Accident & Incident Discussion - Northernone - aka Cameron Donaldson

[Protondecay123]

I get what you are saying but this is a normal part of diving. The first time we can't really believe that we can inhale under water. After hundreds of dives we think nothing of it. That does not mean we will get another breath out of our regulator. Spending an hour underwater IS deviance.

Well so how do you scuba dive without breathing underwater? You can’t. So that’s part of the basic skill set. But breathing on a scooter in 6 knot current isn’t part of the basic skill set. That’s where safety rules, Training etc come into play. Let’s speculate say I’m going to do a shore dive and there’s a sign that says “ No Diving Allowed” . Well I look around and there’s no one around, so I dive anyway. I make it out ok. Then I go back 10 more times and wind up ok. But the 11th Time a huge Kraken swallows and eats me. If I would have just followed the rules instead of normalizing deviance the Kraken wouldn’t have eaten me!

 

[RayfromTX]

But there is peril in ignoring the local knowledge that sets the foundation for those rules, much less the small degree of analysis to see why those rules came into effect. Perhaps The local authorities in Cozumel noticed an increase disappearance of divers who dove from the shore to get to the wall versus increased recovery from boat divers caught in currents along the wall? Perhaps having a boat with additional personnel actually made the diving safer and saved lives rather than more cynical reasons? Maybe PADI, NAUI and other agencies setting a limit of 130 fsw for recreational diving makes diving safer and brings awareness to the risks going beyond those depths rather than profiteering or something more cynical? And as far as solo tech diving goes, all anyone has to do is look on this form and see the fatal results. And if anyone doesn’t think they are covered by rules like that, look at the results here and why we are having this discussion. Maybe there is some giant Kraken waiting in the depths of the Coz channel to randomly grab highly skilled divers? Or maybe there’s a situational mortal threshold that’s not crossed by following those “rules” and mitigating the associated risk.

Scan the A&I forum. Divers of all types and training and from all walks of life and from all parts of the world die while scuba diving. By your logic, none of us should dive.

 

[BRT]

Well so how do you scuba dive without breathing underwater? You can’t. So that’s part of the basic skill set. But breathing on a scooter in 6 knot current isn’t part of the basic skill set. That’s where safety rules, Training etc come into play. Let’s speculate say I’m going to do a shore dive and there’s a sign that says “ No Diving Allowed” . Well I look around and there’s no one around, so I dive anyway. I make it out ok. Then I go back 10 more times and wind up ok. But the 11th Time a huge Kraken swallows and eats me. If I would have just followed the rules instead of normalizing deviance the Kraken wouldn’t have eaten me!

With all due respect, do you think that most diving deaths occur with people not following the rules? I see people dying in all different sorts of dives. No question if the depth limit was 10' there would be less deaths of people following the rules. If OW was a 1 year course that cost $10K there would be less certified divers dying. But the normal way we gain experience is by doing things that are slightly beyond our comfort levels and continuing to do them until we are very comfortable doing them. This occurs more safely with a good instructor but it occurs on our own too. All of these things are more dangerous to do than not to do. Diving has risk. The more we dive the more likely we will die diving. But very likely the more we dive the less likely we are to die on a given dive. That would really bother me but driving has risk too, with the same result.

 

[lionfish-eater]

There is no law or regulation that prohibits shore diving outside of the Marine park.

The person who was quoted in the article is a representative of the dive charter industry.
As far as they are concerned, all diving should be done with a guide in the park.

Cam must have had a medical or environmental issue.
He could have been hit by the scooter.
He has had a few shark encounters in this area in the past. We talked about how the vibration from the scooter might be an attractant. A simple bump from a bull shark could have knocked him out.

 

[Nick Steele]

When I read the description of the reef damage from the divers that went to the last known area my first thought was that it was an impact from the dpv and was a main cause of him not surfacing. I didn’t want to say this at the time because I was still hopeful he would turn up somewhere on the surface waiting for us to pick him up.

Curious question though, maybe @RayfromTX you would know. I assume Cameron carried atleast one cutting device. I’ve seen it mentioned where he placed his dpv was out of the norm and would be hard to cut loose.

Is it possible he cut the dpv free and it came crashing down or would that have been hard to do?

 

[MargaritaMike]

Cam must have had a medical or environmental issue

A simple bump from a bull shark could have knocked him out

Medical issues happen at the most inopportune time sometimes. I was providing radio support for a half-triathlon a couple of years ago. 37 swimmers went into the water and rounded the turn. 36 swimmers got out of the water. It took about 15-20 minutes for this to be "noticed". After rescue calls went out and boats arrived with Sonar to scan the bottom, the 37th swimmer was found on the bottom. The autopsy show he had a heart attack. Because he was an athlete and had very little body fat, he sank immediately. He was in a pack of swimmers and no one noticed. It can happen in the blink of an eye. This MAY have happened to Cam. PURE SPECULATION but a possibility. You can't prepare for these, but it doesn't stop you from preparing for the dive.

 

[RayfromTX]

When I read the description of the reef damage from the divers that went to the last known area my first thought was that it was an impact from the dpv and was a main cause of him not surfacing. I didn’t want to say this at the time because I was still hopeful he would turn up somewhere on the surface waiting for us to pick him up.

Curious question though, maybe @RayfromTX you would know. I assume Cameron carried atleast one cutting device. I’ve seen it mentioned where he placed his dpv was out of the norm and would be hard to cut loose.

Is it possible he cut the dpv free and it came crashing down or would that have been hard to do?

I asked his mother about that and posted that information here.

I asked Bonnie why he gave her his camera when they separated for him to go deeper. Her reply follows.

"He always gives me his camera unless there is absolutely no or little current. You can't take macro photos in a current. So I almost always kept the camera while he did his going deeper part And yes he liked his hands free while going deeper."

I didn't realize that. That's why there are so few pictures of the deep stuff.

"Right, The camera was for the deco part of the dive ...in the shallows with time to look for the little stuff. We had done it that way many times. And we always stayed at least 20 minutes more than the most conservative amt of deco time. He.always wanted to be extra safe on deco length (I think especially for me) and also because we both absolutely loved being at 10 ft looking for little things he could photograph."

Easier done on a shore dive. Probably one reason he preferred it to boats.

I've asked more questions. Here are the responses. As I have said, it is natural for people to jump to conclusions. They will usually be off the mark.The blaming tone is what makes people reluctant to share what they know in these threads. Cameron was more transparent that that because he cared for others more than for his ego. I am sharing this in that spirit. I have not felt like asking these questions sooner. This discussion is irrelevant to our search for Cameron on the surface which has up to now been our primary focus.

Bonnie, where was the scooter when you separated and how strong was the current?

The Scooter Was In Front Of Him Not Stowed behind. I have felt the current stronger there on other dives.. the current was strong but let's remember I was able to navigate 2 miles of that reef at 70 - 90 ft that day. I realize currents can be stronger and different at deeper depths.

 

[Christi]

There is no law or regulation that prohibits shore diving outside of the Marine park.

The person who was quoted in the article is a representative of the dive charter industry.
As far as they are concerned, all diving should be done with a guide in the park.

That was a poorly translated GOOGLE translation - and he did not say that shore diving was illegal, because it's not and in our Association discussions he does not even propose banning shore diving. It t is NOT our position that shore diving be banned.

I URGE people NOT to take google translated articles literally - and do not rely on them - even more so if they are taken from one of the local newspapers where reporters are not real journalists. Google Translate is not intended to translate full articles - so the written word is taken horribly out of context. There are many expressions, slang or simply different ways of saying things in Spanish that come across more literally or just completely wrong through google translate.

 

[2airishuman]

The ONLY part of that list of actions that would not be standard for a mid-level tech dive for MOST agencies is the part about being solo.

And he was shore diving where it was banned by the Mexican authorities according to one of the previous posts.

I would just like to point out that I engage in solo dives that are, for one reason or another, not in compliance with some of the laws, ordinances, and administrative rules of the authorities having jurisdiction over the waters where I dive. I don't believe that makes my dives unsafe.

While we will probably never know the details of what went wrong on Cameron's last dive, I doubt very much if the outcome would have been different had this been a team dive.

I also disagree that the fact that he was in technical non-compliance with the various rules (etc) of the authorities having jurisdiction had much to do with the outcome. Surface support of some kind, whether a boat or someone on shore, reduces risk in many situations. There are other ways to achieve the same thing, PLB, marine radio in a basket on the surface, various other signalling devices. The shore diving risks at Cozumel are not unique but rather are present in the many places where shore diving is conducted in the presence of currents, tides, traffic, etc. For most people it is not feasible to pay to dive often, let alone daily, from a boat. Doing it in places where there are various rules (etc) against it does not affect the safety of the activity.

 

[2airishuman]

The point is......if having done a risky dive successfully makes you think that was OK, and you do it again because now you think it must be a bit less risky than you thought....THAT is normalization of deviance. Having done some risky dive "hundreds of times" makes it seem like it is not as risky as you thought it was. But the dive hasn't changed, only your perception of the risk. It is Russian Roulette...and each time you spin and just go click you are NOT entitled to think, "Hey, that's not so bad! Let's do it again!"

The problem with this line of reasoning is that it's being directed at purported bright-line rules regarding depth and solo diving. I don't believe that Cameron was engaging in normalization of deviance in these areas simply because he had the training and the background to complete dives of this kind safely.

While Cameron was a better diver than I ever anticipate becoming, there are some things I find troubling about his approach to this dive. One is that he has shown, in the past, a dismissive attitude towards strong currents. The other is that he did not, so far as I can determine, have an effective means of signalling available to him, to use if he were to find himself adrift. I do not know if these were part of the causation chain for this accident in particular but I find them much more troubling than the fact that he was solo after having made hundreds (thousands?) of other solo dives, or the fact that the dive was planned as a deco dive beyond recreational limits, given that he had the training and equipment considered customary for such dives.