Petition to Address the Current Line Placement in PSSP

[Jeff H]

A meeting of all UTC (Underwater Trail Committee) members will take place on Wednesday April 6th at 7PM. I don't believe this meeting is open to the public; however a petition has been drafted in order for everyone's opinion to be heard to address the current line issues at PSSP.

Please take a moment to review the attached petition. If you would like your name added to the petition please respond to this thread with your full name and intent to be added.

If you have comments or recommendations please also post them. We are open to constructive ideas.

************************************************** ***************

Petition to Address the Current Line Placement in Peacock I

The following petition is signed by concerned cave divers, cave diving instructors and leaders from major training agencies that do not endorse the changes that have taken place in the Peacock Springs Cave system. Reel running procedures, protocols, and experience building skills are paramount values in the cave diving educational process. Post training, all cave divers must practice these skills as they continue their journey towards becoming safe, courteous and proficient overhead divers. Peacock Springs represents one of our greatest resources for cave diver education.

A great deal of this education revolves around the mastery of running primary reels and placing jumps and gaps as well as the skills associated with line entanglement, lost diver and searching for a lost buddy. Running a primary reel and doing jumps and gaps are often times the only practice a cave diver gets to help hone his or her skill set enabling them to be properly equipped to handle an actual lost diver or lost line situation.

The cave diving training agencies represented on this petition teach that proper buoyancy and trim are necessary to enter the cavern/cave environment and require that a student become extremely proficient within these parameters while properly handling a guideline prior to receiving a passing status during the educational process. If the lines are being added because of the implied environmental damage, then it appears that the issue is in the skill set of the diver not the location of the lines.
[list=1][*]Recommended Changes

1. Move the permanent gold lines to beyond the natural daylight zone at Peacock Spring cavern
2. Remove the line which connects the Crossover Tunnel to Olson goldline
3. Remove the line at Pothole Sink which connects the goldline from Peacock Spring to the goldline to Olson Sink.

[*]Reasons for Changes

1. The likelihood of a cave fatality is greatly increased by the current configuration.
2. Does not conform to primary training agency standards as stated by[list:63d454707b]
3. Denny Willis, NSS-CDS, "Their policies are not within NSS-CDS Training practices or the practices of other cave training agencies, with respect to the teaching of safe line protocol. If any NSS-CDS Instructor, and or members, has implied NSS-CDS approval, they have done so without official approval."
4. David Rhea, GUE, "Global Underwater Explorers does not endorse nor were they consulted on the changes to the Peacock Springs line system"
5. Michael O'Leary, NACD "1) it does not comply with present-day cave diving training programs and protocol, and 2) it jeopardizes the safety of all cave divers who venture into this cave system"

[*]Introduces new conservation issues within the cave system.[*]To bring this community together, with the collaboration of all cave divers, all cave diving instructors and all training agencies for harmonious solutions to the current issues[/list:63d454707b]
[*]Safety Concerns

1. Current configuration promotes complacency among trained cave divers by:[list:63d454707b]
2. Discouraging the use a primary guideline, which may be wrongfully adapted by divers to other systems and unfamiliar systems.
3. Routinely accepting permanent markers and 'T's without properly referencing the cave system or using their own personal confidence markers. Will the divers be able to safely exit system should something happen to these markers or the line that they are attached to?
4. Does not promote reel handling/skills/techniques which are survival skills certified cave divers will need after training if they become lost or separated from their dive buddies.
5. Impedes the practice of becoming a better cave diver, with regards to line [reel] handling, and perhaps even referencing navigational decisions on exit

[*]Allows cave divers to penetrate further into the system, which may result in only moving impact into areas less likely reached[*]A number of divers have already deviated from the main line to the Crossover Tunnel without recognizing the navigational error (validated by personal letters sent to the Park)[*]The current guideline configuration in Peacock Springs is not consist with other caves in Florida[/list:63d454707b]
[*]Conservation Issues

1. The line placements across Pothole sink is 8' or better above the floor. Cave divers running a gap reel at this location are not impacting the cave.
2. A negative impact to more distant sections of the cave is more likely with the current line configuration than before.
3. The impact on community/park from increased fatalities vs. the impact on the cave in an isolated area should also be considered by the line committee.

[/list:63d454707b]

All guidelines, line placement, and cave traffic affect the conservation of any underwater cave system. By pulling the gold line to the surface and placing line 'T's in the system the committee is making the cave more assessable to inexperienced and unqualified divers.

Signed:
Johnny Richards
Larry Green
Debra Green
Michael O'Leary
Jeff Hunter
Gary Hoadley


Heather Choat
Dustin M. Clesi, Cave Instructor (Inactive), Owner-Steamboat Dive Inn, Branford
Ronald B. Carmichael, NACD Instructor & owner, Splash Dive Center, Inc. of Alexandria, VA
Lara Hinderstein
Mike McKay CDS 53194
Dave Manning, (NACD CA1614)
Wendy Shirah
James Pate
Cristiana Ghiazza (NACD 4260)
Rick Murcar I-152
Kevin L. Jones
Cristian Pittaro
Jeff Bauer
Amani Ramahi, OH
Richard Kaplan, OH
Brett Stokes, FL
Jerry R. Nuss
Jerry Finkel
Robert Laird
William L. Huth
Michael M. Menard NSS-CDS # 6451
Bill Lester NAUI IT #39010 • NACD #IN-41 • TDI #9449 • DAN #11947
Eric Osking
James Pickar
David W. Rhea
Crystal Rygersberg
Matt Myers

[Genesis]

Strongly disagree with the following:

1(a)

Less-strongly disagree, yet still disagree, with 1(b) and 1(c)

Reasoning follows:

2(a) - Unproven assertion. Proof by assertion doesn't wash in a real debate. There is no statistical evidence behidn this; the recent fatalities involving jump/gaps and "T"s have all had other preceeding factors that were radical violations of basic cavediving safety rules, rendering the contribution of this particular issue to the event questionable at best. Second, with regards to 1(a), this assertion is almost certainly patently false - in a zero-vis exit you're far more likely to succeed with ONE line to follow rather than the probable spider web that will be present (remember, its not just YOUR skill - its everyone else in the system at the same time!)

2(c) - Misplaced assertion without evidence. Moving lines back into the cavern zone or beyond will cause MUCH more erosion of the walls of the cave near the entrance from placements. Every placement causes erosion, no matter how slight. Ditto on jumps or gaps where placements are necessary - I've not seen, however, the exact placement of the complaints in 1(b) and 1(c), so can't comment specifically on them, only in the general sense.

2(d) - Clearly not true - there has been at least one other thread on CDF in which strong objections have been voiced to this proposal. Please do not make a claim that there is unity of position on the matter - there is not.

3(a) - Line placement should NEVER be set forth with a goal of forcing drills - rather, the sole criteria should be (1) safety, and (2) cave conservation, in that order.

3(b) - If you can't stay off the bottom how did you pass Intro? Address the problem within the agencies and their instructors - if a problem exists - rather than applying crutches.

3(c) - If you can't navigate, stay ouf of overheads. Line and cave referencing is a basic - not advanced - cavediving skill - so says all the books and classes. Again, see the 3(a) criticism.

3(d) - Huh? Jackson Blue and Little River come to mind, other than the "line to open water" issue. Second, the penetration distance limit claim is questionable - you can go way up the Peanut line without jumping - so the arguement that Intro divers (who don't carry a few extra spools) are actually limited by the gap is questionable at best.

4(a) - Any gap that requires placements (and any SECOND reel placed on the SAME gap is likely to, even if the original does not) causes erosion in the cave. Avoiding this in heavily trafficked areas is a legitimate conservation goal, as with 1(a).

4(b) - If you can't stay off the bottom.....

4(c) - A raw appeal to emotion with nothing to back it up; specifically, an allegation that "increased fatalities" will occur is an argument without basis. Show us any fatality directly traced to this sort of thing (tertiary factors don't count - once you've screwed up 400 different ways, the 401st is pretty far down the relavence list and absent it the victim would almost certainly still be dead.)

Anyway, my 2 cents.

I disagree less with the "T" and Gap than the move of the lines inside the cavern zone.

What I do strongly disagree with in all cases is appeals to emotion without facts behind them to attempt to drive a change in policy.

That this petition resorts to such appeals says, to me at least, that the underlying facts do not support the position taken and thus there is an underlying motive that is not in conformance with the prime goals of the UTC - that is, (1) safety and (2) conservation, in that order.

Neither Peacock nor any other public lands exist for the purpose of providing a forum for the profit-making enterprises of instructors and shops. While Peacock is open for such activity that does not make the UTC answerable to the desires of instructors any more than all other users of the resource.

IMHO the UTC's goal should first be safety; in order to address debate to the issue of safety you must first show how safety will be improved by presentation of facts (not claims of "increased fatalities" where none have occurred.) The practice of NOT running primaries which often comes with having the lines in the cavern zone (see Ginnie - how many primaries do you count there other than classes on an average day?) is clearly more hazardous than having a permanent "primary", and does not prevent anyone from running their own for skills practice. Further, that a spiderweb of primary lines could turn into a disaster during a zero-vis exit is a given.

Therefore, I believe that recommendation 1(a) is directly contrary to the prime directive of the UTC.

The second goal should be conservation of the resource. It is inescapable that any line placement to natural formations does permanent damage to the cave due to contact with the cave surface. Therefore, all things being equal, the recommendation of 1(a) is also in direct conflict with this part of the prime directive.

As for 1(b) and 1(c), the actual evidence presented supports leaving them alone, given the inescapable fact that placements cause cave erosion. Therefore, in order to support 1(b) and 1(c) one must show actual safety improvements from those changes - without resorting to unsupported emotional appeals.

IMHO, of course.

(No, you can't add my name to this, but in all fairness, if you're going to present the petition, you should present this counter-point as well. IMHO again, of course.)

[BobK]

I understood the original reason for having the gold line back beyond open water was to reduce the "attractive nuisance" hazard - OW divers would be tempted to follow the line. Peacock no longer allows OW divers, so it makes it real tough for them to follow the line at this point.
We train for things such as running a primary line because it is necessary, as most cave systems require a primary to complete a continuous guideline to open water. When a system already has that line in place it is simply not necessary to run a line. Making a leap from that fact to declare that cave divers will all suddenly forget what they are supposed to be doing is quite a stretch. Most of the cave systems in the area still require a primary, few divers, probably none, dive exclusively in the Peacock system. IMO, I think it's a non-issue.

[John L.]

I have to agree with the instuctors. When I was learning cavern and intro, it wasn't a cakewalk to set the primary, maintain bouyancy, use placements, etc. I, like alot of beginners at the time were struggling with the reel, bouncing off the ceiling, or was too negative trying to set the primary, and burning alot of air doing so. I have excellent trim and bouyancy now, but it did'nt suddenly happen. It took lots and lots of dives, and experience building. I feel that you can become complacent if you don't practice your skills. I know that if I have not used a reel in awhile for a jump, or primary, It don't go near as smooth as if you used it all the time, and you are saying to yourself "damn, that was a sloppy jump, I need to do it more". If you go diving all the time and not set primaries, do visual jumps etc., are you going to be polished enough to do the drills you need in a total siltout, or light failure? I don't think so.

[OFG-1]

Greetings, and HUH?

Have you guys seen Peacock on the weekends? How many primary reels do you want from daylight to the main line?

I am old enough to remember when the perm. line in Devils was past the keyhole. I have seen 3 reels in, and I was running a fourth. Picture 4 lines running through the lips.

Same at Peacock. The main line used to be at the bottom of the restriction. I have gone up the Peanut line to avoid multiple reels into the main line. And the Peanut line was way, way back, 300' or so. That was when you could go in at Olsen to avoid the crowd.

Unless training standards have changed (and they probably have) how many instructors teach exiting with several reels into the same place? Take your students, install 3 reels, have them run a fourth, have an assistant remove 2 of the three original (naturally you want two dive teams to pass you on the way out just for realism) and then have the student remove their reel. Now that's entertainment. Try a no light drill with 3 or 4 reels originating from the mainline going different directions to the surface. Up the restriction at Peacock with 4 lines in the dark? What fun. Have an assistant install a reel or two over your students. Then have the student reel out. Yee HA

As far as the Tees are concerned, if we were to adopt and teach uniform
methods of marking them, it would be better. I have no objection to removing all of them, and gapping everything. But don't tell me about safety. Even very experienced divers can miss a gap and swim off into the great beyond. (anyone else old enough to remember Bill Hurst?)

As far as "inexperienced" divers are concerned, don't certify them. If they are bad, refund their money, advise them to take up golf. We have constructed a system of incremental steps to be "full cave" certified over the last 20 or so years. However, the simple fact is you cannot stop anyone from diving beyond their level of certification, or more so, their skill level. Never have been able to. Never will.

With no intent to be smartass, a first for me, and with the greatest respect for the instructors of NSS-CDS, GUE, and of course, NACD, (We know you guys are getting rich teaching, just look at John Orlowski's fancy truck ) if you don't like the line placement , find somplace else to go. Take YOUR students to some place that you, as instructor, deem more suitable for your training needs.
You go to Peacock because its easy access and cheap.

[DogDiver]

I fully agree with this position. As a NAUI OW instructor, training is everything!!! Ken Anderson

[Moonfuzzy]

I agree with most of what Genesis has said, and disagree with most of the points listed in the petition above. I really hope that these counterpoints are brought up in the meeting.

And the Peanut line was way, way back, 300' or so.

If the line started 300' back, then I must have had 295' of line on my primary one day, because I had to add a jump/gap reel to reach the main line!

Russell

[oms121]

I completely disagree with the petition and feel that the points made were spurious at best. There are plenty of opportunities throughout the popular caves in FL where you must/should run a primary and countless jumps and gaps where you can "practice" those skills. In addition, those serious about their skill development can always practice in pools or OW.

Regardless of where the permanent line starts, instructors, students and those who really care about practicing their reel skills can still run a primary or gap/jump in addition to the existing permanent line.

In very popular caves such as Devils, LR and Peacock, the volume of traffic and the CF of line placement (not a good reason to enforce more lines) especially on weekends and holidays is insane. Recognize the reality that these are called popular caves for a reason and make the gold line extend close to the entrance.

Even without extended lines, connected jumps, etc. people have been going too far too fast as is painfully obvious from the condition of the caves. At worst, having the line extended 75 ft will only get those divers another 150 ft into the cave.

I applaud the training agencies concern over both the level of initial training and the need for ongoing practice over time, but Idon't believe that cutting the lines back is the answer.

If people aren't willing to practice their skills or if OW divers or others who lack sufficient training decide to follow those lines, that is a personal decision and we cannot control or protect those with no judgment.

Mark

[OFG-1]

And the Peanut line was way, way back, 300' or so.

If the line started 300' back, then I must have had 295' of line on my primary one day, because I had to add a jump/gap reel to reach the main line!

Russell

Russell, somewhere in the late 70's, early 80's reels shrunk. I have a original Martz pattern reel that holds 450'. The crank handle broke and I don't dive it anymore. It was heavy (I have the aluminum version, not the plexi version with the bouyancy chamber), clunky, and a pain in the a**.