Diver drowns in guided cenote dive

[boulderjohn]

Here is an example of the challenges of assessing personal abilities.

A few years ago, I was diving with two close friends in Akumal, using a dive shop in Akumal Bay that offered a series of quick, one-tank dives out to the nearby reef. We came in from a morning dive that had been led by a DM we had not seen before, and as we walked to the shop, he said we were the only ones signed up for the first afternoon dive, and he wanted to know if we were OK with going to a more challenging site, one more fitting our abilities. Sure we were. When we began to prepare for that dive, however, we were joined by a couple who had just signed up. When we began the dive, it was clear that they were not good at all. The DM spent the first 5 minutes of the dive giving them a basic buoyancy lesson while the 3 of us hovered nearby watching. Once we began the dive, it was clear they would be unable to handle the maze of channels and swim throughs the DM had planned for us, so we just swam around the outside of the reef.

After the dive, the DM apologized, telling us that the couple only had about 25-30 dives and did not have the skills we had picked up through our vast experience. I pointed to my two friends and said, "I just certified them yesterday. You just witnessed their first two dives as certified divers."

I would say that the couple with which we had just dived would still be at a level of the most basic competence if they did another 25-30 dives of the kind they had been doing previously--they still would not be at the level my friends were at on their first OW dives.

 

[boulderjohn]

Here is an example of the challenges of assessing dive sites--in this case two caverns only hundreds of feet apart.

A few years ago, a father (a certified OW instructor) took his 2 teenage children into the cavern area of Jackson Blue cave in Marianna, Florida. This is a high flow cave with a large opening. It can be like entering and exiting a fire hose at times. With all that water movement, there is nearly nothing like real silt present, and if you stirred up what is there, it will be gone in seconds. The 3 of them probably had a wonderful time flutter kicking their way around the entire spacious cavern area.

The next day they went to another cavern a stone's throw away--twin cave. The daughter charged in, her flutter kicking revealing one major difference between Jackson Blue and Twin--Twin is a low flow cave with many feet of fine silt covering the floor. Her kicking stirred up a huge storm of silt. Fortunately, a couple were in the cavern and had laid line to the open water. When they saw what was happening, they grabbed the line and headed out, colliding with the terrified brother and pulling him to safety as they went. On the surface they got on their cell phones ASAP and called for help. By the time that help (Edd Sorenson) arrived, the area was so clouded by silt that it took him a long time just to find the opening. Once inside, it was pure luck that enabled him to run into her while she was at the cavern's ceiling, breathing from an air pocket there.

 

[Bob DBF]

I agree wholeheartedly with almost everything you said, made all of those points myself earlier. The only one I disagree with is John R's ill-conceived attempt at analysis being relevant. We already have the tools, we already have the procedure, we already have the education, we already have the solution. The solution has existed for years.

Yes we are both on the same side. What I am trying to point out is that John R's analysis is the vehicle that has improved workplace safety over the years by showing the problem in a way that courts and insurance companies understand. There is no way to stop this practice by Just Say No, but an insurance company can stop it or make it safe with one letter to the dive Op.

As for "just say no," what is your solution? We tell children that they are not allowed to drive until they have had proper training. Should we revisit that procedure? We tell people not to fly airplanes until they've had proper training. Should we change that as well?

There are also barriers in place to reduce this problem, like controlling the keys, airport security, and the parents teaching their children good judgement, which may not work, but one has years to train.. From what I see the teaching good judgement in OW, has been reduced to "you are certified to 60', "dont go in caves", and other such catch phrases.

What we don't have is a willingness to personally remove ourselves from the situation when it is required. We believe we can abdicate our responsibility to someone else.

I agree. However, when the Carny comes to town with all the bright lights, music, and adventure, a lot of people still don't understand that it's a scam, and they may go home without their wallet.

The PADI technical program does a much better job of talking about extending personal limits than do their recreational courses. This is particularly true of the trimix course, since there is no course after that, and divers have nothing but their own judgment to determine the degree to which they can extend their limits.

That much better job of talking about extending personal limits needs to go back into the OW class where it belongs. The way I see it is when divers first start expanding their skills, when they have so few, is where good judgement could start saving more lives. The plus is that you would get a better diver going into your tech classes.

Extending Personal Limits, how to improve your diving judgement, could be your next distinctive specialty. I could send you a few people I've run across.


Bob

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

This thread seems to have really taken off yesterday, and it's taken me a while to wade through all of the responses. Several have made some interesting points. And while I see some validity in the "just say no" approach, we should all by now understand that it's a great theory that has very little success in the real world, because human nature is such that people will always find rationalizations to do what they want to do. And in this case, as long as there's a market for taking open water divers into these caverns (and it's a very lucrative market), there will always be those who are willing to do so. The solution goes even beyond making it more difficult, or even illegal, for that market to exist. We've seen in the ongoing US "War on Drugs" how unsuccessful that approach is at changing human attitudes and behavior. "Just say no" does little to nothing to prevent people from doing it anyway.

It also doesn't answer the questions about what really happened. There are several questions that, while we may not know the answers in this specific case, may provide some value to understanding how fatalities like this one occur ...

• Did this man stray from the line or did the guide take the group in there?
• If the former, why? Was it an intentional act or due to some deficiency in how the lines are marked? I asked that question earlier, and if any of you are familiar with this place, how far off the cavern line are the lines into the caves? Seems like there are multiple entrances, so how well are the marked?
• What was the guide's qualifications for taking these people on this particular tour? While this cenote seems to be a popular "bucket list" destination (partly due perhaps to its more commonly known name as the "Temple of Doom") is it really an appropriate place to be taking tourists? My impression, based on reading the reviews of the cavern zone is that there are better places ... Dos Ojos, Gran Cenote, Pet Cemetary, and Carwash, for example.
• Is the cavern line clearly marked? I've read someone say that it's a gold line, but is that a fact or an assumption? I know from my limited experiences in MX that some of the popular cenotes are not marked with gold line, and instead have the same white line as the ones that go back deeper into the caves.
• What kind of lights were these tourists using? Were they even using lights at all? I recall seeing once, at Car Wash, a guide with four tourists coming out of the cave zone. Two of the tourists didn't even have lights, and the ones who did were using what appeared to be smallish backup lights. Only the guide had a light appropriate to the environment. Yes, this is a clear violation of common sense, much less any kind of training or (hopefully) policy regarding cenote tours ... but how common does it occur? And what's the "culture" of such violations in MX? More to the point, why?

The bottom line is that we probably aren't going to know any of the specifics of how the accident occurred ... that rarely happens in any diving accident, particularly one involving dive professionals who will almost certainly be facing some sort of litigation from the surviving members of the deceased's family. But exploring the particulars of the environment, and asking good questions can sometimes expose areas where steps can be taken to mitigate the risks ... whether it's policy changes, a stiffening of the training and experience requirements for tourists wanting to hire someone to take them into these places, or just deciding that this particular cenote is too risky for this type of activity. But you can't affect changes without first identifying specific steps that can be taken practically ... and "just say no" really isn't a practical solution, regardless of how much sense it would make to do it.

This, by the way, isn't just applicable to this type of overhead ... or to overheads at all. How much sense does it make to take barely-certified divers to the various blue holes around the world ... yet it's a burgeoning industry in places like Belize and Dahab (and yes, they lose a few in those places too). How about people entering wrecks? That's been brought up, and even closer to home ... on the various wrecks in British Columbia ... we see instructors taking AOW students (who often have no experience outside of their OW class) inside of wrecks, justifying it by saying that they are "clean" wrecks with clearly identifiable exits. Yes they do ... but that won't be much help if a student gets their reg kicked out of their mouth and doesn't think to reach for their backup ... their first instinct will be to bolt for a surface they have no hope of reaching.

I guess my point is that "just say no" would work better if it were applied not to the individual diver ... who probably has no clue what the risks truly are ... but to the dive op and/or dive pro who most certainly does, but who takes these people into these situations because if they don't their competitor down the street certainly will.

You can tell people till you're blue in the face why they shouldn't do these things. They can know it. But there's a difference between knowing and understanding ... and the latter usually comes from the context of experience and training. You won't get that from a typical tourist. All they know is that they read somewhere this is a bucket list dive, and some dive pro or magazine article told them it's worth the experience.

Accidents like this are often the result of a diver being assured that despite what their training taught them, it's OK to do these things. A few years back I co-wrote an article on a fatality that described exactly that phenomenon ...

Don't Worry - It Will Be OK - ScubaBoard

... and while it had nothing to do with overheads, the fatality amounted to the same thing ... a diver going into an environment she was in no way qualified to be in. So why do it? Mostly because they really want to, and therefore they are all too willing to believe the reassurances of the people selling them on the experience. Maybe that, really, is what causes accidents like this to happen ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[oya]

@boulderjohn

Good contrast.

Important to point out the ASTOUNDING unlikelihood of the rescue in the later case that borders on miracle. And a reminder that that air pocket was slowly going losing oxygen and gaining carbon dioxide (which I've heard argued is why the girl was found as calm as she was).

 

[Jack Hammer]

While i agree there may not be anything new to learn, that doesn't discount if changes are warranted at that location. Does a line need to be moved to prevent accidentally jumping? Does a more thorough and standard pre-briefing need to become required? Etc. Bonne Terre makes people sit through a painfully bad and long video prior to their tour.

When I was diving the area we saw a few cavern lines that were well within sight of and far too near at places to the cave line.

 

[boulderjohn]

When I was diving the area we saw a few cavern lines that were well within sight of and far too near at places to the cave line.

Even this issue is debatable. While probably most cave divers hold it as an article of faith that cave lines should be completely out of sight, there are many who disagree and feel it is better to have it well in sight. Here are some of the arguments in favor of that:

1. When a cave diver makes the connection from open water to the cave line, there is a line for the untrained diver to follow into the cave anyway, a line that may go away while the untrained diver is inside following the cave line. (While I was recently decompressing in the Devil's eye at Ginnie Springs, there were free divers (!!!!) following the cave divers' lines into the cave.) If they turn on main cave line and come back to find that the cave divers who had put in the line have already left with the line, how do they find their way out?

2. Whether the line is in sight or not, the untrained diver knows it is there--somewhere. It is tempting to go in and try to find it, not realizing the consequences of not find finding the exit upon the return. This is one of the theories behind the discovery of an OW diver in the Catacombs at Ginnie Springs a few years ago.

3. Some OW divers may be tempted to just dart into the cave area for a quick look, turn around, and head back, not realizing how hard it can be to find your way back without a line. That is one possible explanation for what happened in this case. In fact, IMO, it is the best explanation.

 

[Jack Hammer]

John, the lines I'm referring to were permanent lines that ran parallel. Too easy for a distracted cavern tour diver to unintentionally follow a cave line.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

John, I don't think the issue is whether or not the line's within sight so much as it is the distance of the jump between the two. I can't speak for this specific system, because I haven't dived it. But I do recall several instances where jumps were less than two or three feet apart ... in some cases just a few inches apart. It's incredibly easy to find yourself heading down the wrong line in that case. All it takes is to look away for a second or two. It happened once to me ... and I've had all the requisite cave training. Fortunately in my case I was leading us out, and my dive buddy immediately signaled me. I stopped, looked back, immediately saw what happened, and got back on the right line. Had the same thing happened to divers who weren't paying good attention ... or to a diver bringing up the rear ... it'd be real easy to suddenly find yourself going deeper into the cave on a line that you thought was leading you out.

Again, I'm not suggesting this was the case here, but I do believe that some of the jumps in MX are way too close together. And if it happens to be the case in one of the cenotes where they're doing tourist dives, I can see that easily leading to an accident.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[boulderjohn]

Bob, I saw it happen myself in Jackson Blue. I was number 2 in line exiting the cave, and I saw the lead diver make the mistaken jump. I flashed him, and he corrected the error. There was very nearly a fatality at Jackson Blue not long ago because of that same issue.

I think there is a middle ground between being that close and being so very far. In trying to decide where to dive in Mexico not long ago, I was advised not to go to a certain cave. I only had a 400 foot primary reel, and I was advised that unless I knew where exactly where I was going to find the main line, that might not be enough. I also found a description on the web site that said that divers new to the site looking to connect to the main line could use up all their planned dive gas trying to find it. Maybe something in between those extremes could work.