Divers vs Underwater Tourists

[Epinephelus]

When I'm just looking around a new site, I call it a tour...
Sometimes I like to have a DM (or experienced local) along to shortcut the process of finding interesting things I might miss on my own.
Sometimes... sometimes, that tour may be on trimix, deep, in a cave, or wreck...
E. (still a tourist, occasionally)

 

[foxe]

It's a nice thought, but you might also find that you aren't getting what you think you're paying for.

Check out this thread. There's a dead guy who also thought the DM would keep him safe.

Terry

That thread seems to have been suspended, but I think I see the point you are making. However, I am not paying the DM to 'keep me safe''; I am paying them as someone more experienced under certain conditions and at the particular location, to advise me on any features I might need to know about, including potential hazards -- as well as things to improve the dive experience, of course (eg "when we get round this rock there are often lobsters to be seen" or similar). I wouldn't dive unless I was fairly sure I could take care of my own safety under the conditions I expect; and I rely on the DM to warn me about conditions I don't expect, such as hidden rip currents or the like. Yes, if he/she lets me down on that then I might well be in trouble, even though I would do my best to be prepared for the unexpected; but the alternative is either not to dive anywhere new ever or to do it without a DM, which certainly can't be any better! So far, anyway, I haven't been disappointed...

 

[Cave Diver]

At what number dive do you get the promotion to "Real Diver" from "Underwater Tourist"?

Amen!

I recently went on a weekend trip where I did one dive. Someone else on that same trip did 6 dives. Anyone care to guess which one of us had more bottom time at the end of the weekend?

There are a lot more factors that determine whether someone is a safe, competent diver than the number of dives, or the number of years they've been certified.

I'd started a thread on a similar subject a while back: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/ba.../272626-what-does-experience-really-mean.html

 

[Cave Diver]

In the scientific diving world we define an active diver as someone who has made 12 dives in the previous 12 months and who has made a dive to his or her qualification depth (30, 60, 100, 130, 150, or 190) in the previous 6 months. Divers who do not meet the first specification must do a series of work up dives with a specified buddy before resuming regular diving, divers who do not meet the second must do a series of specified, increasingly deep dives to regain their depth qualification. I'm not exactly sure how to translate that to the rec world, but that's what we do and it seems to have worked fairly well.

Does your standard have a minimum dive time requirement as well? Say a dive must last at least 20 minutes to count?

If so, and someone made 6 dives, but at 2-3 times the required length, does that mean they are no longer "qualified" or "active?"

 

[TSandM]

I'm shaking my head over this thread, which I think illustrates just about all the ways people can be misunderstood on the internet! If you guys knew the OP, you'd take a deep breath and relax.

Wouldn't we all agree that people who dive regularly tend to have better skills and are more relaxed in their diving? Sure, there are exceptions, but in general, if you do 100 dives a year, you're going to be a different kind of diver from the person who does 3.

I think we might even agree that, below some level of regular experience, a person shouldn't count on having their skills sharp or being able to respond well to any kind of urgent situation. The exception might be people with thousands of dives who have to take a surface interval for some reason, but even they might find themselves a bit slow or awkward at first. (I know I did with horses, when I got back into riding after 10 years.)

And I also think it's a good idea for people to be able to reflect on their training and their amount and recency of experience, and decide whether they are truly a diver capable of safe, reliable independent function underwater, or whether they had better have someone with frequent rescue experience at hand. Thus the person who would find himself in Gray's "underwater tourist" classification would consider hiring a DM to accompany them in the water, rather than count on some random person (or some DM trying to supervise 8 such folks) to help if anything goes awry.

I don't think there's anything offensive or arrogant about those statements, and I believe that is pretty much what the OP intended to say, just as all chickdiver intended to say was that people who can dive the caves on a daily basis are going to be different cave divers from people like me, who are lucky to pull off three cave trips a year.

 

[captain]

A while back one of my first cousins stopped by and gave me a like new Nikonos II camera. I asked where did he get it and he said it was his and that he used it on vacation when he went diving. He bought it new. I had no idea that he dived. Apparently every few years he and his wife would go to the islands on vacation. Judging by the condition of the camera it was apparent it hadn't been in the water very often. In my opinion he was a underwater tourist not a diver.

 

[matts1w]

No matter how you slice it, no one wants to be called a tourist- even if it is true. The connotation of tourist is a clueless, loud, selfish, disrespectful, loud shirt wearin', traffic jam causing idiot. I have taken high school kids to very remote islands in the South Pacific to dive and for incredible expreices with other cultures. The very first lesson we discuss with them is "The Difference Between a Traveler and a Tourist." Perhaps that is why so many people have taken offense to the OPs thread. Words are powerful.

 

[rsldonk]

The snarkieness on this thread is almost sickening. Thanks for that.

 

[Cave Diver]

Wouldn't we all agree that people who dive regularly tend to have better skills and are more relaxed in their diving? Sure, there are exceptions, but in general, if you do 100 dives a year, you're going to be a different kind of diver from the person who does 3.

Lynne, this is one of the few times I find myself disagreeing with you. The saying "practice doesn't make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect" comes to mind.

A diver that dives regularly, but does so with poor skills, or fails to practice emergency skills does nothing but reinforce those bad habits. In such a case they can be lulled into a sense of overconfidence in their ability to react and respond appropriately.

I think there has to be some balance between # of dives, amount of time spent diving and the challenges faced during the dive that really determine individual skills. There are also "natural athletes" who seem to excel at a sport with much less work and effort than the majority.

IMO, it's really hard to pin down a specified number of dives, or hours that someone must have to be consider "skilled." There are just too many variations among individual people, so the standards tend to play to the lowest common denominator.

 

[muddiver]

There are some recent threads regarding personal responsibility and the newer diver and that is what caused me to start this thread.

If you are a new diver and only dive in tropical locales on vacation you are an underwater tourist not a diver and you should hire a DM to be your buddy (and only your buddy) on every dive.

Yes, if you think you are going to swim the reef in any tropical vacation destination and you do not consult with the local diving profesional you are being selfcentered, and foolish. Everyone must support the dive industry or there will be no need for dive professionals.

There are quarries, lakes, whatever reasonably close to most people. If you are a diver, new or otherwise, you will take advantage of these to learn to dive in addition to your tropical dives while on vacation. You are a diver and are responsible for yourself whether you are new or not.

This is taking personal responsibility for your own actions. You can't change the way the dive industry is operated. You can't change PADI or the practices of tropical operators. You can't learn to dive and be considered a diver if you only dive a few times a year on vacation.

If everyone either put in the time actually diving or simply hired a personal DM as buddy many of the needless accidents we hear about would be avoided without hoping that someone else will make up for your lack of personal responsibility.

Personally, I think it's silly for people to think of themselves as divers and to have an industry tout them as such when they are actually just underwater tourists. I got on a horses back once and rode around for a while. I don't consider that I'm a horse rider or that I know anything about riding horses. In the dive world...I'm a diver!.

This is too true. Why do people use SCUBA gear to began with? Is it not to explore and visit the underware world? What is the definition (commonly understood) of a Tourist? Is it not someone who is exploring, visiting or touring a new location or environment?

Therefore, if you are not diving for pay, diving to perform a task other than blowing bubbles and you have not logged at least one 200 foot deep dive with a minimum :15 bottom time to perform a defined task, then you are not a diver.

I'm all for DM's and Instructors and charters being professional but the way the industry is put together it's just amazing that every other underwater tourist makes it out alive.

If anyone disagrees or has additional comments I guess this post will turn into a thread.