Why dive in a quarry? Should you log them

[boulderjohn]

Most of my dives last fall were training dives. They mostly ranged from 200-300 feet, with us breathing trimix for the dive and up to 3 different decompression gases. Why is it they are not worthy to be logged?

 

[northernone]

Most of my dives last fall were training dives. They mostly ranged from 200-300 feet, with us breathing trimix for the dive and up to 3 different decompression gases. Why is it they are not worthy to be logged?

This is why I'm glad for forums. Bringing broader perspective to our ideas.

 

[Kevo88]

Because I was under the impression that quarries were only used for training. I saw them as large pool dives. An LDS I was at last week goes to a quarry for training. I had no idea that people actually used quarries for everyday recreational diving. I didn't and don't consider training dives to be actual open water dives. But that's just me. People log their dives as they wish, and some not at all. It's such a minor detail in any event. I've only been diving for a few years and do not have several hundred or even thousands of dives under my belt like many others here. I have only dove in the ocean and lakes. Perhaps when I have more dives in a larger variety of locales, the change of scenery a quarry offers will become more interesting. Presently, it still seems a little strange to me. Anyone and everyone is free to disagree. I just hope civility is maintained.

I think that's where some of the confusion lies, the only real difference between quarries and lakes is that a quarry is a man made hole instead of a natural hole. They have the same ecosystems as natural lakes, and most have some much more appealing structure than our usual Midwestern lakes can provide. Another benefit, and why they're probably often chosen, is that they're deep and steep. Around me, I'd be hard pressed to find a natural lake large enough to drop 50' down without a decent boat ride or a really long surface swim. At the local quarry-turned-lake, I can giant stride off the dock and be in 50-60 feet of water right below me.

 

[diver0008]

Most of my dives last fall were training dives. They mostly ranged from 200-300 feet, with us breathing trimix for the dive and up to 3 different decompression gases. Why is it they are not worthy to be logged?

I never said that they are not. For you. For the OP. For anyone. We are not all clones. I was curious. I will continue to be curious. I will continue to modulate my opinions based on what I learn. I am fascinated by technical and rebreather diving. I am confused why people are so defensive. Kinda makes me not want to participate here any more.

 

[boulderjohn]

Most of my dives last fall were training dives. They mostly ranged from 200-300 feet, with us breathing trimix for the dive and up to 3 different decompression gases. Why is it they are not worthy to be logged?

never said that they are not.

Just in case you forgot what you posted earlier, I thought I would refresh your memory with some quotes below. Perhaps you do do not realize it, but to some people, including me, your tone is coming aross as pretty sanctimonious. "I would never deign to log a ridiculous, stupid quarry dive." "I don't consider training dives to be actual open water dives."

Just curious, but do you count quarry dives in your #logged?

They seem more like diving in the deep end of a pool to me.

I really do not see the point of diving in hard or lousy conditions with nothing to see.

I am getting a clearer picture of why people dive quarries. Still does not seem like the kind of dive that I would log personally,

A quarry seems like training ground. A closed, controlled environment. Like a big pool. For skills refreshing or training. If I went into a pool or the lake at the cottage to practice something or try out a new piece of gear , I would not note it. To me, it's practice for diving, not an actual open water dive.

I didn't and don't consider training dives to be actual open water dives.

 

[USMC CPL.]

Because I was under the impression that quarries were only used for training. I saw them as large pool dives. An LDS I was at last week goes to a quarry for training. I had no idea that people actually used quarries for everyday recreational diving. I didn't and don't consider training dives to be actual open water dives. But that's just me. People log their dives as they wish, and some not at all. It's such a minor detail in any event. I've only been diving for a few years and do not have several hundred or even thousands of dives under my belt like many others here. I have only dove in the ocean and lakes. Perhaps when I have more dives in a larger variety of locales, the change of scenery a quarry offers will become more interesting. Presently, it still seems a little strange to me. Anyone and everyone is free to disagree. I just hope civility is maintained.

So when I dove the HMCS Yukon for my Wow I should not have logged it since it was a training dive? 2 miles out and 110 feet down. Why wouldn't I log it training or not.

 

[USMC CPL.]

Sorry AOW.

 

[Joneill]

FWIW, I took the whole "it's rubbish" comment the way I would take the same words if we were sitting around drinking some beers and I said "I dive in the local quarry". As they say, "lighten up, Francis."

Anyway, I did a weekend of NJ wreck diving last Fall. It's not as good as NC wreck diving. It's colder and the viz is not as good (based on my vast one weekend of experience up there). But, I thought it was still totally enjoyable. If you ever want to go and dive with a not-quite-instabuddy, let me know. I'm game to come up there and do it again. I went out on the Gypsyblood, out of Pleasant Beach. We dived the Algol and the Mohawk, which were nice wrecks. I thought it was a good boat and crew. I'd go out with them again, but am totally open to other choices. Especially ones further south, since I'm coming from VA.

You should at least have a go with the NJ wrecks yourself before you write them off as "too dark and cold".

Thanks - I will definitely dive some NJ wrecks eventually. NC is on my radar as well so I may take you up on the offer at some point. Next stop for me is a weekend or 2 at Dutch Springs (trying to get a Rescue Diver course in as well as some exploration there) followed by a head check and then 10 days in Grand Cayman in August. I'm still looking at a fall trip - maybe Key Largo ?

 

[Joneill]

Most of my dives last fall were training dives. They mostly ranged from 200-300 feet, with us breathing trimix for the dive and up to 3 different decompression gases. Why is it they are not worthy to be logged?

+ 1. Other than pool "dives", I log all of my dives: some are logged as recreational dives and some are logged as training dives - but the experience and data are of equal usefulness to me.

 

[diver0008]

Just in case you forgot what you posted earlier, I thought I would refresh your memory with some quotes below. Perhaps you do do not realize it, but to some people, including me, your tone is coming aross as pretty sanctimonious. "I would never deign to log a ridiculous, stupid quarry dive." "I don't consider training dives to be actual open water dives."

I never said this, which you attributed to me:

"I would never deign to log a ridiculous, stupid quarry dive."

That must have been someone else.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And you missed this, which I did say:

'Having never dived in a quarry, the question is sincere in its ignorance. I've heard that they are often used for certification training / testing. I had not pictured them as actual dive destinations, in lieu of a better word, like oceans, lakes, caves, etc. They seem more like diving in the deep end of a pool to me. Not that there is anything wrong with that, I just wondered if this was the kind of thing one would log."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read that again, and tell me what the "tone" is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Or this:

"I am getting a clearer picture of why people dive quarries. Still does not seem like the kind of dive that I would log personally, but that is easy for me to say as I will probably never dive in one, and at least now I get why others might. Thanks for the replies."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Sanctimonious"?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"People log their dives as they wish, and some not at all. It's such a minor detail in any event. I've only been diving for a few years and do not have several hundred or even thousands of dives under my belt like many others here. I have only dove in the ocean and lakes. Perhaps when I have more dives in a larger variety of locales, the change of scenery a quarry offers will become more interesting."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not making this stuff up. But you left it all out. Why?

Why are you trying to create false impressions?

What exactly are you trying to justify?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no problems with anything I said, as out of context as the snippets are.

I insulted no one.

I was disrespectful to no one.

I did not demand anyone agree with me, nor chastise anyone for not.

I asked many questions, and was receptive and courteous to the replies (those quotes, not very suspiciously, left out).

The same cannot be said for other participants in the thread.

And, yet.

You make efforts to go through and pick apart my posts.

For what?

Because I don't agree with you?

To make me understand that my opinion is not a unanimous one?

Do you really think that I did not know this already?

Do you really think that as an administrator, trying to slander me with out-of-context quotes is effective for anything?

I am really not sure what your motive is.

When disagreement stops being a two-way street, a dead-end is not far off.