Golf Ball Diver Drowns in Florida

[Upstate Scuba OWI]

I searched Scuba Board and didn't see this posted anywhere else.
Deputies say golf ball diver drowned while trying to free himself

PASCO COUNTY, Fla. - A golf ball diver who drowned in a small pond in January may have been trapped in his equipment, according to a report released Monday by the Pasco County Sheriff's Office dive team.

David Voiles' body was found in a small lake just outside the Sherman Hill Golf and Country Club on January 3.
The dive team found that Voiles could not reach his regulator (breathing apparatus), which had gotten tangled in a line that lead to a nylon bag filled with approximately 500 golf balls, weighing 85 lbs.

The report suggests Voiles was trying to get at a knife when he ran out of breath.

Read more: Deputies say golf ball diver drowned while trying to free himself

[DandyDon]

Golf Ball Diver Missing - Florida

[dumpsterDiver]

Bummer! All the golf ball divers I knew did not wear BC's and wore a lot of lead and rubber snow boots instead of fins. A failure would require ditching the belt, the bag and a lot of arm swimming. I always wore a BC. Not sure why the diver would remove his regulator in that nasty water?

BTW: 500 balls weighs 50 lbs not 85 lbs... ask me how I know..

[Liquid Pleasure]

...BTW: 500 balls weighs 50 lbs not 85 lbs... ask me how I know..

Because 10 golf balls weigh 1 lb?

[cruiser]

Not sure why the diver would remove his regulator in that nasty water?

I'm thinking his regulator got snagged on his gear, and got pulled out of his mouth.

[JonKranhouse]

(Emphases added)

Diver's death ruled accidental drowning (from TBO.com)

By TONY HOLT | Hernando Today
Published: February 07, 2012; Updated: February 07, 2012 - 6:04 PM



BROOKSVILLE -- David Voiles was submerged in 8 feet of water and dragging a bag full of golf balls when his breathing apparatus was yanked from his mouth, deputies said.

His death was ruled an accident.

A dive team from the Pasco Sheriff's Office discovered Voiles' body the morning of Jan. 3 in a pond off Eagle Falls Drive.

Voiles, 43, a U.S. Army veteran, worked for Sherman Hills Golf Club in Ridge Manor. He collected golf balls from the bottom of the ponds located throughout the property.

The owner of the golf course called the sheriff's office the night of Jan. 2 after he noticed Voiles' golf cart was parked along the shoreline for several hours, according to the Hernando County Sheriff's Office.

The diver said he first noticed a nylon bag "containing a large amount of golf balls" in an area 7 feet from the shoreline. He followed the nylon string from the bag and saw Voiles' breathing device entangled in it.

"The regulator appeared to (have been) pulled across the diver's back in such a fashion that (he) could not recover it," stated Detective John Ellis, who was briefed by the driver who discovered the body.

Moments later, Voiles was found lying on his stomach along the bottom of the pond with his diving tank, weight belt and face mask still in place, according to the report.

He was not wearing a back-up respirator, Ellis stated.

The sheriff's office in Hernando doesn't have a dive team and requested assistance from Pasco.

Deputies said Voiles had been a certified scuba diver for 24 years.

A toxicology report released Monday revealed there were no drugs in Voiles' system. The medical examiner ruled it an accidental drowning.

Less than four months prior to his death, Voiles saved a woman from drowning after her vehicle veered off the road in Hernando Beach and sunk into the channel.

Voiles, who was driving along the same road, witnessed the accident. He jumped into the water and pulled the woman to safety.

In November, he was awarded the Citizen Service Award by the sheriff's office.

The diver said he first noticed a nylon bag "containing a large amount of golf balls" in an area 7 feet from the shoreline. He followed the nylon string from the bag and saw Voiles' breathing device entangled in it.

wholt@hernandotoday.com (352) 544-5283
----

COMMENT by Karl Luttrell - University of Michigan
posted February 9, 2012 @ TBO.COM:

This is a very sad event. Doing underwater work for profit, even diving for golf balls, should be done to OSHA and ADCI standards. Recreational (non-work) standards are great for many diving activities. Underwater work is different. The crew that mows the grass at a golf course must comply with OSHA safety rules (eye protection, hearing protection, safe footwear, etc.). Diving for work has safety rules spelled out that don't apply to recreational diving. Trying to second guess which recreational technique would have been better is barking up the wrong tree.

Mr. Luttrell's comments RE OSHA should be considered in light of past comments made by dive industry leaders during their "Nitrox Summit," where risk management tactics that broadly affect the industry were discussed (i.e. that community standards are often set without data). My earlier post in the "Protect Our Right to Post" thread includes a link to download this pivotal document from the Rubicon Foundation.

DAN's Nitrox Proceedings Workshop, Nov 3-4, 2000 (pdf) includes edited transcripts of comments made by meeting participants... you may be surprised by the industry's "political" relationship to OSHA.

My posts aren't about slinging mud -- they're about sharing an understanding of how and why standards were set. Taking the time to download and read this document might save your life. When you read that document, you'll note that some key experts objected to some standards, believing that recreational divers were put at risk of dying from Ox-Tox. (The OSHA "variance" allows dive instructors/DMs to use Nitrox while teaching.)

Within the 202 page of DAN's pdf are comments between Bill Turbeville, the dive industry's go-to defense attorney, PADI's Karl Shreeves and dozens of other dive industry Pooh-Bahs. Risk Management issues they discussed went far beyond OSHA's Nitrox "variance," including "strict liability" insurance payouts related to dive computers, contaminated air, and a critical nuance to defend "failure to rescue" claims (i.e. Plaintiff claims hardly ever win if during a recreational dive - that's not a teaching-dive - a dive pro/DM/guide never saw the victim get into trouble while underwater; failure to rescue on the surface is hard to defend. I can't help but believe that such talk encourages "willful blindness," both figurative and literal.)

So what's this 12-year-old Nitrox meeting got to do with the tragedy that befell Mr. Voiles? It's about how the relationship between the recreational dive industry and OSHA has evolved. (Excerpts below, emphases added):

Turbeville: ...I will tell you from personal experience, however, that regardless of what the variance says, the fact is that OSHA does not want to get involved. I know this for two reasons. One, Steve Butler, OSHA Division of Maritime Compliance, told me he does not want to be forced to become involved. Only if I he is forced to become involved would he recommend any prosecution even if there was an accident that occurred outside of these parameters. Second, there havebeen two cases that I've been involved in where I've represented individuals, agencies or companies that have been sued where OSHA has stepped in. In these two particular cases, the instructor died along with the student. One was a sport diving case within commonly defined recreational limits, about a 70 foot dive. The other case, which is in ongoing litigation was a technical diving situation. In the first case, the OSHA regulator was very interested in bringing an action. It was not until the Department of Justice got involved and spoke to a U.S. attorney that I could turn the dogs off and get the case dismissed. The regulator didn't understand what was going on in scuba diving. [?!] This happened to be in Wisconsin. The second case is more interesting, a technical tri-mix dive, where clearly it was beyond the scope of the variance or the original exemption for sport diving. There was a dual fatality, a student and an instructor. One phone call was made by OSHA, they knew about it. They spoke to the proprietor of the store and knew there was an employer/employeerelationship in January of 1998. There has not been any follow-up whatsoever in nearly three years. We doubt there will be. OSHA simply doesn't want to get involved. I should say from a legal perspective that if you are outside the parameter of the variance and you are teaching nitrox diving in an employer/employee relationship, you might be outside of the"law". The fact is even if there were an accident, the odds of there being serious repercussions are not very great from what we've seen so far.

Shreeves: ...The other area where the industry might have some concern with regard to OSHA is not anaccident, but a complaint. OSHA is required to investigate a complaint. Were there to be an employee who, say, is terminated and wants to get back at the employer, looking for an angle, such a hot-headed employee could create some issue by alleging that there's a problem with following the exemption or the variance, depending on situation. How far and seriouslyOSHA would take that we don't know.
...
Turbeville: That brings us to the point of administrative and prosecutorial discretion...The fact is OSHA doesn't want to get involved in that much of a knitpicking of a variance because it causes too much work for them. They're rather under staffed and overworked as it is right now. The bottom line is if we don't make this an issue for them, they're not going to follow up on it.

I believe it's folly to advocate regulations that seek "perfection." But for those who believe that every dive fatality is inevitable or "God's will" or 100% the victims' fault, I say hogwash.

100% self-regulation only makes defense attorneys rich. In the era of social media, this self-serving formula is bound for extinction.

Meanwhile, preventable dive accidents generate tens of millions of dollars in negative publicity for the dive industry.

Far worse is the mental anguish and lost lifetime incomes suffered by hundreds of families impacted by recreational dive fatalities.

(The posting of this copyrighted news article is protected under the "Fair-use" doctrine of US copyright laws, which allow the re-use of copyrighted matter, without permission, for reasons such as teaching and criticism of issues related to public health and safety. Click here for a further discussion of the Fair-use doctrine)