How do you know when you're too "green" to dive without an instructor or DM?

[briannaunderwater]

Point taken. I shall watch and learn. I hope when the article is published, she comes back to resurrect this thread and tell us what publication it's in.

It will be in the January/February issue of California Diver magazine . . . and many of you will be in it! Especially you, Wookie! Please send me your contact info and full name. I really want to quote you.

 

[briannaunderwater]

I think an actual magazine article on this very subject is an awesome idea.

It could come with a little survey before the text and say:

"When you finished your open water class, (were you / would you have been) safe and happy diving with just a buddy, in conditions similar to or better than where you were certified?"

Then go on to describe that the above is an actual requirement for OW certification and if the answer is "no" then something was wrong with your traning.

It would be incredibly cool to watch this get the publicity it deserves instead of being hidden here on SB.

flots

OMG, what a cool idea. I'm going to do that! I will ask the question and ask for replies to be sent to my email . . . . then I'll collate the answers and post them here (and maybe the magazine will want to include them, too. It will be fascinating to find out the answer!! I'm so glad I asked you guys. Cheers, Brianna

 

[annlaur]

I didn't find training difficult. Oh, sure, there were a couple classes that had me disappointed in my performance and visualizing how to improve between classes that were spaced a week apart, but there seems to be an unwarranted perception of how "hard" or "difficult" higher standards of diver training really are since fewer and fewer divers get to experience how much fun and rewarding it is to attain skills.
[…]
"Hard" and "easy" are just perceptions and those words influence how we feel about something we have yet to experience.

Agree with your post and philosophy. But I meant "easy" as in "something you can do while on a vacation", meaning a 5 day course. Maybe I should have said "convenient".
After my second dive trip, I started taking a course by the French federation (CMAS **) which met once or twice a week for months in order to build on my skills. It was great while it lasted, but I missed more than half the classes and eventually dropped out. Those types of courses are great for people who work 9 to 5 or have regular days off (or don't work at all). My schedule is way too hectic. So I'm stuck with vacation diving.

The flip side of that Trace, is that plenty of divers would never be in the water if they were still being required to commit to weeks of training.

Short courses are time constrained, but they've also led to many more people enjoying diving than would otherwise. Heck, my wife and I are in that camp. We started out as vacation divers, but after the very first "let's try this and see what it's like" dive trip, we were hooked.

My point exactly.

So, is it just in the United States that the dive operators don't coddle their divers? Most operators I know don't provide in-water supervision because of insurance requirements. […] Maybe the standard should be that all divers are supervised. Boy, that'd get a bunch of folks blood pressure up.....

The French federation, which is non profit and pretty much rules the UW world out here, doesn't cuddle divers. On the few trips I did in the Med, I never saw anyone carry somebody else's tank or set up someone's equipment. But no Level 1 diver (rough equivalent of Padi OW as far as requirements and skills go) is allowed underwater without the supervision of a Level 4 DM/instructor. That's non negociable. Depth is also limited to 20 meters (25 if the right dive conditions are met).

I believe the "cuddling" thing has a lot to do with the dive industry trying to make money. Sure, I can carry a tank and rinse my BCD, but it's not my favorite part of a dive and I'm happy to give an extra tip to the DM who offers to do that for me.

As for saying (ironically) that all dives should be supervised, it's like saying all trips to a foreign country should be done with a guide with stays in all inclusive resorts. While I dive with professionals, I pretty much like to do everything topside by my own means. To each their own. I'm thankful the different options exist so everyone can find what suits them.

 

[annlaur]

I think an actual magazine article on this very subject is an awesome idea.

It could come with a little survey before the text and say:

"When you finished your open water class, (were you / would you have been) safe and happy diving with just a buddy, in conditions similar to or better than where you were certified?"

Then go on to describe that the above is an actual requirement for OW certification and if the answer is "no" then something was wrong with your traning.

It would be incredibly cool to watch this get the publicity it deserves instead of being hidden here on SB.

flots

It might be written in the Padi guidelines as an actual requirement, but like Bob and Thal have written, I don't see how it can be achieved in a course that lasts less than a week. IMO, something isn't wrong with the training per se, something is wrong with any agency claiming they can turn out a self-sufficient diving buddy pair in 5 days.

 

[Trace Malinowski]

The flip side of that Trace, is that plenty of divers would never be in the water if they were still being required to commit to weeks of training.

Short courses are time constrained, but they've also led to many more people enjoying diving than would otherwise. Heck, my wife and I are in that camp. We started out as vacation divers, but after the very first "let's try this and see what it's like" dive trip, we were hooked.

The role of courses like "Discover Scuba" and "Resort Course Diver" are an excellent means of getting people interested in scuba diving. Students in these courses are able to participate in many of the same adventures as certified open water divers, but are supervised by dive pros. For example, if your dream was to be surrounded by sharks on a beautiful reef UNEXSO on Grand Bahama will take you there on your discover scuba dives. A resort course allows divers to dive with a pro throughout their vacation.

Once hooked, people had three options:

1) Return home and take a scuba class through a local dive center and do all class, pool and open water training through the LDC.

The benefit to the student was that emphasis was on a quality education and the student was introduced to the myriad of adventures that existed locally and regionally. The benefit to the dive center was that it allowed the staff time in training to gain the trust of the student, create a well-rounded diver, and an active customer. The benefit to the diving industry is that local divers own cold water gear as well as travel gear, dive more often, replace beaten equipment more frequently, and keep up greater skill levels. Local diving also fosters greater levels of continuing education. Such courses usually lasted 6 - 8 classroom and pool sessions with two days of open water diving.

2) Devote their next dive trip to training at a resort. With classes and open water training lasting about the length of the 8 day/7 night stay, the student still received plenty of training time, but was able to complete the course in "paradise" without the hassle of driving to the local dive center, the local YMCA, or the need for thicker wetsuits and colder, lower visibility dives. This route promoted dive travel, but had minimal impact on local diving economies and often warm water divers never braved home waters. However, the upside was still better training if the resort followed the standards of the day without short cuts.

3) Return home and do the class and pool training through a local dive center, but complete the open water dives during their next vacation.

The benefit to the student is that the student still received thorough training, but was able to avoid open water work in conditions that might be perceived as being unpleasant. Often, it's hard to concentrate on class with azure blue water lapping at your feet. Training at home allowed students to enjoy being in the water in the pool in colder calendar months, focus on the educational process of diving, and salivate over their upcoming warm water trip. It allowed the opportunity for the dive center to still create a customer and perhaps eventually encourage local diving, but took away the prospect of discovering that local diving is really pretty cool because immersion in local waters could be bypassed.

IMO, dropping training to three or so days was a mistake and the deplorable habits we see all the time such as divers standing on the bottom and swimming with trim greater than 30 degrees, I would bet are somehow related to lack of training time.

In my previous posts, I forgot to mention that the primary key to diving without an instructor is most likely the opportunity to shore dive.

How many divers made their very first dive that they planned and lead at a local lake, quarry or in a country like Bonaire with easy access to shore dives? Since you don't need a boat that is often crewed by dive pros, taking part in shore diving often caused a dive to take that first step into self-sufficiency.

 

[Wookie]

Why on earth would you apologize for stimulating valid discussion? May I quote you? I'd especially like to include your message to students to go back to teachers and demand better education. I have been both kinds of DM. And I agree with you . . . OW certs should qualify one to dive in the conditions one was trained under. Sadly, I just hear nightmares all the time! Today, my boss at work told me how her instructor skipped over several of the course requirements (like the swim test!) and just checked them off of the list. I'm sure the instructor was in another country (I think she might have said Mexico), so she will probably not have the opportunity to get a tune-up or a followup from this instructor. Although I agree that she should be able to go diving on her own, I am scared that she will! She's terrified of diving. She says she's afraid when her mask fills with water. And I have no idea if she can swim. I pray to the powers that be that she has the good judgment to get more training before considering striking out on her own.

I promise to represent your viewpoint fairly. I hope you'll allow me to include it.

Cheers,
Brianna

You are welcome to include anything I've said, you are welcome to contact me anytime, and I promise to be civil. (I looked back at some of my posts, and, while the message is the same, it just doesn't come out in a forum the way it would come out in conversation). Call me any time (East coast hours) 281-300-4748

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I believe the "cuddling" thing has a lot to do with the dive industry trying to make money. Sure, I can carry a tank and rinse my BCD, but it's not my favorite part of a dive and I'm happy to give an extra tip to the DM who offers to do that for me.

As for saying (ironically) that all dives should be supervised, it's like saying all trips to a foreign country should be done with a guide with stays in all inclusive resorts. While I dive with professionals, I pretty much like to do everything topside by my own means. To each their own. I'm thankful the different options exist so everyone can find what suits them.

"Supervised" diving doesn't necessarily mean that you're incapable ... it is what you choose to make of it.

I'm generally a pretty independent sort ... and fairly capable of taking care of myself underwater. But when I go someplace I've never been before, I appreciate the services of a dive guide. They are familiar with the site and generally know what to look for. Many's the time I'd have swam right past something really interesting had the guide not pointed it out to me ... critters can often blend in pretty well with the surroundings if you don't know what they look like, what type of habitat they prefer, or what telltale signs to look for to find them. Dive guides can often make a dive in an unfamiliar place more exciting ... and in this respect they offer real value. And yeah, some folks enjoy being "coddled" on vacation. Doesn't necessarily imply that they can't take care of themselves ... just that it's nice on vacation to just relax and let someone else worry about the small stuff. I don't see anything wrong with that ... as long as it's preference rather than dependence ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[SeaHorse81]

The flip side of that Trace, is that plenty of divers would never be in the water if they were still being required to commit to weeks of training.

I think this is true, but I don't see why it's a bad thing. Granted, there are people who go through the shorter courses, get the bug, and go on to develop into fully capable divers having a wondeful time. There are so many who never go further, however, and stumble along through their dive careers, kind of learning things the hard way as they go, or worse, not learning. I can vouch for this because I've been one of those. I think this kind of diver (limited early training, annual vacation diving) probably makes for more than a fair share of the accident/fatality statistics. Fewer of these people in the water would mean fewer dead people, in my opinion. I think it might also mean fewer people harassing sealife, abusing reefs, and creating incidents that endanger other divers. I like the idea of raising standards so that the standards act as a sort of screening device to assure that those who proceed are serious about doing so, and likely to be more proactive about their education.

There dives must by law be led by a DM. They put our gear together for us and checked our gauges. They had their save-a-dive kits ready to go in case of trouble. What was I to know? I thought that was how it was done.

I want on a bunch of trips to different places, and they were all like that. Every one. Again, I figured that was how diving worked. Then I got on a boat in Florida and we headed out to the site. I kept wondering when someone was going to set my gear up for me. After a while I figured out that it wasn't going to happen and started setting my own gear up just as we were arriving at the dive site. Now, let's see--how does that regulator go on again?

My diving has occurred in two chapters: several years of vacation trips only, a few years off, and then the most recent few years being back to vacation diving, with more emphasis on ongoing training. In chapter one, where it was strictly the annual vacation dive trip, I noticed that the operators did all the work of gear setup, schlepping, etc. I was surprised, because I actually expected to be taking care of my own gear, but it was nice to not have to carry heavy stuff around and do the peripheral work of a dive trip. I asked the staff why they did this and the message (ten years ago) was that so many divers were so incompetent that the staff figured it was safer to make sure, themselves, that everything was done correctly. While I could see their point of view, I noted, from one trip to the next that I just felt dumber about it all each time. I could feel the erosion of skills, between only going once a year and then having so much done for me when I did go. It worried me, but like the poster quoted above, it just seemed to be the way things are done, so I didn't question it.

Now that I'm in chapter two of my dive career, I am seeing these things from a much different perspective, and becoming more interested and proactive about my skills and ongoing education. I'm a bit horrified at how passively I approached it until recently, but must say that I encountered absolutely no influence to the contrary along the way. I learned so much more in my last 50 dives than I did in my first 100, and that's saying something because there is so much more to learn in the first 100. I'm grateful to have finally gotten the point now, but it's troubling that it took so long, and I think I'm a fairly typical example.

I think that raising standards and requiring people to earn their certs rather than just getting through the motions of the requirements would be an excellent start. I think that dive ops requiring some minimum standard of proficiency would be an excellent next step. I understand that each of these would mean fewer dollars flowing to people in the industry, but the divers who were in the water would be better ones, with far fewer incidents. I don't have an answer for the economic conflicts of interest that some will likely feel are created by requiring diving to be pursued more responsibly. I just think it's the right thing to do.

I've never had a dive injury, but it's clear to me in retrospect that it's been because I've been fortunate, not because I truly knew enough to keep myself safe. I suspect the same is true for many, many other divers. This can't be the right way to structure this sport.

 

[brunow]

OMG, what a cool idea. I'm going to do that! I will ask the question and ask for replies to be sent to my email . . . . then I'll collate the answers and post them here (and maybe the magazine will want to include them, too. It will be fascinating to find out the answer!! I'm so glad I asked you guys. Cheers, Brianna

Try this for your survey SurveyMonkey: Free online survey software & questionnaire tool they offer a free membership and the paid subscriptions have some very cool options.

I would have to agree that the choice is situational. My family and I, wife and 2 teanagers, are very new divers. I feel confident with the training that I received to dive safely with someone with the same level of experience as I have. On the other hand I do not feel comfortable enough to safely take my family out diving on our own in the same conditions that we were trained in, without a more experienced diver to accompany us. Knowing that they will be looking at me as the lead diver. I feel that I will need to have many dives under my dive belt before that level of confidence is achieved.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I think this is true, but I don't see why it's a bad thing. Granted, there are people who go through the shorter courses, get the bug, and go on to develop into fully capable divers having a wondeful time. There are so many who never go further, however, and stumble along through their dive careers, kind of learning things the hard way as they go, or worse, not learning. I can vouch for this because I've been one of those. I think this kind of diver (limited early training, annual vacation diving) probably makes for more than a fair share of the accident/fatality statistics. Fewer of these people in the water would mean fewer dead people, in my opinion. I think it might also mean fewer people harassing sealife, abusing reefs, and creating incidents that endanger other divers. I like the idea of raising standards so that the standards act as a sort of screening device to assure that those who proceed are serious about doing so, and likely to be more proactive about their education.

This is true ... but it would also mean less access to diving for everyone else. Like it or not, the world isn't what it was 30 or 40 years ago. There's way more people competing for fewer and fewer resources ... and what determines who gets what boils down to money.

Where I live, we've lost access to almost all of the shorefront ... because developers buy the land, and shoreline down to the low-tide mark belongs to whomever owns the shorefront. We've lost more than a half-dozen popular dive sites over the past couple years because of a developer-driven "beautification" program by the Dept. of Natural Resources. North of the border in Vancouver there's a legal battle taking place even as I type this over the sinking of a retired battleship for an artificial reef that's being driven by a handful of well-financed residents who don't want it "in their back yard". Competing interests between fishing and diving almost always go in favor of the fishermen ... because they have a lot more money and members than the diving community. In almost all cases where diving interests compete with some other interest for resources, the divers lose out because there are fewer of us, we're less organized, and less financed. That's how things work in today's world. So wishing for fewer people in diving ultimately works against the best interests of all of us.

My diving has occurred in two chapters: several years of vacation trips only, a few years off, and then the most recent few years being back to vacation diving, with more emphasis on ongoing training. In chapter one, where it was strictly the annual vacation dive trip, I noticed that the operators did all the work of gear setup, schlepping, etc. I was surprised, because I actually expected to be taking care of my own gear, but it was nice to not have to carry heavy stuff around and do the peripheral work of a dive trip. I asked the staff why they did this and the message (ten years ago) was that so many divers were so incompetent that the staff figured it was safer to make sure, themselves, that everything was done correctly. While I could see their point of view, I noted, from one trip to the next that I just felt dumber about it all each time. I could feel the erosion of skills, between only going once a year and then having so much done for me when I did go. It worried me, but like the poster quoted above, it just seemed to be the way things are done, so I didn't question it.

Well, first of all, I think the services offered by the dive ops are more driven by the desire for tips than because people are incompetent. Perhaps it depends on where you go, but most of the places I've been insist on setting up my gear even though they know I am perfectly competent to do it myself. I used to argue with them that I am more competent to set up my gear than they are, because I use a hogarthian rig ... even in the tropics ... and many of these people don't know how to set one up properly. I got nowhere until I mentioned that if I had to argue the point it would cost them their tip ... that tactic has always gotten more cooperation than the competence argument. So I think income is what mostly drives these policies.

Now that I'm in chapter two of my dive career, I am seeing these things from a much different perspective, and becoming more interested and proactive about my skills and ongoing education. I'm a bit horrified at how passively I approached it until recently, but must say that I encountered absolutely no influence to the contrary along the way. I learned so much more in my last 50 dives than I did in my first 100, and that's saying something because there is so much more to learn in the first 100. I'm grateful to have finally gotten the point now, but it's troubling that it took so long, and I think I'm a fairly typical example.

Yes, I believe you're right ... but again that gets back less to "competence" than expectations. You don't know what you don't know ... and if divers aren't taught from the outset what the objectives are, they won't be motivated to learn them ... not until some other factor ... like having an incident, or the lack of having someone around to do it for you ... motivates them.

I think that raising standards and requiring people to earn their certs rather than just getting through the motions of the requirements would be an excellent start. I think that dive ops requiring some minimum standard of proficiency would be an excellent next step.

I'm less of the opinion that standards need to be raised than that they need to be enforced. If standards are followed in spirit ... rather than to the minimal letter ... then I think they can and will produce divers who are competent to dive to the level intended for a given class. What produces incompetence is a business model that offers classes at ridiculously low prices in order to entice people into the dive op ... where they can then be sold expensive gear and dive trips. The business model is what motivates reduced-quality instruction ... not the standards ... because ultimately it boils down to getting what you pay for.

I think where standards really need to be raised is in the ridiculously-low standards that currently apply to becoming a dive instructor. Someone with 100 dives or less barely knows how to take care of themselves (and not always even that) ... and rarely has the knowledge or background to effectively train someone else how to.

I understand that each of these would mean fewer dollars flowing to people in the industry, but the divers who were in the water would be better ones, with far fewer incidents. I don't have an answer for the economic conflicts of interest that some will likely feel are created by requiring diving to be pursued more responsibly. I just think it's the right thing to do.

I agree ... and I feel that the best way to achieve a higher standard is to separate dive instruction from dive equipment sales ... and charge a high enough fee for a class to cover the cost of quality instruction. More pool time and more dives are what's needed to improve the quality of dive instruction, and both of those things cost money ... money that the current model simply cannot support.

I've never had a dive injury, but it's clear to me in retrospect that it's been because I've been fortunate, not because I truly knew enough to keep myself safe. I suspect the same is true for many, many other divers. This can't be the right way to structure this sport.

The vast majority of divers ... even the incompetent ones ... can say that they've never had a dive injury. That speaks volumes for the fact that injuries are typically not the result of poor skills, but rather a cascading sequence of events that can be interrupted, preventing an accident in the process.

But what's ultimately harmful ... both to the diver and to the industry as a whole ... is the appalling dropout rate. Roughly 3 out of every 4 divers who ever get certified end up dropping out of diving ... most rather quickly. And while there are a number of reasons for it, one of the biggest is that too many of these divers learn just enough in their introductory class to scare the crap out of themselves, and therefore decide that diving's not for them ... and so they go find something else to do with their discretionary dollars.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)