Diver Death in Cayman

[Thalassamania]

Not that it matters much in this conversation but definitely wrong on this point... Live about an hour away and grizz are very common in and out of the park.

You are correct - somehow in my early morning dyslexic haze I read "Yosemite" rather than "Yellowstone." What the hell, the both start with a "Y."

 

[pilot fish]

Jim, this is so simple: tell the diver, No, you cannot and should not go to 100 ft. Do you understand that, Diver? this dive will be at 60 ft max and everyone is to stay together. Is THAT undewrstood? Jim, how tough would that have been to do?

See, you are stretching it to the extreme, baby sit, hold your hands etc, for dramtic effect. None of that was asked for. Simple dive guidance and adherance to the rules, keep group together and at the same depth, would have saved a life on this dive. This dancing DG did not do the MINIMUM.:depressed:

And exactly how would you do that PF with adults capable of making up their own minds and having free will? What in your training says how to do this. Get off it already! If you want the DM/DG to keep you safe and control the dive and everyone on it, pay him to do that and be sure before you leave the dock that's what he/she will do. It cannot be done the way you'd like it. Oh we could tie everyone together and put remotes on their bcs and regs but even then stuff will still happen. The fact is the divers were free, over 21, and not morons. The instructor who did not effectively let them know what they were capable of and what their limits were is where this all started. If they had been compentently trained, if everyone were competently trained we would not be having this discussion and THEN YES, HE WOULD BE ALIVE!

 

[pilot fish]

Its impossible to answer your question - since if this diver "wanted" to go deep then even if the DM had kept the group at 60' ... there is a very real possibility that this could have happened no matter what the DM had done.

Ah, go ahead, take a stab at it. It's not impossible to answer, you just might not like the answer. If the DG had said, No you can not go to 100 ft, HE DID NOT EVEN SAY THAT, we would be having a different discussion.

 

[pilot fish]

You are correct - somehow in my early morning dyslexic haze I read "Yosemite" rather than "Yellowstone." What the hell, the both start with a "Y."

Y, heck, we all make mistakes like that.

 

[CDNScubaMoose]

Ah, go ahead, take a stab at it. It's not impossible to answer, you just might not like the answer. If the DG had said, No you can not go to 100 ft, HE DID NOT EVEN SAY THAT, we would be having a different discussion.

DM role is to ENCOURAGE responsible dive practices - not to ENFORCE them. You can not protect people from themselves. It is however the responsibility of his original instructor to EDUCATE about the risks of diving, how to minimize the risks and to make proper decisions. That said - it is still the RIGHT of the diver to ignore his training and do whatever he wants to.

 

[Thalassamania]

DM role is to ENCOURAGE responsible dive practices - not to ENFORCE them. You can not protect people from themselves. It is however the responsibility of his original instructor to EDUCATE about the risks of diving, how to minimize the risks and to make proper decisions. That said - it is still the RIGHT of the diver to ignore his training and do whatever he wants to.

Not even the encouragement of responsible dive practices, that you'd limit the DM's duty to, seems to have occurred in this case.

 

[CDNScubaMoose]

Not even the encouragement of responsible dive practices, that you'd limit the DM's duty to, seems to have occurred in this case.

If the information that we have is complete and factual then I would agree. However, I believe the ulimate responsibility is still that of the diver in question and unfortunately he paid the ultimate price. In an effort to prevent this from happening again, I want to know what can be done to prevent this tragedy from reoccuring.

DM's become the scuba police? - violate the various depth limits and they have the authority to put your c-card through the paper shredder? I am aware of some dive ops that have a policy if you violate a certain depth then you sit out the next dive - is this the solution?

I would also like to know (not sure if we will ever know) - was this diver aware of the risks via his training ... did he ignore his training, was his training not clear enough on the risks? Was he a victim of a society that promotes passing the buck to somebody else?

I'm not sure which upsets me more - the possibility that the training was incomplete/ignored or that there are people excusing this lapse and looking for a scapegoat?

 

[Mayor]

I really do think OW divers feel the DM will keep them out of trouble. It might be because they are asking for air checks to time the turn just like the Instructor. What ever it is I'm sorry for your loss.

 

[scubajb]

You are correct - somehow in my early morning dyslexic haze I read "Yosemite" rather than "Yellowstone." What the hell, the both start with a "Y."

One of these days i'm gonna head out to Yosemite. I hear it's amazing - plus I like it where there's no grizz!

 

[Pre BC]

Perhaps it is time for the industry to revisit the issue of hard depth restrictions for various levels of certification (particularly for walls and other bottomless dive sites). While it would be openly surrendering to the general worldwide trend away from exercising good judgment and personal responsibility, it would give dive operators the right to point to a "rule" and say no to over zealous or irresponsible new and intermediate level divers. It would simplify what is now a clearly murky grey area. Should DMs be required to physically restrain divers from busting floors? Absolutely not. However, the "rule" draws a clear line in the sand. If the DM takes the novice diver too deep it is the DMs responsibility. If the diver goes too deep on their own, it is 100% on their head. It establishes a clear deliniation of responsibility. Additionally, by doing so, beginners who aspire to deeper diving would have a roadmap to follow. Whether it is the next level of certification (AOW for example) or a set number of logged dives, they would have something to look forward and aspire to.

I find it hard to heap blame on the Divers Down or any other operator in Grand Cayman that routinely takes new divers to 100 feet and more while we promote a culture and turn a blind eye to locations that routinely do it in Florida, the South Pacific and Caribbean... If we are not going to criticize that practice on an every day basis and push for change now, what gives us the right to get on our high horses every time someone dies?

By the way, my comments above are not a criticism of any of the previous contributors to this thread... I have found the frank exchange of opinions on the 72 pages before this one to be both interesting and informative... I just wanted to throw my two-cents into the ring. I am as guilty as anyone else of not saying anything when I see groups of newly certified divers being led down to 135 feet at the Blue Hole and elsewhere.

As I have said previously, this type of turning a blind eye to new diver safety persists only because none of the certifying agencies want to lose market share by being the first to enforce hard and fast experience requirements for advanced diving activities... whether it is deep, drift, wreck or otherwise. It is a classic case of all or none... If one agency enforces standards they lose customers. If they all do it at the same time on a voluntary basis, they are all equal until one bends the standard to gain an advantage... then it all crumbles. I believe the only way to make it work is for the RSTC and NAUI to agree to a common mandatory set of depth versus certification standards...

I look forward to the thoughts of wiser contributors than I!

P