How to handle violation of a dive site rules (Solo Diving)

[Dr. Lecter]

However as an instructor and diver search and rescue team member, I need the pratice in body recovery.

No worries - overly confident and underprepared buddy "teams" abound. I would wager they're more likely--both as a matter of numbers and on a per-capita basis--to provide the raw materials for your training.

 

[Basking Ridge Diver]

I hear about dive sites becoming unavailable a lot more often than I hear about new ones opening up.

Generally - Bad news sells and spreads like wild fire... Good news does not sell and very few people tell those stories because everyone is waiting for the train wreck so they can watch...

There is a finite set of areas that are dive-able outside of the ocean and of those not every owner wants to open up their property for various reasons not just the insurance and lawsuits... We have a quarry in town that is fenced off - clear water and deep is what I am told - but the quarry uses this water for their own purposes - they cant be letting folks dive and be concerned about their safety because they need the water - but if you could convince them they could make more money on diving then crushing rock - I think they would change their minds...

 

[DaleC]

All dive certification agency proclaim the need for dive buddies with good reason...

What was that reason again?

 

[NAM001]

We have a site in my genreal area that has had i think they had a diver die like 4 years in a row. They are still open. That, I would guess, is because the site did everything the law required them to do. The deaths were most likely deemed diver fault. I say this because the nanny state proponents function from a position that it takes a village to do anything. That no one is responsible for them selves because its some one elses job. The nanny state will never ride box to the grave with **** ITS ***victoms. It feels it has done enough by taxing the one seater box from its conception to final occupancy and disposition. The nanny state phiolosophy is the problem that fosters poor decisions. and if anything distractions. The state has no legitimate intrest in any of our safetys. No site will not do anything other than what is absolutely required to protect thier liability, to do nmore than what is required is creating liability. That is why the card is checked at the gate and not the pier, Thats what the waiver is for,,, to get them off the hook. Once that is signed you can do what ever you want, because you agree to take the acountability for your actions. They (the shops) dont want to know about violations, cause they will have to do something about it and when doing so they loose customers. That looses cash flow and that is not wht business is about. The sites job is to provide a hole to dive in and paid services that are consumer safe. Not to insure that you dont violate a rule once you pass the checkpoint.

Diving is a self regulated sport that depends heavily on the integrity of those that engage in that activity. Its not the sites job to verrify you have air in your tank or your hoses are good or you dive with a buddy. It is thier job liability to insure that the diver is aware of the rules and agrees to the rules not follow the rules. Unless a site has a waiting line to get in you will see no interference from the owners. For those who believe that they need to report infractions then please tell me where the line is drawn in doing so. When i show up and you hear me saying i have 3150 in my tank and see that it is LP tank, do you tattle. When one enters the water and the other goes back to get his camera do you tattle for solo diving? If some one is solo and his isolator valve is not shut do you tattle. This attitude is totally misplaced as it belongs in situations where you are making 100 ft dives and knowingly allowing OW certified only's to do it. Yet the proponents of doing this all claim that its thier skills not the paper that counts. Preticularly when it comes to those thy certified. You cant have it both ways..... you cant turn your head to throwing a 10 looged dive OW into 100 ft of seawater off a boat and then cry foul because someone does not have a pony bottle in a 30 ft quarry or lake.

If you cant hold an OW diver to thier training level restrictions how can you hold anyone else to thiers or the sites.

 

[mrdre]

...Once that is signed you can do what ever you want, because you agree to take the acountability for your actions....

Mmmm.... not always.. If one dives (and dies) in some neutral waters in the ocean, then yes. But if the diver gets into accident in some local quarry, then there is a rescue team (which is often paid by public money) is sent to rescue him/her. Then it's the search and recovery team (paid by public money) is sent to recover the body. Would you prefer the relatives be sent a bill for all these expenses? Moreover the dive spot might be closed for a while, so the businesses who make money off of it lose money. So, if it comes out of the public pocket, then the public has full right to regulate the dive site to minimize the losses. Every rescue and recovery costs money and whoever pays is right to set the rules.

 

[Dr. Lecter]

So, if it comes out of the public pocket, then the public has full right to regulate the dive site to minimize the losses. Every rescue and recovery costs money and whoever pays is right to set the rules.

You forget the public elected to undertake that task/financial burden - nobody put a gun to the State's head and said Thou Shalt Pay For All Rescues/Recoveries!

 

[NAM001]

There is nothing that does not fall ilnto the public arena. The answers to the questions is yes. Do you somehow thik that if you eat too many big macs and have a heart attack thta they dont bill the family? If you are going to pose an argument you need to stop making the exceptions the rule. I have never seen a site closed. Either you are blowing out of perportion isolated incidents or you are talking about sites that are not the sites normally used by the largeer diver population. If a site fails to check a cert and that person is not certed and dies,,,,, YES close them down. Send the bills to the family and let them get in line to sue the site. Since you believe the way you do.....Exp[lain Why sign a waiver????? When these public services are used for private areas the public service bills the private entity for use. So long as the site has paid thier taxes which as a business are pretty high they are entitled to those public services at the public expence.

You need to reread you coment.

You justified underqualified/uncertified divers diveing beyond thier training because thay are in NEUTRAL waters.
You have merged landowner liability with public liability.
You have put the accountability for the divers stupidity on all but the diver themself.
You have defined the real tradgedy as how it effects access to the dive site and those that profit or benifit from it as if a right has been taken away from you as a personal attack.

I dont get it. But there are those who spend thier day taking down license plates of speeders and non seat belt users.

Mmmm.... not always.. If one dives (and dies) in some neutral waters in the ocean, then yes. But if the diver gets into accident in some local quarry, then there is a rescue team (which is often paid by public money) is sent to rescue him/her. Then it's the search and recovery team (paid by public money) is sent to recover the body. Would you prefer the relatives be sent a bill for all these expenses? Moreover the dive spot might be closed for a while, so the businesses who make money off of it lose money. So, if it comes out of the public pocket, then the public has full right to regulate the dive site to minimize the losses. Every rescue and recovery costs money and whoever pays is right to set the rules.

 

[mrdre]

You forget the public elected to undertake that task/financial burden - nobody put a gun to the State's head and said Thou Shalt Pay For All Rescues/Recoveries!

Of course the public elected it, I didn't forget it. What are the alternatives? Let the diver rot in there? Wait until the relatives pay for the recovery? (I'm assuming the diver is dead - since nobody paid for the helicopter/car/rescuer's equipment/training) Wait until the volunteers pull him/her out? Place a sign "if you find a dead diver, please call this number"?

Of course sometimes rules and regulations are stupid, because it's hard to expect from lawmakers to know what is "safe" and what is not, especially when even professional divers argue all the time. For example the law in Laguna Beach, CA requires the divers (as part of "safe dive" requirement) to have a snorkel. Yet many (including myself) consider a snorkel actually a hazard if you swim through kelp. Yet, people died in Laguna. The city just tries to minimize the loss (at least financial) and is right doing so. The details of the rules can be worked out, though.

---------- Post added July 11th, 2014 at 06:58 PM ----------

There is nothing that does not fall ilnto the public arena. The answers to the questions is yes. Do you somehow thik that if you eat too many big macs and have a heart attack thta they done bill the family. If you are going to pose an argument you ned to stop making the exceptions the rule. I have never seen a site closed. Either you aer blowing out of perportion an isolwated incident or you are talking aites that are not the sites normally used. If a site fails to check a cert and that person is not certed and dies,,,,, YES close them down. Send the bills to the family and let them get in line to sue the site.

Actually, yeah.. they will send a bill.. and a person suppose to be insured. I'm not talking about closing the site permanently, but for the search/rescue/recovery time.

 

[NAM001]

I am going to make a guess here. Your last statement: Do you think there is an reasonable expectation to never be inconvienienced by the actions of others? I ask because as a society,,, we all agree to bear the burdon of the execution of the societies operations. We do this when ever ther is s highway accident. In regards to highway accidents, we all expect to have to deal with things when they go south. part of accident reduction (NOT IRADICATION) is drivers training and regulations. One must consider a safety program successful if you can create an environment that nearly eliminates accidents. The goals of such things are to reduce the events to a level that can be managed/responded to buy the public services.

Of course the public elected it, I didn't forget it. What are the alternatives? Let the diver rot in there? Wait until the relatives pay for the recovery? (I'm assuming the diver is dead - since nobody paid for the helicopter/car/rescuer's equipment/training) Wait until the volunteers pull him/her out? Place a sign "if you find a dead diver, please call this number"?

Of course sometimes rules and regulations are stupid, because it's hard to expect from lawmakers to know what is "safe" and what is not, especially when even professional divers argue all the time. For example the law in Laguna Beach, CA requires the divers (as part of "safe dive" requirement) to have a snorkel. Yet many (including myself) consider a snorkel actually a hazard if you swim through kelp. Yet, people died in Laguna. The city just tries to minimize the loss (at least financial) and is right doing so. The details of the rules can be worked out, though.

---------- Post added July 11th, 2014 at 06:58 PM ----------



Actually, yeah.. you they will send a bill.. and a person suppose to be insured. I'm not talking about closing the site permanently, but for the search/rescue/recovery time.

 

[Bob DBF]

Mmmm.... not always.. If one dives (and dies) in some neutral waters in the ocean, then yes. But if the diver gets into accident in some local quarry, then there is a rescue team (which is often paid by public money) is sent to rescue him/her. Then it's the search and recovery team (paid by public money) is sent to recover the body. Would you prefer the relatives be sent a bill for all these expenses?

I don't know where you live, but out here fire and rescue get paid regardless of whether or not they get out of the station.

You might get me on your side if I got my tax money back when the estate is charged for the rescue, but what are the chances of that. If you want privatize public services, do it to all of them, don't penalize just the people you don't agree with.


Bob
----------------
I may be old, but I'm not dead yet.