My sorrow to all those involved. I only hope this does not have a negative impact on those of us that strive to dive correctly. Being personally involved in a "scuba" related tragady I seem more affected by this. Thanks again for all the support from the forum.
Oh, I'm moving down to Branford next weekend. Start work at Shands AGH on Tuesday the 18th. Sea ya all....
Of course and who could help but feel for the family. Given the nature of the report thus far some might like to see some accountability in such a seemingly senseless and avoidable tragedy.Originally Posted by CaveDivingCop
This is a time of mourning and not speculation....that's why the title of the line is "Mourning" and marked by a black line arrow....Let's all take a moment to think about the victim who was still a person, and who has left behind a family............................................ ...............................
I disagree on the "accountability" thing - since that has already happened - tragically so.
Let's remember folks that whenever we get into the water, we all make a conscious, intentional decision to perform the dive we are about to make. We all have the ability to stick up a thumb at any point in time, and if that thumb is ignored, the universal signal we all possess the right to use is one finger further over. We also bear sole responsibility for our own gas management, for the gauge is on OUR hip, not our buddy's. Likewise, the determination of suitability of the conditions on any given day at any given site against our skill levels is our own - one day a given site may be perfectly fine, yet on another it may be radically beyond our ability to negotiate safely, either due to conditions at the site or even our own personal physical and psychological state.
As such an attempt to assign blame to those who dove with the deceased is, in my opinion, a misplaced attempt to exact (additional) retribution for a decision consciously made by someone who has already made that evaluation, found that it was inaccurate, and paid the ultimate price.
Such calls for someone else to "take a hit" for an incident like this are thus inherently unfair and unreasonable, and to the extent that we contribute to such a "piling on" we take a terrible and unnecessary risk.
In calling for others to be "responsible" for our decision to dive (or not) on any given day and in any given place we make ourselves and those around us less safe, for we delegate, in whole or part, the decision-making process to someone else.
I have long been of the belief that singles in any overhead are unwise, and as such have dove doubles in any overhead - no matter how small or great since. I had my "close call" on a single some time ago (albiet not in a cave) and have no desire for a repeat - it was that incident that formed my opinion and is the reason that you find lots of sets of doubles in my garage. Never do we see people expiring because they have too much gas - the critical problem, other than something medical, is nearly always the reverse. With gas one has time to solve problems - without it one does not. Once panic takes over as the clock ticks down, rational thought - and life - is lost.
Let us instead mourn the loss of a diver, learn what we can from the incident, but use this incident to reinforce that we are all individuals, we all make our own decisions on when and where to dive, and that the responsibility for our choice to stick our head underwater, after careful consideration of our own personal state, the location we are at, the gear we have and know how to use and the environmental conditions on that particular day are exclusively ours.
AMEN - Brother you are preaching to the choir. It couldn't have been said any better.
special attraction?
What about Peacock III makes it a "better" dive that Peacock I? Since I don't even know where III is: it it more secluded and perhaps easier to "sneak" into?
Re: special attraction?
Nothing per se makes it "better" - a cave dive's appeal is strictly left to the individual's tastes. It is just a different cave with some distinct characteristics. As previously mentioned, it is a siphon system (usually very slight).. It has generally lower visibility than Peacock I system, and Hendley's Castle is a section that goes deeper (to 185-190 feet or so) than most areas found in Peacock I. It shares the same parking lot as Peacock I's entrance, but is just located off to the side or down the "slough" run, closer to the Suwanee river than Peacock I. It also tends to get far less diver traffic in it due to these characteristics.
JB
Best post I've yet to see in response to an accident. Thanks for writing it.
WJH
My condolences and prayers to all involved and their families.
wow.
Joe
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks