Should I log these dives or not?

[Aquatic Eagle]

Exactly, altho I always thought it was 20 ft for 20 minutes. My computer has hours of time at 9-15 ft. I don't log all my dives like that unless there was something neat that I wanted to remember, but I say 25 ft counts and you're on scuba equip, so who's to tell you that it's not REALLY a dive?

NAUI defines a scuba dive as either minimum of 20 ft for 15 mins. or 15 ft for 20 mins. Can't remember which it is, I'd have to check my standards and policies but as long as it fits that criteria....log it. I think it's the 20 ft for 15 minutes.

 

[LoneWolf]

Thanks for your input. God, I love this board. I think I am going to log all my dives there. After all, Julie is right, we all want the biggest log possible That sounds really bad. Vettster, thanks for the offer, I sent you a PM. Also, rmediver you have a good point, and I'm not just saying that because you are a fellow soldier. If I can master my buoyancy in that shallow water then the deeper dives should be a piece of cake in that respect. Afterall, who wants to waste a couple dives on a $1,000 scuba trip relearning buoyancy?

Once again, thank you all.

 

[ygthad]

I am currently living in Mexico City working at the US Embassy. I go on a big scuba trip about every 6 months. As you all know 6 months of no diving can make you a bit rusty in certain areas, especially buoyancy. I have been looking for somewhere nearby that I can PRACTICE a couple times a month. Veracruz and Acapulco are a 3-4 hour drive so I would most likely need to get a hotel, and hire a dive boat, and the diving in those places is just OK. I'd rather save my money for big dive trips.

Anyway, I think I found a place. It is called Las Estacas and it is a one hour drive and is in Cuernavaca. It is a river and lagoon that is fed by a natural spring so the water is crystal clear. They shot some Tarzan movies there in the 50's. Apparantly several people practice their diving in the lagoone there.

Now my question. While the lagoon is crystal clear and beautiful it is only about 25 feet deep. That will be sufficient for me to keep up on my basic skills but should I log those dives? If I do then my log book is going to be filled up with 25 foot dives.

What would you do?

Yes I think you should log all your dives.

 

[R_Deluca]

You should log those dives. I also do a few 20-30ft dives a month to practice bouyancy and emergency drills. Logging these dives lets you keep track of the things you have practiced and the things you need to improve on.

Safe Diving!

 

[SterlingDiver]

It sounds like you have a real opportunity to work on your skills, even if it is in shallow water.

Good Diving!

 

[IslandHopper]

I always figure that if I am breathing through SCUBA equipment and I am underwater, then it is a loggable dive (of course I could put anything I want in a logbook ... it's mine.)

I log lots of dives where I never get below 10' .... we have lots shallow reefs here and can get many nice photos at those depths !

And like has been said earlier ... bouyancy controll is harder at shallow depths anyway, so you certainly gain more bouyancy skill during those shallow dives than you do at 50 feet.

 

[MikeFerrara]

I've seen several references to minimum times or depth that are required befor a dive can be loged. In your own book there are no rules. Agencies have minimum depth, time and/or gas usage requirements for what can count as a training dive but you're not bound by those standards.

I put anything that might be useful later in my log. I don't include some things like pool time in my count of dives but I may make notes in the book about something I did in the pool. As others have pointed out a log book is a tool for you to use so use it how you want. The other purpose it can serve is to document experience so you might set some guid lines for yourself so as not to be misleading.

 

[Bob]

I've seen several references to minimum times or depth that are required befor a dive can be loged. In your own book there are no rules. Agencies have minimum depth, time and/or gas usage requirements for what can count as a training dive but you're not bound by those standards.

I put anything that might be useful later in my log. I don't include some things like pool time in my count of dives but I may make notes in the book about something I did in the pool. As others have pointed out a log book is a tool for you to use so use it how you want. The other purpose it can serve is to document experience so you might set some guid lines for yourself so as not to be misleading.

To me, depth is not an issue, but time is. I was diving in Key Largo about a month ago and on the second dive, for some reason, my ears wouldn't clear. I hung at 8' for 5 minutes and still couldn't clear. I ended the dive, but didn't log it. I did make a notation in my log that I attempted a dive, but couldn't clear. To me, "dives" like my example, don't qualify as a bonafide dive. I do not belive in padding my dive log almtree: Bob

 

[MikeFerrara]

To me, depth is not an issue, but time is. I was diving in Key Largo about a month ago and on the second dive, for some reason, my ears wouldn't clear. I hung at 8' for 5 minutes and still couldn't clear. I ended the dive, but didn't log it. I did make a notation in my log that I attempted a dive, but couldn't clear. To me, "dives" like my example, don't qualify as a bonafide dive. I do not belive in padding my dive log almtree: Bob

I don't believe in padding a log either. Sometimes though more experience is gained on a very short dive that's aborted than on a very long dive where everything goes right. In one case you learned and gained obvious experience managing a problem and in the other you just spent time breathing underwater doing what you've done before. Which is more worthy of log space?

I had a cave dive once get screwy right off the bat and on top of that we had a primary light failure right after tieing into the main line. While the dive was really short it's in my log book and it's not for the purpose of padding my count of cave dives.

In fact if I just do a dive and there isn't anything remarkable about it and nothing that would be needed for reference later, why make the effort to write anything at all?

When I look back at my log I see that in the beginning I loged dives but lost a lot of useful info. I started a dive once and my buddy had a free flow during the descent. It was pretty eventful for a couple of minutes but at the time I didn't think I should have loged it. Now I think I should have loged that attempt but skipped killing trees over the successful dive that followed.
My point is that deciding what purpose the log is to serves determines what we put in it.

 

[Charlie99]

... I hung at 8' for 5 minutes and still couldn't clear. I ended the dive, but didn't log it. I did make a notation in my log that I attempted a dive, but couldn't clear. To me, "dives" like my example, don't qualify as a bonafide dive. I do not belive in padding my dive log Bob

There are really 2 things being discussed --- 1) what to record in your logbook, and 2) what "counts" as a dive for purposes such as meeting the minimum number of dives required for DM or instructor certification.

I agree that your aborted dive shouldn't "count" as a dive towards some minimum required number of dives.

However, the circumstances surrounding a dive that you aborted is probably one of the more useful things you can record in your logbook for future reference.