Diver found missing in Laguna's Shaw's Cove

[tphelps]

It must have been a personal health problem like maybe a heart attack? It says he was a certified diver. The procedure is if you loose your buddy is to resurface after 1 minute. I'm curious as to who the instructor for that class was. Even if you do manage your students that poorly, you should have the common sense to have the group turn around and look for the guy. And also, 25 feet is shallow, very possible to do a CESA even if he did run out of air. Very sad and very puzzling.

 

[bosshog]

I apologize. This is sad for all involved. I only mean we should second guess everyone, including instructors in order to learn from others mistakes. Something went horribly wrong...so what are we thinking about that might have us make a safer decision next time we are in a similar condition? Even speculation can have a positive outcome from this perspective if it makes people think. Again, sorry for the people involved...none of them deserved this.

 

[Ken Kurtis]

At the risk of me coming off like the parent scolding the child . . .

It must have been a personal health problem like maybe a heart attack?

"Must have been"???? Based on what evidence?? Wild guesses do not equate to thoughtful accident analysis nor do they really contribute to our collective understasnding of what happened here.

Even if you do manage your students that poorly . . .

First of all, they weren't students. They're certified divers. Secondly, where's the evidence that there was bad management underwater. Separation in and of itself is not indicative of that. Are you saying you're NEVER lost your buddy? Are you suggesting that ANY time someone loses a buddy, it's only the fault of one diver? Again, you're not only assuming facts not in evidence, but may be unfairly castigating those involved in this, as if the incident itself wasn't traumatizing enough.

. . . you should have the common sense to have the group turn around and look for the guy.

That's not common sense, that's a recipe for a second fatality. I recently testified in a lawsuit where that was one of the issues. To have non-professional-level people searching in less-than-optimal conditions for a missing diver (and who's to say your searchers have any rescue experience) is inviting trouble should one of your rescuers get into trouble. First rule of rescue: Don't make yourself a victim.

And also, 25 feet is shallow, very possible to do a CESA even if he did run out of air.

That's definitely a valid question that derserves more inspection.

- Ken

---------- Post added April 17th, 2013 at 11:18 AM ----------

I only mean we should second guess everyone, including instructors in order to learn from others mistakes.

I hope you meant to say we should NOT second-guess everyone. This is what the lawyers do in these types of lawsuits. The accusation is that if only you had done something you hadn't done, the person who is dead would be alive so it's obviously your fault. Bull. You can't say that something not done would have changed the outcome since you can't prove a negative.

Something went horribly wrong...

Not necessarily. Many times when looking at these things, what seem like routine decisions are simply bad choices and at some point they pile up and spiral out of control. When you say "something went horribly wrong" it makes it sound like something catastrophic and unavoidable happened and that's generally not the case. Two studies (one mine, one by DAN) indiciate that 69% of the time dive accidents can be traced back to diver error (my study) and in 47% of the cases, out-of-air is the trigger (DAN's study). Both definitely avoidable although they can obviously have catastrophic results.

Even speculation can have a positive outcome from this perspective if it makes people think.

Speculate all your want in a general discussion of accidents but in analayzing a specific accident, stick to what is known or can be reasonably inferred from what is known. For instance, the heart attack comment in #41 is IMHO totally out-of-line as it has no basis in anything that's been said. It would be like suggesting he committed suicide because he had terminal cancer when there's absolutely nothing to indicate that that's a valid claim.

- Ken

 

[WendyB]

AaronRiot,When he surfaced,it appeared to me as if he were in the same area as the other instructor,his wife was brought in minutes later by the other instructor.I met them both at the water..that instructor turned around went back out as i walked with the wife and sat on the rocks.

 

[LAKelpDiver]

For those familiar to the site: if you found yourself separated from your buddy/group and inside this surgey rocky reef would you surface and swim to shore? Surface and try to swim out and around the reef? Stay down (circumstances permitting) and swim out and around? Maybe ditch the gear and head to shore? (I realize the best option is not to lose your buddy etc but that is not what happened in this case is it.)

We dived there Sunday, and have numerous times in the past. According to Wendy's description earlier, it would seem as though the diver surfaced somewhere in the middle of the many urchin covered trenches and rock outcropping shallower areas. Perhaps even in the middle of the "crevice".

I would. Surface then swim out and around the reef on top, unless the surface conditions prevent that. The law does require divers carry a snorkel here. In typical conditions here, a surface swim to shore would not be an easy. It would be a long swim out and around to clear out of the reef area, and you are exposed to the surf the entire time. Underwater in less than ideal conditions, which is how they were reported for that day, would not be easy either, and due to this trench structure, it would be very confusing for someone that does not dive there frequently. You can't just go straight to shore, lots of shallow rock outcropping completely covered with urchins. I guess you could if you had to, but that is going to be a painful trip and tough as you are completely exposed to the surf. Better than dying if it came down to it though.

Re-re-reading Wendy's post, they were probably not out where the trenches are, could have been in the crevice area though. Still, not a cake walk swim out on the surface from there either, same issues coming straight to shore.

 

[peterbj7]

It sounds to me a pretty tricky dive site, at least when this incident occurred, perhaps not one that inexperienced divers should have attempted. On my PADI IDC off the south coast of England on a steep shingle beach, conditions were so bad one day that our CD could not get out of the water and two of us had to remove our gear on shore and then go back in to get her - with a lot of difficulty. An inexperienced diver there then would have been in considerable danger, yet in calmer conditions OW courses were taught there.

As a private pilot I remember a well-known mantra - a good pilot can usually get out of trouble, a really good one won't get into trouble in the first place. Don't get into the water if you aren't sure you'll be able to get out again.

 

[diverrex]

I don't remember what Laguna site it was, I think Divers Cove, but if I am remembering correctly about two years ago a diver got too close into the rocky area in heavy churning surf and basically got smashed to death by the rocks. Laguna sites are generally easy but many of them have rocky areas where it is not possible to swim straight to shore. Ironically in heavy surf the shallower areas are often more dangerous than the deeper parts. Swimming out deeper, then across and then back to shore along the sandy areas could be necessary.

 

[keithbt]

I dive shaws or close by coves every other weekend or so....Sunday I talked to a friend of the instructor involved. HEAR SAY START " he said that it was a hired DM situation for the husband and wife. During the dive the husband (who had a camera) kept falling behind, the instructor and the wife would have to go back and look for him more than once." HEAR SAY OVER"

 

[Hatul]

I dive shaws or close by coves every other weekend or so....Sunday I talked to a friend of the instructor involved. HEAR SAY START " he said that it was a hired DM situation for the husband and wife. During the dive the husband (who had a camera) kept falling behind, the instructor and the wife would have to go back and look for him more than once." HEAR SAY OVER"

If true it does not sound like a good buddy system. In general the buddy team moves at pace of the slowest diver not the other way around. It's easy to slow down, but hard to go faster than you're comfortable, and generally slow results in better dive. In the swim-throughs swimming fast is a recipe for separation and losing your buddy.

I should add that the Shaw's Cove reef is rich in marine life, but you have to stop and look carefully to see it. Rushing through the reef makes no sense at all; you miss what there is to see there and can get into trouble.

 

[brnt999]

If true it does not sound like a good buddy system. In general the buddy team moves at pace of the slowest diver not the other way around. It's easy to slow down, but hard to go faster than you're comfortable, and generally slow results in better dive. In the swim-throughs swimming fast is a recipe for separation and losing your buddy.

I should add that the Shaw's Cove reef is rich in marine life, but you have to stop and look carefully to see it. Rushing through the reef makes no sense at all; you miss what there is to see there and can get into trouble.

I have been on dives where someone with a camera is in their own little world doing their own thing and they are oblivious to what others are doing. The idea that everyone should cater to the guy with a camera is dumb. They guy with a camera should put it down and be aware of what is going on around him/.