What Responsibilities do Dive Operation Have?

[erichK]

I could be wrong here, from a legal issue interpretation, but I believe it is irresponsible and contrary to professional conduct to voluntarily place someone at risk, even when permission is given by client. Any lawyers want to comment? I understand no one wants increased liability. This ultimately has a trickle effect on everyone. I think it was you who pointed it out.

Is it too much to ask that charters take divers to an appropriate dive site based on C-card qualification, log book, or personal knowledge? And to have guides follow the same basic principles. In fact, this is the core of our disagreement, I believe by their actions they have in fact assumed some responsibility. They just don't want to be held accountable - at all, when everyone contributed to a bad decision I know, I know, it costs money. A diver turned down for a trip is money not made, is the position of some. While others do great without the need to compromise integrity.

It’s a fine balancing act holding liability at bay, and as a result having to defend questionably negligent behavior on the part of a few, that if allowed to fester could pose a bigger problem. Again, abstract, usually not black and white case, and pointing no fingers at anyone here.

Specifically in regards to the incident being discussed:

I say the divers didn’t do too bad on this one, with the exception of perhaps to have preferably chosen to distrust expert professional advise and skip the dive. Again, people do rely to varying extent on expert professional advise. Kind of their reason for being, otherwise, what good are pro's for? What do we pay them for? Guidance is one of the reasons.

I also say the pro’s and/or leaders screwed this one up, to use a slang expression - royally.

We appear to have an insurmountable difference of opinion over the question of assigning responsibility. Unless a new twist emerges here, I don’t think re-stating essentially the same points from a new perpective is going to change your minds, or mine. Its been a good discussion. Feel free to continue to express your point or refute mine.

You've contributed a concise and to-the-point summation of the central issues in the discussion, which I like even better because your impression of who scewed up worse is similar to mine . Obviously, we do not have all the facts, but this *impression* is certainly warranted by the information given (again, it's good to check the original, instructor's area "Dangerous Dive or...thread).

Those panicked at the mention of regulation, please do review what I actually wrote. First and formeost, I expect governments to take some *responsibility* in return for the tax dollars they already collect from our sport. Such as access steps at really popular dive sites like the Victoria BC breakwater, where one of our club divers broke her foot. Are any of you against the regular inspection of dive boats, compressors and operating equipment?

Complusory reporting of serious accidents/injuries is surely also a good idea. And I used airline briefings simply as an example of a regulation checklist- based briefing. Of course our eyes glass over after too many of these, but don't you also make a note of the nearest exit? Items like current at depth and bailout procedures could be similar.

As far as the expiry of certification is concerned, isn't the need for some such system pretty obvious for aging/very infrequent divers (and drivers?) And not all that onerous. There are already refresher courses of various types, which could easily be formalized (much like the 1 day refresher/relicencing course First Aid/CPR course one must take every three years to keep[ one's certification. I could have saved a lot of time and money by continuing to use my 1968 OW Cert instead of doing it all over again in 1981, and yet again in 2002,,,and also might not be here to iritate you all! ;-}

P.S. I'd be offended by some of the angry assumptions about my attitudes, dive ability, fitness, etc. if they weren't so far off the mark. Just for the record, I work out hard and regularly to stay in shape (though I can't help my age), and my little family would give you an earful about how "fanatical" I am about equipment cleaning and maintenance, pool and OW prep and research before dive trips, as well as continual training and upgrading of skills. I'm no expert, but do my best to dive safely. I've been on many unguided dives. I've had a few mishaps, but always found a safe way out. If I screw up, I take reponsibility for it, in diving or any other time. BUT I do expect fair warning of dangerous or pecular conditions and situations and always appreciate any extra help, guidance or care that DM's and operators may provide.

 

[SDAnderson]

Those panicked at the mention of regulation, please do review what I actually wrote. First and formeost, I expect governments to take some *responsibility* in return for the tax dollars they already collect from our sport. Such as access steps at really popular dive sites like the Victoria BC breakwater, where one of our club divers broke her foot. Are any of you against the regular inspection of dive boats, compressors and operating equipment?

First off, let me clarify something: I'm not panicked at the mention of regulation - I am, however, deeply troubled by this proposed intrusion into my affairs and a little angry with those who would so blithely undertake to deprive me of my own personal authority and responsibility.

Do you really think that the government is going to take on new responsibilities without increasing taxation? How can they? Second, where would you draw the line for these new responsibilities? You want them to take responsibility for inspecting and maintaining dive sites, but how far are you prepare for them to get involved? You cite dive boats, compressors and "operating equipment" (not certain what that is), would you extend this to your personal equipment? To your personal skills?​

Complusory reporting of serious accidents/injuries is surely also a good idea. And I used airline briefings simply as an example of a regulation checklist- based briefing. Of course our eyes glass over after too many of these, but don't you also make a note of the nearest exit? Items like current at depth and bailout procedures could be similar.

Why is compulsory reporting of serious accidents/injuries a good idea? What benefits are we going to enjoy and at what costs? The level of voluntary cooperation with organizations like DAN is high, what benefit (and at what cost) would there be to altering the status quo? As to briefings, as you point out yourself, we have learned that the vast majority of people don't listen to airline briefings. The dimmies out there aren't going to listen to them no matter what and I didn't have to take a class to certify me as an airline passenger to know to check where the nearest two exits are and not to wear synthetic fabrics, so what possible justification can their be for creating yet another federal beauracracy to force charter operators to brief a government mandated grocery list of information? Are we going to expand NOAA so that they will be able to provide "current at depth" information? Ditto with bailout procedures - that was covered in class, shouldn't need to be covered again and won't be listened to even if it is, so how do you justify the intrusion in the absence of a benefit.​

As far as the expiry of certification is concerned, isn't the need for some such system pretty obvious for aging/very infrequent divers (and drivers?) And not all that onerous. There are already refresher courses of various types, which could easily be formalized (much like the 1 day refresher/relicencing course First Aid/CPR course one must take every three years to keep[ one's certification. I could have saved a lot of time and money by continuing to use my 1968 OW Cert instead of doing it all over again in 1981, and yet again in 2002,,,and also might not be here to iritate you all! ;-}

I'm not going to argue against continuing or refreshing training periodically - I think it's a terrific idea. The training agencies, however, have done a demonstrably good job of substantially increasing diver safety and reducing the incidence of diver accidents with their existing programs and my confidence in their interest and ability to handle standards far exceeds my confidence in yet another government agency to do the same. Divers that need retraining have plenty of opportunites to obtain it - and the world doesn't need anymore government sponsored feel-good jingles on the television.​

P.S. I'd be offended by some of the angry assumptions about my attitudes, dive ability, fitness, etc. if they weren't so far off the mark. Just for the record, I work out hard and regularly to stay in shape (though I can't help my age), and my little family would give you an earful about how "fanatical" I am about equipment cleaning and maintenance, pool and OW prep and research before dive trips, as well as continual training and upgrading of skills. I'm no expert, but do my best to dive safely. I've been on many unguided dives. I've had a few mishaps, but always found a safe way out. If I screw up, I take reponsibility for it, in diving or any other time. BUT I do expect fair warning of dangerous or pecular conditions and situations and always appreciate any extra help, guidance or care that DM's and operators may provide.[/QUOTE]

This is a little snarky, but we all appreciate any extra help, guidance or care that DM's may provide. The question is, are you willing to pay for it? If you are, all you need to do is open your wallet and ask - operators will be falling over themselves to provide you with whatever you need. If you aren't willing to pay for it, then please stop trying to stick the rest of us with the bill.​

 

[erichK]

Inspection/regulation of dive *operations* not *sites* is what I had in mind. But perhaps it would not be a bad idea to have some minimum standards. The example of Victoria BC's Ogden Point breakwater should serve. It is mentioned on many tourist sites and publications, there is a large dive shop and a big coffee shop on top of that, plus a dedicated parking lot, all doing a thriving business, and paying a fortune in taxes and fees to governments. There are underwater educational and informational placques galore and 5 prominent dive markers on the breakwater itself. Yet there is not even so much as a handrail, let alone a set of steel steps for exit/entry (which even the Cubans manage to provide). So one walks or staggers hundreds of yards along slippery granite block terracess in full drysuit, tanks, etc. or climbs/ scrambles down them, tring to avoid cuts from barnacles, and either chances breaking a foot or leg on a lower sheld in a stride jump out, or goes in backward, trying to avoid the kelp. If public facilities can be provided for launching boats, swimming and many other water sports, than why not ours?

In the case of the two divers who complained, and, btw, allege that their fellows, too, were very unhappy with the trip, the harbour authority had simply copped out with a "proceed at your own risk" warning that only a locally-familiar person could likely have understood the implications of. Whether it is regulations, standards or generally agreed guidalines, our sport and its needs deserves more recognition and consideration. Of course either of us could always go in and dive, ignoring any warnings, just as I can go in and swim when a beach or swim area is closed. I can always insist that as a former competitive swimmer, instructor, etc. I can take care of myself. But then I have been fully warned and am going at my own risk.

Part of the the problem is that diving is a relaxing leisure activity for some and an extreme sport for others...and everything in between. Just like hiking, which ranges from casual walks along well groomed paths to such exhausting scrambles as Dominica's Boiling Lake, there is quite a range, and it is difficult to grade exactly, but candidates surely have a right to a clear warning.

But maybe airline briefings are not such a good example...we never want the dive one's to get *that* canned and boring!

As far as extra help, it's certainly not hand-an-foot service that's being asked for, but some real interest and a helpful attitude are always appreciated..and we try to reward those, however possible.

As for recertification, I just don't feel that *most* licenses of any type should be for life. The technology and the whole sport changes too rapidly for that to make much sense.

 

[SDAnderson]

Inspection/regulation of dive *operations* not *sites* is what I had in mind. But perhaps it would not be a bad idea to have some minimum standards. The example of Victoria BC's Ogden Point breakwater should serve. It is mentioned on many tourist sites and publications, there is a large dive shop and a big coffee shop on top of that, plus a dedicated parking lot, all doing a thriving business, and paying a fortune in taxes and fees to governments. There are underwater educational and informational placques galore and 5 prominent dive markers on the breakwater itself. Yet there is not even so much as a handrail, let alone a set of steel steps for exit/entry (which even the Cubans manage to provide). So one walks or staggers hundreds of yards along slippery granite block terracess in full drysuit, tanks, etc. or climbs/ scrambles down them, tring to avoid cuts from barnacles, and either chances breaking a foot or leg on a lower sheld in a stride jump out, or goes in backward, trying to avoid the kelp. If public facilities can be provided for launching boats, swimming and many other water sports, than why not ours?

First, there is a repetitive theme running through your argument: that taxes are already being collected from our sport and that they should be sufficient to pay for the laundry list of regulations and improvements that you are asking for. You may not like the way your tax dollars are being spent but that money IS being spent. The notion that services can be increased without an incremental increase in tariffs is...delusional. That's not the way government budgets work.

I don't know how it works in BC, but around here, the money to pay for the launch sites and harbors comes from user fees, i.e., every time you launch a boat, dock a boat or fill a gas tank, you pay. One of the big gripes here is that the user fees the boaters pay greatly exceeds the expenses incurred in providing service to them, the fact of the matter is that the boaters are paying for the bike paths and other park facilities. In downtown Chicago a day pass for the launch ramp costs $20.00 and another $10.00 to $25.00 for parking. In sum, this sum is the answer to your "why not."​

In the case of the two divers who complained, and, btw, allege that their fellows, too, were very unhappy with the trip, the harbour authority had simply copped out with a "proceed at your own risk" warning that only a locally-familiar person could likely have understood the implications of.

First, that isn't the warning that was given. The original report said that the harbor master issued a warning to "proceed with extreme caution." In reality, even in Mexico, the local authorities will provide much more information than this undoubtably truncated version. Mark reported that the harbor probably should have been closed that day, obviously the harbor master disagreed - there has to be a grey area between bathtub conditions and storm tossed tempest. Second, I think the inability to understand what "proceed with extreme caution" means has less to do with locality than processor speed. This is the weakness of relying on others to watch out for you - the assumption that someone is responsible for protecting me, therefore it must be okay, therefore I can ignore the warning signs of trouble...this is the incident chain that gets people killed.​

Whether it is regulations, standards or generally agreed guidalines, our sport and its needs deserves more recognition and consideration. Of course either of us could always go in and dive, ignoring any warnings, just as I can go in and swim when a beach or swim area is closed. I can always insist that as a former competitive swimmer, instructor, etc. I can take care of myself. But then I have been fully warned and am going at my own risk.

As a certified diver, you have been fully warned and told to proceed only at your own risk. You have also been told that you need to familiarize yourself, hire a local guide and not to dive in conditions that exceed your ability. It's the same thing.​

Part of the the problem is that diving is a relaxing leisure activity for some and an extreme sport for others...and everything in between. Just like hiking, which ranges from casual walks along well groomed paths to such exhausting scrambles as Dominica's Boiling Lake, there is quite a range, and it is difficult to grade exactly, but candidates surely have a right to a clear warning.

Divers don't have just the right to ask - they have the responsibility to ask. Divers do NOT have the right to expect that everyone around them will take them by the hand, sit them down for a heart-to-heart, one-on-one chat and review their awareness of basic skills, general fitness, dive site conditions, and the weather followed by a campfire session of kumbaya before every dive.​

But maybe airline briefings are not such a good example...we never want the dive one's to get *that* canned and boring!

As far as extra help, it's certainly not hand-an-foot service that's being asked for, but some real interest and a helpful attitude are always appreciated..and we try to reward those, however possible.

As for recertification, I just don't feel that *most* licenses of any type should be for life. The technology and the whole sport changes too rapidly for that to make much sense.

You don't have a license to dive - you have a certification that says you received X training and that, on Y date, you demonstrated that you possessed the knowledge and skills. It's up to you to keep that information and those skills up to date.​

 

[getwet2]

The example of Victoria BC's Ogden Point breakwater should serve. It is mentioned on many tourist sites and publications, there is a large dive shop and a big coffee shop on top of that, plus a dedicated parking lot, all doing a thriving business, and paying a fortune in taxes and fees to governments. There are underwater educational and informational placques galore and 5 prominent dive markers on the breakwater itself. Yet there is not even so much as a handrail, let alone a set of steel steps for exit/entry (which even the Cubans manage to provide). So one walks or staggers hundreds of yards along slippery granite block terracess in full drysuit, tanks, etc. or climbs/ scrambles down them, tring to avoid cuts from barnacles, and either chances breaking a foot or leg on a lower sheld in a stride jump out, or goes in backward, trying to avoid the kelp. If public facilities can be provided for launching boats, swimming and many other water sports, than why not ours?

As for recertification, I just don't feel that *most* licenses of any type should be for life. The technology and the whole sport changes too rapidly for that to make much sense.

So if one decides on their own to attempt to walk over these obstacle and does indeed break their leg or crack their head open, how does this concern anyone but the person who was foolish enough to attempt it? (Except maybe the paramedics who now have to go help this foolish person.) I hear there are ropes and ladders laid out all the way up Mount Everest, does that mean we should all go give it a try. It comes down to people taking some responsibility for their own safety and deciding for themselves what is safe and what is not and living with the choice they made. Maybe the people making all the money at said site should get after the local government for stairs or splurge and get the neccessary permits for the stairs and put them in out of their own pocket, after all they'd be making even more money if they made access to the sites easier. The sites might suffer in the end but what the heck it's easy to get to! Here's another idea though, if it's that difficult get a boat!

As for the certifications, if you feel that strongly about recertification and keeping your skills up go back to what I said in my earlier post. Decide what you are going to do about your own situation and where you live and go do it for yourself, on your own don't b***h and complain about what you feel the government should do about it and wait for them to force you.

 

[erichK]

So if one decides on their own to attempt to walk over these obstacle and does indeed break their leg or crack their head open, how does this concern anyone but the person who was foolish enough to attempt it? (Except maybe the paramedics who now have to go help this foolish person.) I hear there are ropes and ladders laid out all the way up Mount Everest, does that mean we should all go give it a try.

The problem is precisely that the Ogden Point breakwater is widely publicized as an easy dive. (And it is...once you get underwater.) No one's going to claim that about Mt. Everest. My complaint is essentially that diving is treated like a marginal pursuit for a few daredevils, rather than the popular and relatively safe sport that it has become. If the Cuban government can put in steel steps at Playa Giron, then the relevant authorities could surely do it atn this breakwater. Maybe they'd charge a looney (Canadian dollar coin) to defray the cost/upkeep.

It is not "the government" that issues first aid certificates, but the Red Cross, St. John's and a number of other certifying agencies. And they seem to have agreed that periodic /refreshement/updating/recertification is necessary.

 

[getwet2]

The certificate I was refering to was the dive cert not the first aid.

Because the majority of people do not use first aid on a regular bases the first aid cert is refreshed every so often, I believe, do to someone elses butt being on the line not your own. An employer or a life guard for example, it's called due deligence, so they can prove that you are trained and up to date. You don't necessarily need it to perform first aid unless you are in a postion that leagally requires you to have it.

Mind you, there are some people out there that might take it upon themselves to get it for their own interests. A babysitter! They learn it because first, it will help them get the jobs and second, they also want to be prepared just incase an emergency should present itself, which leads us back to people taking resposibility for your own actions, being trained as best they can for unexpected circumstances and knowing well enough when to make the judgement call not to do something that could put them in harms way. Only one person knows what your limits are and that person is you. We all choose to try new things and expand our knowledge, some by training and some by trial and error. You can choose what way suits you best but just don't blame someone else when it's the latter of the two and things don't quite work out the way you thought they were going to. It's also a cop-out, at least in this situation, to suggest that someone else take responsibility for your safety, you are on this board talking about it, so it seems to me that they did their job.

Thats just the way I see it!

KNOW YOUR LIMIT, DIVE WITHIN IT!

 

[erichK]

The certificate I was refering to was the dive cert not the first aid.

Because the majority of people do not use first aid on a regular bases the first aid cert is refreshed every so often, I believe, do to someone elses butt being on the line not your own. An employer or a life guard for example, it's called due deligence, so they can prove that you are trained and up to date. You don't necessarily need it to perform first aid unless you are in a postion that leagally requires you to have it.

Mind you, there are some people out there that might take it upon themselves to get it for their own interests. A babysitter! They learn it because first, it will help them get the jobs and second, they also want to be prepared just incase an emergency should present itself, which leads us back to people taking resposibility for your own actions, being trained as best they can for unexpected circumstances and knowing well enough when to make the judgement call not to do something that could put them in harms way. Only one person knows what your limits are and that person is you. We all choose to try new things and expand our knowledge, some by training and some by trial and error. You can choose what way suits you best but just don't blame someone else when it's the latter of the two and things don't quite work out the way you thought they were going to. It's also a cop-out, at least in this situation, to suggest that someone else take responsibility for your safety, you are on this board talking about it, so it seems to me that they did their job.

Thats just the way I see it!

KNOW YOUR LIMIT, DIVE WITHIN IT!

You have a very good point here...but the reality is that those of us who live in places like Saskatoon, Canada, also end up--unless we really love, muck and ice diving-- being at best occasional divers. And how can we really know the conditions that will occur and the special skills that will be needed in a Fiji or Mediterranean Dive. We try and read up and ask, try to stay in shape and subject our expensive equipment to muck and chlorine to get in shape, but ultimately it is often only the actual diving, and sometimes a really well-though out and prepared briefing that will tell us if thr particular dive/site/dive routine is something we feel comfortable or even safe with.

We dove Dominica (Souffrier Bay with Nature Isdland Dive) and then Saba (with Sea Saba) this past Christmas vacation. The first was fantastic, easy and comfortable. The second sometimes a real hassle. Diving conditions (water temp, visibility, depths, etc were quite similar and never a problem, but the operators and their attitudes, the dive routines and obviously stressed DM's were not. I felt *much* safer in the first situation than in the second, partly because, decades ago, I worked some years with a large ambulance service and have become very aware of the conditions under which accidents tend to happen: when people are in a hurry, tired, pissed off with the boss or work and just plain stressed.

What are we, or the couple at the start of this thread to do then? It's your annual chance to dive, to keep up your skills as well as enjoy the experience, you've spent thousands of dollars on travel, and likely thousands more on a dive package, or at the very least reserved space and signed a contract to use it (read the fine print!). The operator then does his or her best to fill as many places as possible and discharge that obligation, always conscious of the bottom line. When my wife found the violently rocking boat between dives was too much for her and told them she was skipping a day, and then spent another hiking, I got told off to the extent that I ended up doing a rather mundane night dive I didn't really want.

The couple that complained may have been in worse shape than they should have been, or one of them may have had ear or other problems on the way down. (Where they really warned about the need to get down quickly?) However, I started this thread because, in my own experience, dive briefings are often inadequate especially because they don't start with any real questioning of basic assumptions on both sides, because operators are often in too much of a hurry to really notice/bother with the particularities of the divers they group, and because the main issue for some on the instructors' thread seemed to be amortizing operating costs and avoiding *taking responsibility* in order to avoid liability, rather than real concern over the safety of this couple (and, apparently, other divers in this group).

To get back to your point, in Metro Tronto Ambulance services, even people who use their first aid and CPR skills daily were required to regularly refresh. Most of them found that there was always something new to learn. I still insist that certification should require periodic renewal, through a refresher course every few years, and a whole new course, or at least most of it, after a decade or so. Or through the continual upgrading my family and I try to do. We can't both admit that diving is a dangerous sport and at the same time accept a situation in which operators will allow someone to use a thirty or forty year old C card and plunk them onto the boat to be our buddy!

 

[Scuba]

I read the other related thread. I see very little, from dive professionals, beyond the same attitude and position displayed here, that responsibility entirely falls upon the diver - none on them.

Aside from some of the duties of the dive captain and a mention of the existance of dive briefing standards, in a forum where there is no shortage of dive pro’s, no one has directly addressed the question and issues posed in the title of this thread. What Responsibilities do Dive Operations ( and operators in various capacity ) Have? There is much talk of the responsibilities others have. Ironic? And almost zero, zilch, nada, big fat nothing, about responsibilities incumbent on those acting in their capacity as professionals in the performance of their duties. Possible errors in judgment and actions by dive professionals to an outcome are to be absolved of all responsibility, not accounted as contributing factors, and not considered for investigation of possible negligence. This seems to me is the predominant position being expressed. Not a good reflection of a profession - or its members, so apparently obssessed with assigning responsibility. I'm assuming we have a representative sample here, and naturally, some do accept responsibility in the exercise of their duties.

Let’s clear the air, if it’s still possible. Disregard the responsibility issue for a moment.

Are there - and if so - what are, the minimum standards of practice professionals are obligated to exercise in the discharge of their duties in order to maintain license in good status as per agency regulations, in regards to:

Inquiring about dive skills, experience, and certification level of divers taken on a dive trip or guided tour.

Appropriately matching divers to dive sites.

Appropriately matching known dive conditions to guided divers.

Standards of care to be exercised while guiding.

Dive briefings standards.

Upholding licensing agency training and recommended safety guidelines denoted by C-card, in the absence of subsequent known development.

It has been mentioned there are standards for dive briefings. Care to expand MikeFerrara?

There are many operations and operators who do a wonderful job of due common sensible diligence in these matters as is evident from Hank49’s post and personal experience. The unanswered question so far is: Does this solely emanate from their personal character?

For example, in regards to an issue raised by erichK, some operators will not take a diver who can’t show a log book with recent dives. Forget exactly the time period, but about 6 months to a year, otherwise must take refresher course before going on dive trip. Granted, it’s not always easy to create fair standards. For example, an OW diver who has 30 dives in two years and has not dove in a couple or years, is quite different then a tech diver who’s been diving for 10 years and has hundreds or thousands of dives. But, reasonable accomodations are possible. This is especially important to protect those most in need. Divers who are a part of the dive community as much as anyone else. It’s about being proactive as opposed to reactive.

 

[Scuby Dooby]

ErichK,

It's been said before but I'll repeat again. If you are nervous and feel that you don't get enough experience at home or don't have the skills and confidence to enable you to make the dives on offer during your holidays then you should tell the shop you are diving with and either hire a DM / Instructor to work with you individually (babysit / hold your hand) or just skip the dives while you are there. You can propose all the regulations and as many industry standards as you like and it still won't solve this problem for you.