Take a stand for safer cavern and cave diving

[phillip1]

This is aimed st all training agencies

FYI It has been reported to IANTD numerous times that their DR instructors and instructor trainers are taking unsuspecting OW clients on 1200 ft cave penetrations on a daily basis and zero has been done, nothing at all.
It's funny the only agency that actually has been active in trying to help with the DR problem has been PADI.

This petition is not aimed at any agency in perticular it is aimed at all agencies
If an agency knowingly ignored that a guide or instructor is violating safet guidelines and decides to keep that guide or instructor on their roster I think that agency is knowingly disregarding the safety of the diving public.

Again if you disagree just ignore this

[cmint]

It is important to note that training agencies are exactly that--training agencies. When they get into the position of imposing rules upon dives outside of training (which they do not do currently),

That is an excellent point.

[Aotus]

I missed the context. See what?

Sorry, responding to Cmint

[JohnAd]

Or maybe an ow diver will see it and think, "oh man, I guess that was dangerous, maybe I should look for training before asking my guide to go in a cave again"

Where will an OW diver see that petition? How do they know what kind of training they need?

I have written about this before. The problem with OW divers is that they have no realistic guidance on this matter. they are told to just say no to ALL overhead environments, and I assume they leave their OW training with that idea firmly fixed in their minds. Then they go on a dive trip to Cozumel and are led by their DM through short swim throughs with no problems. They go to South Florida and find that every first dive of a 2-tank dive takes them into a wreck, with or without a guide. It does not take long for them to decide that the "just say no" warning is complete BS.

So where does that leave them? They now have nothing to tell them why it really is OK to go through a short swim through or the wide open deck of a shallow wreck but not OK to go into a cave, even with a guide.

That is why I created a course called Understanding Overhead Environments, which shows as clearly as I can make it why the fact that you can go into some overheads with reasonable safety does not mean you can go into all overheads with reasonable safety. It shows the increasing danger of different overheads, and it explains what training is necessary for the different levels of danger. I taught the class recently to someone who said afterward that it achieved its purpose very effectively--it scared the bejeezus out of him in regard to caves and serious wrecks.

The course was approved by PADI, which is significant since it does admit that it is OK for people to go into some overheads without training. I am only one instructor, though, so not many people have taken the class. That last student said that the class, or something like it, should be part of all OW classes.

[jason]

It is important to note that training agencies are exactly that--training agencies. When they get into the position of imposing rules upon dives outside of training (which they do not do currently), they run into potential legal issues.

Is there a middle ground where agencies could indirectly punish instructors who chose to violate safe diving protocols (as defined by the agencies) by not renewing them at the end of the year, rather than taking direct action to punish them immediately?

Perhaps there is a way to do this as brand protection?

[phillip1]

Is there a middle ground where agencies could indirectly punish instructors who chose to violate safe diving protocols (as defined by the agencies) by not renewing them at the end of the year, rather than taking direct action to punish them immediately?

Perhaps there is a way to do this as brand protection?

Although this is an idea, not punishing them immediately means that they will continue to possibly violate safety guidelines with the knowledge of the certifying agency until the renewal is up.

[JohnAd]

As I mentioned in another thread on this topic, what PADI did in the case of the Blue Hole might be a consideration. Throughout Belize, dive operators associated with all agencies (or with none) were taking newly minted or otherwise unqualified divers to the Blue Hole, where they would descend to 130 feet (or more) and enter a semi-overhead environment (half a cave). Knowing it had no authority over such practices, PADI wrote an open letter to the community calling for something to be done. It could have been some kind of legislation, or it could have been an agreement among all operators. I believe there is something like that in play in Mexico, an agreement on minimum standards for all operators conducting guided cavern dives.

Here is why in most cases it must be something like that and can't be an individual agency enforcing those rules.

If you are a dive operator in South Florida and announce that you will not take anyone without some minimum overhead training (like wreck diver certification) to a recreational level wreck dive, you will be out of business in a couple of months as all the divers flock to your competition. If you are a dive operator in Cozumel and announce that you will not take anyone without cavern certification into a swimthrough, you will be out of business in a couple of months as all the divers flock to your competition. If you are such an operation and the agency with which you are affiliated announced a policy of that nature, you would drop that affiliation and go with another agency immediately. Agency loyalty will not get in the way of staying in business.

If, on the other hand, all the operators in your area agreed to adhere to a specific standard of behavior or were required to do so by law then you could do it. If dive operators in the area where told to abide by those rules or have such a law passed, I would bet you would see a lot of voluntary compliance.