To focus on principles closer to those of the NSS?
namely
" to study, explore, and conserve cave and karst resources; protect access to caves; encourage responsible management of caves and their unique environments; and promote responsible caving."
To focus on principles closer to those of the NSS?
namely
" to study, explore, and conserve cave and karst resources; protect access to caves; encourage responsible management of caves and their unique environments; and promote responsible caving."
It's hard to beat the power of a first impression. Who is in a better position to make a first impression than the instructor who introduces you to the activity?
I believe an absolutely fundamental connection is there to be made between instruction and the promotion of good values and responsibility in caving.
I agree. I guess other folks want PADI to teach cavediving.Quote:
Originally Posted by kotik
I took my cave training with NSS-CDS, I then joined, not living in Florida and only making it down there about once a year I don't know that I would have joined otherwise. After joining and receiving the journals and information it did raise my awareness to cave conservation (which was also hammered into me during my training) and I subsequently also joined the NFSA and ASA as well.
Why would removing instruction cause this change?
Do you believe that without instruction more people would join, be active and volunteer in the nss-cds?
Aren't there other orgs like the nfsa, scci that already exist for this purpose and you could rally folks around?
To me, it all depends on where and how the CDS shifts it's focus. I belong to several org's and half of them don't have anything
To do with instruction and I'm happy to support them.
Dive instruction doesn't have be a part of the CDS for it to survive.
Ìf the CDS is out of the business of training/education, who creates, maintains, and upholds the standards?
Good question and that is one alternative that has been thrown to training. Presently each org. sets its own standards and runs with it. With something along the lines of accreditation in time the standards would line up across the different orgs. as instructors would have the most success by having the accreditation.Quote:
Originally Posted by whodunit68
I do far more with the NFSA & ASA than I do with the org.s that train. IMHO I believe training (& the politics that go with it) holds them back.
I think this is a carry over from another thread that it was stated that if the CDS took a Leadership / Regulatory role OVER certifying agencies it could be a conflict of interest.
What I believed to be proposed was the CDS to take a BIGGER role in training by regulating certifying agencies, maintaining standards and regulations regarding instructors.
I am not trying to create any drama or offend anyone but as RESPECTED as the CDS is it might be one of the few that could pull this off.
This is a growing need that is being perceived.
JCG
Exactly!Quote:
Originally Posted by JCGoodwin
But it's going to take some big thinking and some bold actions to make it happen and even with that it will still not be easy.
The up side is that if we can pull it off what we'll have is a much more sustainable org.
But why would a for profit agency like GUE, TDI or IANTD submit to oversight from the CDS? Another thing to consider is that the CDS is very Florida centric, there are many other cave areas in the world which might do things differently than the way things are done by the CDS because that's what works for their region and i doubt would welcome the oversight. You can already see some of this in sidemount diving styles which seem to be quite different from say Florida to Mexico to the UK. And if they weren't willing to do so voluntarily I don't see any mechanism that would force them to fall under their oversight. Now, I'm not saying that there isn't a requirement for improved standards etc, as that is well above my pay grade but if you honestly think the standards need to be improved I think the most realistic way of achieving that would be for the CDS to continue teaching, and to raise the level of their own standards forcing other agencies to compete. Just my 2 cents of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by JCGoodwin
Exactly. I can't think of a single incentive that any of these agencies would have to subvert themselves to what the CDS says. Much less all of them, and that's what it would take for the sort of thing that's being proposed to have any teeth. The word "regulate" is being used, but I really doubt that what would come of this effort would be anything that could truly be described as regulation.Quote:
Originally Posted by moody
I can see the major training agencies agreeing on broad standards, but not electing an overlord, and I don't see accreditation panning out unless the cost of it is passed on to students, and only then if it's the case that those students are unable to dive the sites they want to without proof of training through an accredited instructor. Otherwise, all the incentive will be to go to the lower cost guys who don't play ball.
Maybe not the agencies getting oversight or accreditation, but individual instructors being able to say "NSS-CDS Accredited".
Neither agreeing or disagreeing with this at this time, just discussing.
That is the rather lightly outlined idea presently. The issue with just trying to raise standards of teaching presently is that instructors teach through multiple agencies which makes corrective action almost impossible. I have turned an instructor in for, what I consider, criminal much less standards violations. I was informed directly by the training director for the agency that they couldn't do anything because the instructor teaches for multiple agencies and discipline would only hurt the agency from lost revenue.Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesK
And that is absolutely what is wrong!!!!! It's all about the money. Who cares if he teaches for other agencies. Who cares if it hurts the originazations revenue. One instructor should not hold an agency hostage. Make the sanctions public on the website. "Instructor Billy Bob Jumbilia has been suspended for actions unbecoming an instuctor. On such a date he took students blah blah blah". That would give people actually researching instructors actual data instead of internet forum hearsay. It would also show that the CDS is of a higher standard and holds everyone in the orignazation to those standards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby
And I think that is exactly a much needed direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesK
Hey,how dare you talk about my instructor. As soon as he finishes his time on "Duck Dynasty" he will be back to teaching.Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesK
Sorry. I am not saying he is not a nice guy, he just needs to watch out what he is doing! LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Kelly Jessop
I think that we're on to something here. One of the problems is that a new student doesn't really know if his or her instructor did
A good job of teaching them ( they don't know what they don't know) and the training agencies don't get paid by failing or sanctioning instructors and while there are some very good instructors out there we still are producing some sub standard divers.
So with that said; how do we solve this puzzle?
Mentoring programs. Requirement after class is done. With that you can evaluate student and teacher. How to start that, I dont know.Quote:
Originally Posted by cwick
Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?Quote:
Originally Posted by cwick
(who will keep watch over the guardians?)
This problem has been around for about 2,000 years, and nobody has come up with a perfect solution yet.
Honor tends to be a somewhat reliable option. (It works for the Marine Corps)
IF... CDS took the high road, and made itself the "gold standard" for training, it would set a benchmark that other agencies would measure themselves against.
BUT... taking the high road means being smaller than other agencies. Having fewer instructors, fewer certifications, being called "elitist" by the professional, fast food model, certification mills.
Names withheld to protect the guilty... But back in the late 70's when I was looking into getting my first C card, there was a half page ad in a SCUBA magazine. It showed a fully equipped OW diver crawling across the floor of a desert. The caption was "Why do other agencies make SCUBA training so dry?". The text implied that the agency that made the ad would not require their students to actually sit in a classroom and learn the physics of diving. But would instead rush their students thru pool and OW training and give them their C-cards faster, and without all that boring math. Or bothering to learn the how's and why's of the underwater environment.
I went with the "dry" training agency for my first C-card, because I WANTED to learn how (and why) to do it the right way. And I'm sure there may still be a few potential students out there interested in getting trained by the best training agency in the business.
Just a thought.
Mentoring, in my opinion, does more for developing a diver then a structured class. While a class gives the students the skills they need, and shows them how to apply those skills, mentoring is ongoing and helps grow the student. While I felt, and still feel, my instructors (Mark Pergram and Larry Green) did a great job, I feel my mentors which actually included both of them, helped me grow and become the better diver I wanted to be. How do we implement that? Well, while it is a very small step, maybe we could actually add a mentoring program to the CDS. Not an instructor rating, but a mentor rating. People who would be available to dive, at their own cost at no charge to the student, and help build the experience of that individual. I am always more then willing to dive with an "intro" diver and help them learn. However, how do those new divers find those people? Just getting on the forum and looking for a buddy can be risky. However, having an NSS-CDS approved mentor list would be a huge leap for those individuals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Carlisle
just my thoughts.
Everyone else thats already following and maintaining the same standards... NACD, IANTD, PSAI, TDI, NAUI, GUE, PADI, and the rest of the alphabet too.Quote:
Originally Posted by whodunit68
The CDS has not set itself apart from anyone else in SOOOOO long.
Fwiw, GUE is not for profit. I don't know about the other agencies.Quote:
Originally Posted by moody
How about the CDS just does an instructor "clean up" and start booting crap instructors?
Then shape up the ones that are left by doing a recertification and remedial "new rules" program where there are SET MINIMUM SKILLS required. None of this "you barely did the skill" and pass bull crap.
As far as finding the crap instructors:
Everyone knows who they are... just sit in the cavern of peacock or ginnie for 2 or 3 weekends. You can narrow it down pretty quick.
Sorry, I wasn't aware that GUE wasn't for profit. Thanks for the info.Quote:
Originally Posted by PfcAJ
I'm not sure how you'all would architect this without data. It'd probably just turn into another cave agency witch hunt based on social grouping and perceived penis size.
It'd be REALLY interesting to change the paradigm so students registered for classes through the certifying organization. At least then they'd have accurate data regarding pass/fail rates.
There are well known instructors in this area that everyone knows are soft regarding standards and not so well known ones that are hard core about them and REGULARLY fail students for not meeting standards...However just as lawyers would deeply resist a database tracking their actual rates of success in the courtroom, instructors would also never agree to such a thing.
The good ones would.Quote:
Originally Posted by mdax
Looking at the survey numbers, there are a lot of happy people with a organization sitting idle and with no direction. Pretty sad.Quote:
Originally Posted by SuPrBuGmAn
I don't think the new BoD will sit as idle, and it is a wake-up call to the instructors, so hopefully they will make some changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Carlisle
I dont think they will either. I think they have a chance at getting the cds back to what it should be and I think they will try.Quote:
Originally Posted by FW
Quote:
Originally Posted by FW
I truly hope so!
I think getting out of training and sitting idle are mutually exclusive. Has the CDS been sitting idle,or this an interpretation from some members? From my perspective the CDS board has probably been engaged,but probably not things that the membership interprets as important. There have been some administrative changes,and the law suit have been time consuming. I would agree with you that there is some stagnation,and I say give these new board members time to learn their jobs,develop team work,and bring new perspectives to the association.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Carlisle
Most agree that Ford brought auto manufacturing to the modern age,but when Toyota became the number one in manufacturing,did we tell Ford to stop manufacturing,and take an alternative role? Bad analogy,but I think the basic understanding is there. The NACD first and CDS secondly saved the sport of cave diving which was on the verge of being outlawed in the 70s. They are victims of their own success,because once cave diving became less of an extreme sport,but an ecotourism activity,other people decided to enter the market to capitalize on the emerging growth. Has the CDS kept up,partially yes,and has even lead in other areas. For example the CDS saw emerging technology with rebreathers,and was fought by a small faction to not develop training,but it was imperative that the CDS offer this,and stay current. There are some other areas where the CDS leads. For example around 2006-2007 the CDS wrote some required conservation standards in their training program that assured students heard about conservation not just in the classroom,but the water too. No all is perfect,the CDS needs some training material updates,but I asay we have a new training leadership and they need the time and opportunity to address the issues. There are two primary ways the CDS gain new members,one through training,the other through ownership of sites-eliminate one you eliminate a % percent of new or sustaining members. So if the CDS stopped training and lost members,which means a loss of revenue,who will pay for the lines,signs,conservation materials,landowner relations etc? The for profit agencies have been able to teach,and profit on the work of the nonprofit agencies because they have laid the foundation and environment for them to be successful. When is the last time we've seen XXXXX,XXX,XXXX,XXXX signs? line? talked to landowners thinking about closing a cave?
I am not trying to flame anyone or bust anybody,but a search of the forums will see this discussion comes up fairly routine,and since the average cave divers turns over every 2-3 years,then this ends up being a new topic. I agree with Kevin,I don't want stagnation and sitting idle,but a fresh organization moving ahead. 1) I say give this new board sometime. This is the first time in the 20 years that I have been a member that I have seen so many new people come in at one time. There a new ideas and fresh opinions there 2) The membership needs to leave their QWERTY,and become involved. It was pitfull that it took extreme measures to get 20% of the members to send their ballots back. If you don't like something,then become involved and fix it,because you don't have to be on the board,there are committees begging for help.
Kelly,
You and I agree overall more than we disagree. You are correct that with so many new board members they will need time for adjustment and learning. At the same time I believe they are off to a great start as their communication with the membership is spot on. They are asking some of the tough questions and looking in the mirror to say "how can we do it better"
However I also believe that continuing to harp on the membership for not being involved is counter productive, the same as harping on past BOD actions is not productive. There is nothing positive in going back and forth with blame as to why membership is or is not active. Here and now we have a board that is saying they are open to new ideas, ways of doing things, and actively looking to make improvements. We also have the membership giving good input, ideas, and feed back. If we keep this rolling I believe that it will also result in more involvement and results.
BTW if anyone has been on the fence about joining the CDS now is the time IMHO. There is a broad range of possibilities for something better. Positive change can only come if those that have wanted something better jump in and this is one of those rare moments when the timing is just right.
I agree with what you are saying. The membership is the organization,and their input is critical,but if the membership doesn't act then the organization will stagnate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby
You both make excellent points, an I think with the huge turnover on the board and a new training director now is the time to see what can be done. This is a great opportunity for the CDS and its membership to work to build something great! I am not saying get rid of training all together. I can not jump to such a decision without hearing all sides and forming my own opinion. However, talking about such things, no matter how extreme, is what brings change and compromise and good solutions. To stifle and silence this type of talk, not saying anyone is, is what breeds the stagnation.
Ok now I am rambling.
I think the NSS-CDS should stay in the C-CARD business. I do not think without that initial exposure to the NSS-CDS during training that I would have come on board as a member. I don't think the C-CARD Business should be allowed to run the NSS-CDS.
Kelly, James, Bobby...You all make great points.
The notion that without training revenue the organization will fold line is getting very tiring. If that were indeed the case, how would one explain how the NSS continues to thrive? How is the SCCi is hitting it out of the park (2 years ago they had over $1MM in the bank). DISCLOSURE: I am a sustaining member of SCCi ($240/year) and a member of the NSS. I AM NOT a member of the CDS and heard online that my lifetime membership of the NACD had been terminated.
The statement of "let the new BOD learn" is frightening. Why on Earth would anyone want them to learn how to run an UNSUCCESSFUL organization? How about the members say "Have at it! We elected you to make the organization better because we believe in you; now do everything you want to." It would be apparent that the 20% that did vote want this. The 80% that did not vote really con't give a crap.
Proof that the agency in question considers it more important to uphold their bank balance than their training standards...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby
The CDS didn't lead in the area of CCR Cave training. IANTD already had a program at the time the CDS was considering developing theirs. So don't try to tell us that the CDS was trying to lead the industry...they weren't. They were responding to requests from a certain instructor, who was simply looking for a way to put more money in his pocket. I'd call him by name, but that's probably akin to begging for my post to be deleted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly Jessop
Now I'm not saying that Bobby's experience involved the CDS. But I am saying that if the CDS wants to style itself as the gold standard it needs to make decisions based on the good of the sport, and of it's membership...NOT based on the good of individual instructors, or it's own bank balance.
If I thought that the CDS was doing good things for cave divers as a whole...I'd be a member. But, in my opinion, they have historically responded to the desires of their instructors and not much more. I'm hopeful (very hopeful) that the new board will change that. Time will tell...
Brian
Agreed. If the poll was "Do you want the CDS to be active and with clear direction?", my vote would be yes. That's not the poll though, and I haven't heard any clear statement to convince me that involvement in training prevents this. To me at least it's clear that being active in promoting cave conservation and promoting high standards for training can go hand in hand with actually offering training.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly Jessop
Can anyone say in a short clear statement exactly what doing away with training is supposed to accomplish?
Leadership is the key to any organization. Blaming the membership is pointless and will change nothing. People will rally behind strong leaders with good ideas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly Jessop
Charlie
"A management team distracted by a series of short-term targets is as pointless as a dieter stepping on a scale every half-hour"
- From the Google "Owner's Manual"
I agree and have been an advocate of a formal mentoring program for some time. There are many experienced cave divers that already take on this role and a formal corps of trained mentors willing to volunteer their time would have a significant impact on the overall quality of cave divers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Carlisle
The fact is, most of the training is pretty good but there's a limit as to what can be retained after such high-intensity and time-limited classes. Many cave divers' knowledge and skills are highest on the last day of their cave class and it's downhill from there. There are many reasons for this including information overload during training, complacency, and diving with other new cave divers. Bad habits are contagious.
IMO cave diver certifications should be provisional until the diver logs at least 50 cave dives with one or more mentors. Not every dive has to be with a mentor but unless the "apprentice" cave diver logs these dives within 2 years, their provisional cert will expire and require refresher training.
Charlie
All of the training is setup to be good. Instructors trying to make a living doing this is what's causing the dedrigation of training we are seeing.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcr
What does that mean and how is it applicable here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Pickel
If the CDS gives up training it creates an unclear barrier to entry, unclear means much more difficult especially these days, if we can't cultivate our replacements the organization is already doomed its just not dead but it will be.
Even if you refer someone to a different agency cave training is tough and can last a long time, its human nature to stick with the people that get you through it so the reality is that the good intensions associated with a referral wont pay dividends down the road or at the very least not enough to create a sustainable membership base.
Consider this, a well known moderate religious leader in Paris was asked a question:
Do you think that war is inevitable with the "west (EU & US)"?
The reply was interesting and was something like this: "WAR"....what war, we've already won, in two generations we'll controll the UK & the EU and have such influence in the US & Canada that there will never be a need to fire a single shot, our population is increasing at a rate that cant be matched in addition to being quite sustainable, the "wests" reproduction rates are so low that no civilization in history has ever recovered from such dismal numbers, its likely that in time the "west" will become bankrupt because it will be unable to meet the financial commitments it has to service its aging population.
Now if thats true or not isnt the point but its absolutely true that if there's no clear path to membership through education the CDS is finished, it may take 10 years or longer but its not if, its when.
Besides rumor has it that other organizations have cocaine.
Didn't say that,said for them to stay current. The CDS had offered sidemount training for over 20 years,and now PADI is offering it,are they staying current or leading? Probably both. The reason the CDS offered CCR cave training is obviously an issue for you,but at the time my only concern was this was emerging technology and the CDS would be stupid to ignore it,regardless of what other CDS people felt at the time. One day there will be another type of technology the will enter cave diving,whether training is needed or not is secondary,the key is the CDS needs to embrace it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benthic
You can't change human nature. People are always going to try to make it better, faster, or cheaper. The "cave diving community" needs to work with that, not against it. Accreditation is a great solution, regardless of whether that is going to be the CDS's job or not. Agencies need to be held accountable for their instructors, and instructors need to be held accountable for their students.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Carlisle
I'm not sure I agree. There's nothing inherently wrong with a professional instructor but there has to be adequate oversight to ensure standards are being met. When instructors control the organization, and therefore the oversight, there is a serious conflict of interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Carlisle
Charlie
That's why I support the CDS getting out of the cert buisnss. Unfortunately I stand by my earlier remarks. Get out and watch some classes or some newer full cave students and you will see its true. Wish it wasn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcr
I don't even know where to start with this...it sound great and would make a difference...but in practice I think not so much.
On Monday Edd and I went for a fun dive in Hole in the Wall, on Tuesday I mentioned this to a open water instructor I know who wants to get into cave diving, his reply was " i really liked it there as well"...well that got my attention, asked some questions and found out he did some trust me dives with a cave diver (not instructor) I also know. Both plead out as dumb asses, i gave my "it seems really easy until it isn't speech" and have determined that I won't be part of the Open Water Instructions ongoing training in any format because he showed a HUGE lack of judgment....by the way I certified him as a instructor and did not see any hint of that type of attitude in his Instructor training, he hid it because he knew we wouldn't approve. just like the ow folks in the boat that came up and asked us if we were going to be diving the cave for long and when we said we wouldn't be in the way said "we'll come back later" and sure enough they were sitting waiting for us to leave when we got out of the water 90 mins later ...and waited another hour for Edd and I to actually drive the boat away before they went diving..obviously to explore the cave and they didn't want to hear Edd and I tell them they were being stupid, they knew and didn't care.
This type of attitude is everywhere, recently I heard multiple rumors that somebody who REALLY should have known better took a unqualified (not tmix) non full cave diver on a 300 ft deep dive to the nest, they seemed to feel it was ok because it wasn't a formal training or guiding dive, just a fun dive with a friend....another Instructor.
The other side of the problem is that there are MANY if not most that in fact DO want a easy course, they don't want to be challenged in any way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcr
It simply means that the organization, IMO, needs to setup up the organization to thrive in the long run not just short term projects that will make enough noise to make some members happy today. Long term goals are what are needed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
Those from the NSS that taught me and mentored my in climbing and caving never charged a dime. NCRC only charges for costs. Why is it that the CDS is the only section/grotto that provides a select group or members to profit solely off being a member.
The proposal is, if cave training hadn't been developed, there would be more deaths -- seems pretty benevolent to charge for it then. Some decided that given that, a cottage industry could be born. People die dry caving and climbing as well. No one is trying to eek out a living creating a cottage industry there.
Ask those in the NSS how happy many in the NSS membership is that a small "elite" part of the NSS membership gets to make money off their membership dues while they (non cave divers) donate their skill and knowledge -- theirs isn't good enough to pay for? I am pretty sure a previous CDS Vice Chairman has fielded a few of those conversations at an NSS convention or two.
There was a shop in Tampa that used to do AOW check out dives at the Nest often. A cave diver complained to PADI; PADI didn't care.Quote:
Originally Posted by cerich
There is an OW instructor at the Univ. of Indiana that forces students to dive in overhead environments for their class. Several cave divers complained to PADI; PADI didn't care.
It would be nice if there was a respected organizations that tracked instructors and that organization could rank instructors based of classes, mentoring, post class involvement, etc. Instead of asking people that have fallen into a cult-like love for an instructor "just because", provide something akin to an (God forgive me for using this analogy) AngiesList for instructors.
I'm not sure how any of this is relevant to improving cave training. If people want to cave dive without training or do dives that are beyond their abilities there's nothing we can do about it. Let's focus on the people that want to learn and provide them with quality training and a reasonably safe way to gain experience in the cave environment.Quote:
Originally Posted by cerich
Charlie
Just like you quoted me in your post that I am quoting in reply to yours, It was relevant to the points in the post I quoted.
The bottom line is as a community we need to be prepared to stand behind what we recommend and preach, not just give it lip service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcr
I agree as a community we should do what we can to educate on caves. But the very agencies who are not cave agencies are the ones who trained these open water divers and may possibly be the training agency for the cave diver mentioned. They are training but not possibly educating enough these divers on the dangers of exceeding their limits.
I can tell you the cds instructors I used did so and followed up when ever they saw me asking about where i have been and who with and how things were going.
My training recreationally , while they were excellent instructors, mentioned the dangers (not nearly as intensely) and I cant say they followed up. The other agencies need to step up this education also if they are to instruct in it, especially at the recreational level.
I cant say this is a failing of cds instructors, or any particular agency, but a responsibility of the dive community as a whole. Any education of the community we do is worthwhile, absolutely. And should be a part of what our organization does. But it seems our training program already includes a great deal of this and should be commended. As should any agency that does so.
There are instructors, good instructors and great instructors in all the agencies. I guess i have been lucky so far with my choices
Isn't it nice when we all play together in a civil manner? Imagine what we could accomplish if we could continue like this.
Civil? 14.08% of respondents think I should die! LOL :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by cwick
Well, some of that has nothing to do with this poll.
LOL! I thought that was the " I need further info to make an informed decision" box. Damn.Quote:
Originally Posted by cerich
Yes but only 14.8% rather than the typical 75%.Quote:
Originally Posted by cerich
awww, i feel loved... lol.
Chris,Quote:
Originally Posted by cerich
Is this something that is actually being considered seriously?
Jon
If anything they need to expand and harmonize the "training" aspect of the organization, the issues I've seen with training agencies it the inconsistency and the complaints that are generated as a result.
There's no doubt that the average GUE/UTD diver is generally speaking, more qualified and better prepared for the challenges of more advanced diving.
There must be a way to hold instructors and students accountable by removing as much of the human factor as possible. There are many who will look the other way for a friend, let people into sites without proper training, etc.
ANother issue is brought to lite my that silly post about some jackass picking up a log, how do you handle a diver thats really training on vacation, many certified CAVE DIVERS simply dont have the time to maintain skills, you have a person that comes to Florida and becomes certified over a year or whatever time frame, they can do almost anything they want once they have the card but if they make it down one a year for a week it will take them 10 years to gain the experience that a local can in 6 months....
Walking away from training is stupid and short sighted.
But there must be a way to improve training and create a more regimented system with inherent checks and balances.
Training is the most essential thing any sport organization can do. It keeps newbies from killing themselves. I joined the Appalachian Mountain Club for their rock climbing training. I joined NSS-CDS to support the agency that trained me (and to get access to Cow). I chose NSS-CDS certification for the affiliation with NSS and for CDS' original role in setting standards and formulating safety rules. Most of what I know about cave diving came from a little book published by NSS-CDS called "Blueprint for Survival." My cavern instructor said something like, "Follow these rules, and there's a 98% chance you'll die in bed. Break these rules and there's a 98% chance you'll die in a cave." The rest of my training was learning to apply those rules. That book and our training programs have made an inherently dangerous sport fairly safe. If we don't train people we will become invisible and then disappear. I might suggest a few changes in training, but I still think that the only way we can set standards is by example. ("Don't bother people with advice; teach them by example." -Charles Peguy, French philosopher)
Well put Allen, totally agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by allen
From a business standpoint it also makes sense to homegrown your membership and have trained advocates in the public domain saying good things, it can't hurt.
Maybe a few dollars or some profit gets in the hands of a few people maybe not but NO ONE is getting rich off of the CDS so who cares about that.
This dialog is really healthy for the community as a whole.
All are helping to define these issues in one way or another.
Agencies are really taking a hands off on some very serious issues that they should not be treating so lightly.
How do you correct them? Stop supporting them I guess is the easiest way.
Mentoring is not only effective it WORKS!
You can learn the skills in class and be checked off but if you are wise you will seek a mentor to dive with.
In my twists and turns I have had the pleasure of diving with some great people.
One of which mentors divers and our short two days taught me many things.
What is occurring in the training world today is scary for all those who trained in the past.
The mastery vs. minimal skill requirement with little experience advancing quickly.
How do you work at improving these issues?
Why would any agency subject themselves to anyone to oversee or regulate standards?
It is becoming obvious that they will not even police their own ranks!
What is the next step to fix these issues?
These questions and so many more are real and need to be dealt with.
I applaud those trying to make a difference attempting to change the current trend.
Deep down the community still cares about divers and each other even though there are some squabbles here and there.
Change comes at a price hopefully not lists of fatalities.
If the CDS takes this on then I will support them for trying and put forth an effort to help.
Though we all will never agree on everything, WE all love to dive in caves.
If a cluster of fatalities puts that is jeopardy I am certain unity will not be a problem.
It took time to get to this place and will take time to dig out of it.
I choose to be hopeful and positive embracing change even if it means a bit of sacrifice.
JCG
This line made me think some,at what point in the cave diving training history did this become a problem? I was certified in 1994,and there were only really two agencies,and within those two agencies there were a handful of instructors. Instructors had to go through an institute,but prior to that they had to intern. I see a lot of agencies,not really sure of prerequisites to get cave trained,the requirements in the class,and how the instructors are made. I am not blasting any agency,but just curious when master vs minimal requirement became an issue/concern.Quote:
Originally Posted by JCGoodwin
Isn't every option worth being considered seriously?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
There have been some very good points made here and they've produced some very good questions. It seems that everyone here is
concerned about the future of the CDS and they all seem to feel the need for some change and that gives us some common ground
from which to begin. If we continue to produce ideas and ask questions we can find solutions that most of us can agree with on some level.
In order for this process to work effectively though we have to remain open minded and free thinking, we cannot allow our thoughts to boxed in by the status quo or the past and all ideas should be considered seriously.
I believe an agency participating in active exploration and conservation projects will also bring membership. This is something the NACD sorta touched on a bit, but their political shenanigans pretty much nullified any progress they were going to make. This is something the CDS can do that the for-profit alphabet soup groups will never really touch on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly Jessop
Right now, I would think CDS membership from training is waning anyway since the CDS isn't providing anything thats not available by virtually anyone else. Sure, the CDS may have helped pave the way decades ago, but they need to stay on-top of the game.
FWIW, I joined initially because I wanted to be part of an active agency. It wasn't, so my membership lapsed. I rejoined this week with those same hopes and a shiney new BOD that brings me some faith of activity. I've never had, nor am I looking for, CDS training. The sites owned by the CDS aren't enough to sway my membership or not either... most people simply don't realize there is literally over a 1000 cavediving sites in Florida that anyone can dive. I believe if membership is given something to participate in, they'll participate. If not, they'll let membership lapse, get apathetic, and go find somewhere else to play(NFSA, ASA, etc)
Agreed. I'd love the CDS to be the premier Cave Training agency. Really, who else in the US is best to understand caves in all forms?Quote:
Originally Posted by SuPrBuGmAn
That, officially, makes you awesome!Quote:
Originally Posted by SuPrBuGmAn
Leam
You discourage them from the sport and set up experience requirements that must be completed within a certain time frame for their provisional cert to become permanent. Furthermore, you establish experience requirements for periodic renewal of their cert.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
I would love to climb 8000m peaks in the Himalaya but the truth is I don't live in the mountains and couldn't possibly climb enough to develop and maintain the skills necessary to participate in high altitude mountaineering. Similarly, cave diving is not for everyone.
Charlie
I have seen too many instructors, who IMO, should not be teaching cave, both CDS and NACD. There are some I wouldn't trust to polish my shoes. Everyone's instructor is always the best. This is true with both OW, cave and technical. Who wants to admit their card may not be what it should because of a sub-standard instructor. I personally have no objection to the organization offering training. My main concern is across the board for all organizations in that they all seem more interested in numbers than quality with few exceptions. I dropped out of the CDS a long time ago due mainly to their political infighting and administrative short comings. Saying that, they are and have always been hands down better than the NACD, IMO.
I do feel that the CDS has over the last few years lost focus and has become to much like other mainstream training organizations and has become an instructor oriented organization rather than a member at large organization.
Safe Diving
SO this got me to thinking a bit... and that generally hurts if I do it for too long.Quote:
Originally Posted by bletso
It may be a fine distinction, but who is it that is really concerned about the numbers? The organization? The general membership? Or maybe the instructors affiliated with the organization?
I am not so naive as to think the dollars for instruction have no impact, but the question I am asking myself is, "I wonder if it is possible to have an organization that offers instruction AND has a strong enough membership where the non-instructor component has an equal footing with the instructor component.
It would need to offer benefits and be attractive to both instructors and members.
Of course, if instruction is your livelihood, passion, or both, you might tend to have a much more strongly vested interest. Is this something that general membership can either compete or co-exist with? If instruction is not there, will the organization be able to have sustainable level of membership at a national level with out "breeding" more membership? I strongly believe there are tangible benefits to having a large organizations from a number of perspectives.
Ouch, my head hurts now.
Early on, I once had an AOW instructor that could not bend over and put his own fins on. :) Never thought he was one of the best. Never wanted to dive with him again.Quote:
Originally Posted by bletso
It eliminates the massive impact created by instructors who insist on being paid for caving, and then form the organization around sustaining that pay level instead of embettering the organization by promoting the science and study of caves and cave diving.Quote:
Originally Posted by kotik
According to the CDS Constitution
"These objectives include 1) promotion of the conservation, exploration, and study of underwater caves; and 2) education for increased awareness, safety, and skill in cave diving."
The CDS has essentially become a cave diving training agency, with a few other activities that play second fiddle to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyJersey
Some of us would like it to concentrate on (1) and by all means (2), as long as it is education rather than training (i.e. within a commercial relationship between an instructor and a student). The problem now is that the tail is wagging the dog.
Andy
Good points and its impossible to accomplish those without training, another issue is if you downsize the CDS all of the babies that complain about "old boys clubs" will come out of the closet screaming like the lazy people they are because membership and involvement may require a little more then paying an instructor.Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyJersey
Whatever the case you cant unrig the training agency bell without serious and what I believe to be negative consequences, regardless of how the agency was started it is viewed as a training agency today.
We know that Safety, skill and exploration equate to good training followed up by good practice and experience so there's a clear need for a path to certification.
So in order to enhance the conservation, study, awareness and exploration aspects of the organization it makes more sense to use the existing infrastructure of instructors,it will reach more people and therefore create a sustainable organization.
Now do I think that there's room for improvement....of course, with most things there usually is but that doesn't mean we need to destroy the existing structure in needs more focus and that goal is realistically achievable.
Now lets look at the ASA:
The BOD of the ASA has made it very clear that they want nothing to do with the business of training and thats great because that how its viewed today, its ironic that some fools call it a "new old boys club".....LOL, I showed up with $40.00 for membership as required by them and did some of the best diving I've ever done in my life and they didnt know me from Adam.......then a week later I showed up with a friend with 40.00 and did it all over again.......pretty far from some exclusionary "old boys club".
The other reason the ASA doesn't need to train people is because the success they've had is remarkable if not unprecedented, kind of funny how some members have been heavily criticized in the midst of such undeniable success.............huh....I wonder why that could be?????
The "Old Boys Club": this makes me laugh because they really dont exist. When any organization is criticized like this it can only mean one of several several things:
1) That person can't or wont pay the fee for membership.
2) That person can't or wont jump through the hoops required for membership
3) That person has a vested interest in competing with that org so they take shots at it.
but usually it means they are just lazy and bitter.
What might make a lot of sense if for the CDS to develop a strategic partnership with the ASA or entities like it, I think that these two institutions have a lot to offer one another and would be viewed as stronger.
See what I hear after reading the comments of those who support the destruction of the training program offered by the CDS is WE WANT MORE CONSERVATION, PUBLIC AWARENESS AND STUDY.............AND WE ALL WANT MORE CAVES......
I think there a way to do that without having to sever the hand that could feed such an organization.
Killing training equates to killing the CDS.
Awesome to hear about your experiences with the ASA, however the ASA is pretty regional in nature. What we are talking about is all that then some.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
I need to bookmark this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
Chris:Quote:
Originally Posted by cerich
I think the question you asked was smart and I think it needed to be asked but not with the goal of making the change, its the best possible question anyone could think of for the purposes of taking the memberships temperature.
When you asked the question it became real clear to me as to why HOG has been so successful, if you recall I was very curious when we met.
I understand but the point is that there's not a shred of evidence to suggest that killing the training program will be beneficial, yet there are numerous ways to satisfy the overwhelming majority of the membership base through partnerships, JV's and an expansion of the training program with greater focus on the 3 missing pieces (conservation, public awareness and study).
Look at Coke, when they have a new product its so easy to get it to market because they have the distribution network in place, so does the CDS on a smaller scale, so use it to our advantage.
Personally I really dont care, I'll pay just for the right to dive COW alone, forget about the other sites, hell I'll pay even if I dont make it to Cow this year so either way I'm in, what I'm trying to do is look at this as selflessly as possible, based on my professional experience, so that the membership can be in the best possible position to make a decision after every possible alternative has been exhausted.
If some instructors wont play ball, fire them, new ones will emerge and the new ones can me controlled and held to a higher standard and thats also a complaint.
I've never seen such drastic "change" end well, it certainly hasent for most.
In response to Jont's suggestion that vacation cave divers should quit the sport: I don't think we are the problem. Most of us know and respect our limits. I suspect that the every other weekend divers are more likely to exceed thier limits. It took me 3 years to reach full cave diver status, but I respected my limitations, had fun, and learned a lot along the way. Full cave doesn't mean I can do everything. It means I know what I can and can't do. I still have a lot to learn. I can do short circuits (Nicholson, Taj, Cuzan Na). Someday I'll feel up to doing the Godzilla Circuit and the Expressway Circuit, but I'm in no hurry. SuperBugMan is right: Florida has over a hundred diveable caves, but I consider most of them off limits. I am a tourist, and I am still learning my way around the odd recesses of the tourist caves. I lack the training for Eagle's Nest or Jug Hole, and I respect that limitation. I never will be able to do Royal Spring or Alachua Sink, and I don't care. While I am on this rant, I will put in a plea for people who are happy staying Intro and people who would be happy to stay Apprentice if they could. Some people are quite happy just paddling up to Olsen Sink or the Breakdown Room. Some people's ambition ends at the Bone Room or the Godzilla Room; there shouldn't be anything wrong with that.
Allen: I never suggested that vacation divers should quit...I AM ONE, please re read what I wrote.....LOL, I live in Manhattan, the orly caves we have here are filled with annoying people and trains.Quote:
Originally Posted by allen
The point I was tying to make is that just because someone has a c-card for 10 years doesn't mean they have 10 years of experience if they dive once per year on vacation.
Quitting isnt in my nature and I would never suggest anyone quits at anything worthwhile, to many people get upset when people make honest mistakes cave diving.
And then;Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
4) That person doesn't give a toss, doesn't play politics, and suffers those that do poorly.
Good 0ld Boys Clubs, (GOBC), do exist, just look at the competing org. (NACD) Sometimes the cost of membership just isn't worth it, well at least to me. To be fair there are GOBC's that do good, e. g. AMVets, Shriners, etc. Those are just two that pop in my head. I am not a member of either.
I have to agree here. It has been a long slide to this position though, almost like the growth of a slow cancer. You don't notice it until it's too late.Quote:
Originally Posted by apitkin
Sorry, but I can't figure out multi-quoting.Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyJersey
Just as its parent organization the NSS, number one should be conservation. Education doesn't have to mean an instructor-centric organization
Ah nothing you mention is a GOBC, there are rust certain requirements for membership.....no GOBC their.Quote:
Originally Posted by bletso
I can't multi quote either,Quote:
Originally Posted by bletso
So how do you propose that we unrig that bell without dire consequence to the organization?
What evidence do you have to support that position?
What specific course of action or plan have you come up with?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bletso
It is easy, just click Reply with Quote one each one, highlight the whole quote, and save it to Notepad. Then copy the whole mess to a new post, and edit out what you don't intend to answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
Be sure to leave all the [QUOTE and [/QUOTE parts or it will like like this line.
There is a quote mark with a plus next to it in the bottom right hand corner (third option ofter reply and reply with quote), this is the multi quote option.
click on the multi quote option at the bottom of each thread you want to quote then hit the reply to thread button and they will appear in the reply box so you can add your comments or edit out the portions of the quote you dont need.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FW
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
Exactly. So if you want to multi-quote, just click the multi-quote button for all the posts you want EXCEPT THE LAST ONE. Then, on the last one, click "Reply With Quote" and you should get a message editor that has all the posts you selected shown as quotes, and you can type away to your heart's content.Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyJersey
Brian
Every time I see this term being used I just shake my head. It's a mixed metaphor! It combines the term "old boys club" (a British term that refers to men who meet in boarding school and keep a network going for life) with the term "good old boy," an American euphemism for an uneducated redneck.Quote:
Originally Posted by bletso
So a GOBC would refer to uneducated rednecks that met in 4H and kept a network going for life?Quote:
Originally Posted by Slüdge
WowQuote:
Originally Posted by FW
Its really that easyQuote:
Originally Posted by JerseyJersey
Does it work with different pages?
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
I don't propose to unrig, I am one of those that don't give a toss any more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jont
I think that is quite evident, no specific events that really stick out at the moment. I dropped out a few years ago and stay only marginally in the melee. Needless to say the NSS-CDS is not the same organization it was twenty years ago.
It is up to the members to steer the board who will have to take the appropriate steps. In the end, after all is said and done, then if the CDS is on a path more akin to what it was years ago, then maybe I would re-join. It really comes down to the fact that I really don't need it to dive caves. I have dove Cow, nice cave but there are more caves than I will ever be able to dive in.
I realize that it is a voluntary organization, but I think they really need to become much more pro-active in cave conservation, i. e. Saving the aquifers before the caves become too polluted to dive. If the CDS wants to continue as an educational organization, then perhaps the courses should be more demanding and much more emphasis on the cave environment.
Thats a good point and I think thats the best and safest way to go about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by bletso
But you do care because you spent the time to respond to the thread several times.
Agreed, its a silly term for the lazyQuote:
Originally Posted by Slüdge
Is the CDS a leader in Cave Diving education?
I say NO!
Why:
When you actively hide and deny active CDS members from seeing the training standards you are not a leader!
I am no longer a CDS member, why?
After several requests (formal and informal) to obtain a copy of the training standards which were all denied, I could no longer support an organization that I couldn't even determine whether or not they were doing the right thing caused me to end my association with them.
And I pose this question to everyone that reads this: How do you know that the CDS training standards are up to your standards?
There's got to be more to this?Quote:
Originally Posted by billyf