring out what went wrong. But we also have to balance that with, you know, will it upset those surviving family members?
TS: Is there an unspoken rule that, you know, if you come across a body, like if they're filming, do they keep that footage out of whatever they're showing or creating?
RM: No, and I'll tell you that the story has always been when they find bones that because there's probably no living descendants that who knew that person, many times it was used as a focal point of a film or something. Now today, the ethic is to leave those there, but you know, there's nothing wrong with seeing that. That's part of the shipwreck story. And yes, they're more preserved from the Edmund Fitzgerald, and because there are living descendants, you have to treat that in a different light. The difference is this is their permanent grave site, and we treat it that way. And I don't think it deserves any more protection, and certainly the state of Michigan tried to do that, but that was struck down as a First Amendment violation as soon as it was challenged by news coverage.
TS: And how is the technology enhanced diving wrecks nowadays? Is it different from 1994? I'm assuming so.
RM: Oh, yeah, I mean, now, you know, even with depth finders and fish finders, we can scan over a shipwreck for $200 and practically tell how many hatches, how tall the masts are. It costs $70,000 for our expedition in July of 1994 to rent a sub in a tugboat. And as these chapters slowly get solved because technology keeps finding these boats, I think it's better for people to expand their knowledge beyond the Fitzgerald, beyond just the song, but to learn 300 years of sailing on the Great Lakes has stories. And I hope those stories all get told as well.
AJ: That was shipwreck researcher and diver Ric Mixter, talking with WCMU's Tina Sawyer.
