Bad attitudes about solo diving are still prevalent

[Schwob]

I think solo divers will do good if they respect and follow the rules of private properties they may dive in or boats they may hire, should they have any (regarding solo diving).
...
My (privately owned) practise quarry prohibits solo diving w/o and requires a solo card for solo diving. Grateful that they don't just prohibit it flat out like another place in the area I happily am willing to follow their rule for my solo practises, which is why I got that cert card. The skills I am working on anyway, just the way I tick, no idea why diving w/o those skills would be considered safe, the card has nothing to do with that other then that at one point I demonstrated a rather minimal competency in such skills. It probably helps the quarry with insurance or such...
...
Anyway, in my mind, whether that diver dives with a buddy or not, in my opinion a good, save diver is, thinking, self reliant and practises to be and remain self reliant and to get better at it so as to be able to expand that self reliance to a larger set of conditions.
...
And in my mind, divers that insist that diving should only be done with a buddy sure have a valid point ... for them as obviously that is how they work.
Their point however just has no bearing on what I do with my dive if / when I dive solo. The missionary tactics employed at times ... I neither understand nor care for... and they just have no bearing. I have no idea what the point of the argument is. Do the same people try to convince others what food to eat or what religion to believe in or which news broadcast to follow...?Thanks I decide for myself.

What has bearing is local law and rules and a divers skillset and planning and execution under the present and forcast conditions. As there are typically no general rules or laws against solo diving, that's about it... or?
...
All that said, I also happily dive with a buddy ... but, usually, in no way am I safer then than when diving solo. Just too many variables out of my immediate control to think otherwise.The reason I am still plenty safe when buddy diving is because I still dive self reliant. The buddy isn't going to change that.
...
The minute so I think I cannot or should not do a dive w/o a buddy, that's the minute I, and as far as I am concerned anybody should consider to not do the dive. It is great to dive with a buddy, but outside of "assisted dives", where the buddy/ies is/arefully dedicated to your safety, in the end if you are actually buddy dependent, then, really, what business do you have underwater in the first place?
...
That message of self reliant diving being the safe way to dive (with or w/o buddy) should imho come very clearly across in dive training... from day one... It may not come across that clearly... And declaring the buddy as the best and at times only redundancy is imho just very, very wrong... Yeah it is being declared and yeah to me that is quite wrong. That's my opinion.
...
And preaching that solo diving done by those who are and work on and continue to work on being self reliant divers is risky or less safe than buddy diving (especially the all to common ho-hum budfy diving)... well, that's just even more wrong... imho...
... and if that critique were to be coming from such a ho-hum kind of buddy diver it would be, well, ... obsurd!

 

[Gareth J]

What has bearing is local law and rules and a divers skillset and planning and execution under the present and forcast conditions. As there are typically no general rules or laws against solo diving, that's about it... or?
!

I am not aware of any country that has an actual law against solo diving.

However, it appears in my limited experience, that the investigating authorities look at the recommendations of training agencies. Where there is a fatality, and breaches of 'recommended practice', there is an immediate focus on the break in 'normal, or recommended practice'.

One of the reasons that private sites, and many boats do not allow solo diving, is because this increases the risk to them being having to defend themselves for 'allowing an unsafe practice', i.e. a practice that deviates from the recommend practice by the majority of 'regulating or training agencies'.

Another truism, is that, in the majority of countries there is no legal requirement to be 'trained to dive' for recreation purposes.

One worrying thing, is that the number of private legal actions taken by surviving family against other divers in a group, the charter company, the skipper and crew seems to be on the increase. I can fully understand surviving family wanting a reason why a loved one died. But there seems to be a significant lack of understanding about what their family member was doing and the risks involved.

The old phrase, its my risk, i'll solo dive. Has turned into I think it's my risk, but if I don't survive I'll leave you to defend yourself against the authorities or my family's lawyers.
If you go to a beach on your own, walk off the beach for a dive, and die. Then it was your risk, and no one else is in the frame.
If you get on a boat with other divers, then potentially, the divers on the boat, the skipper, and the charter company can all be embroiled in any subsequent investigation. So it's now their risk, that doesn't seem fair to me.

Gareth

 

[JackOfDiamonds]

I don't see how it should bother other people.
At the end of the day if some divers goes solo in to the lake or ocean its not my problem, they should be experienced enough and trained enough to be able to handle this, no need for other people to start "educating" them.

 

[Vallonen]

I am not aware of any country that has an actual law against solo diving.

there is no legal requirement to be 'trained to dive' for recreation purposes.

How could it be? It is recreational, it's like sailing. Don't need any certificates.

As for authorities they will always look for ways to impose themselves as well as for ways to intimate themselves and finally looking for ways to find scapegoats.

People need to get away from this Orwellian Nanny state mindset. I see you are based in England. Hopefully you will not be forced to wear high visibility vests and hard hats followed by a "health and safety" inspector when you dive.

We mustn't allow for these things get out of hand, otherwise it's never gonna stop, and pretty soon you'll need a license, a permit, allowance what ever, for just about anything.

Sure it can be great to have say a RYA etc, but it should NEVER be a requirement for recreational sailing. Same principle with diving.

Encourage it? Sure, by all means. Demand it? Make it a requirement? No, not ever.

 

[TrimixToo]

The problem with opinions about solo diving is just that--they are opinions. As far as I know, we have no statistics to compare the number of buddy saves (there is no mandatory reporting) with the number of double fatalities (or even the parameters of the latter, since neither diver is available to ask) to determine whether solo diving is actually safer than buddy diving or the reverse. This debate has been raging for decades.

Even for swimming, the pairing of two swimmers who are not trained in lifesaving does not somehow magically confer livesaving skills on the one who does not get into trouble. Probably the best that can be said is that the more conservative of the two might prevent an accident by insisting the pair turn around before it happens. Similarly, two divers without rescue, DM, or instructor training receive only the most basic emergency procedure training. I am not even sure that training covers the most frequent causes of diver fatalities, but I am too lazy this morning to go look it up and compare the standards to the DAN or BSAC reports.

 

[Kharon]

My first diving rule is You are always diving solo no matter how many divers are in the water, or how many buddies you have, or how much experience they have or what you discussed during the dive plan.

Don't think so? Watch this:

 

[Gareth J]

How could it be? It is recreational, it's like sailing. Don't need any certificates.

But that's not strictly true is it.

For many European countries, if you take your boat into their coastal waters you are required to have an ICC. Many also require particular levels of insurance.

If you can't produce your ICC, some countries will impound your boat.

 

[chrisch]

But that's not strictly true is it.

For many European countries, if you take your boat into their coastal waters you are required to have an ICC. Many also require particular levels of insurance.

If you can't produce your ICC, some countries will impound your boat.

That is correct. It is because a boat (like a car or other motor vehicle) if misused can cause other people harm. Therefore it is a requirement that a person operating a vehicle or boat has a level of competence sufficient not to cause harm. Governments and regulatory bodies exist to keep people safe from others, not to invent pointless rules and all the other BS and myth about "nanny state" or health and safety. The BS comes about because some inadequate people cannot accept being told what to do and because some inadequate people in authority cannot resist telling everybody what to do.

Solo diving primarily endangers the diver. As such it really doesn't need to be prohibited for the above reason. However, once the diver has got lost or drowned a lot of other people do become involved. In a training quarry for example it is now going to start a search and rescue operation and disrupt all the other students, schools and people just having a fun dive. At sea a SAR operation might involve the coastguard and emergency services. All those people are inconvenienced by the solo diver. If the emergency services have to choose between the lost diver and a "real" emergency it could be argued that lives are threatened.

For all these reasons and more it is acceptable to place limits on the actions of divers and of solo divers. Asking that those of us who want to dive on our own get a certificate to at least prove a basic level of training doesn't seem to me to be an immense hardship. Better than than a total ban. If selling this certification and training profits the quarry owners then all the more reason to do it. If getting the certified training doesn't let us dive solo when we want to then we will go elsewhere and the income is lost twice over.

 

[Vallonen]

But that's not strictly true is it.

For many European countries, if you take your boat into their coastal waters you are required to have an ICC. Many also require particular levels of insurance.

If you can't produce your ICC, some countries will impound your boat.

It’s close enough with few exceptions, that said, of course these things are constantly being pushed for.

I’m pretty sure that soon some countries will push for a bicycle license also and the need for a helmet, and that a point system would be introduced, and with the license holder not being allowed a bicycle with more than three gears for a period of two-three years. i.e. no performance bike allowed. Perhaps not even allowed to bicycle at night, motivation? Putting other cyclists at danger.

But of course this would never happen now would it? Because it would be completely irrational, then again who knows.

 

[Vallonen]

The BS comes about because some inadequate people cannot accept being told what to do and because some inadequate people in authority cannot resist telling everybody what to do. .

The BS (and problems) comes about when inadequate people automatically accept what ever they are being told by those in authority, who then prey on these peoples stupidity and lameness to then continuously arrest life itself with even more “laws” rules and regulations. You know, to quell the human experience and put it in a little box that they can control.

Two groups being the problem here.

A: Stupid people

B: Nefarious people and control freaks in power

The third group, which I and many with me still belong to, end up increasingly loosing basic rights and freedoms the FIRST group is completely unaware of even existed in the first place, simply because they are used to seek permission for just about anything that they want to do, as well used of being told what they can and cannot do, so they end up supporting what ever the group in power do.

And as always, it’s all done in the spirit of keeping them and others safe, and who doesn't want to be safe. (even thou safety in and of itself is an illusion)


In a free society where people have the god given right to exercise their freedoms it follows that they at times would put each other at risk. That’s the price you pay for freedom.

Unless of course, you wanna live in a full blown nanny state. A society in which no man in his right mind would ever want to live in.


Which was why I said in post #44

We mustn't allow for these things get out of hand, otherwise it's never gonna stop, and pretty soon you'll need a license, a permit, allowance what ever, for just about anything.

This is how you may treat children! Not grownups. The flip side is this, if you keep treating adults as children they turn into children. Solution? Well that must be even more "laws" rules and regulations then.