BMW
Registered
Sorry - I meant only the ones with known hazards (the "lobster trap") - not all of them.
Diver missing on Cape Breton in Nanaimo 11/24/07
- Thread starter PrincessOfPower
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
I personally would be opposed to any modification to the wreck. Especially if it would encourage people to think wreck pentrataion without a guideline is potentially safe if we cut enough holes or remove potential snags.
It is not safe without proper training and equipment. That is the message that should be taken out of this thread. I'm sorry folks, a PADI wreck diver badge is not enough to be going into these areas regardless of how many traps we try to remove.
lamont
Contributor
cold water diver
Registered
Hey Dave
Has the police report been released yet?
Has the police report been released yet?
I don't know. I am not very happy with the police right now. After numerous emails and phone messages without replies trying to find out where Ron's reel ended up we decided last Saturday to dive the wreck and see if it was still there. Lo and behold there it was laying in the rust pile right where Daniel was found. The reel is toast now after 3 months. This would have been helpful news a couple of months ago but no one from the RCMP returned my calls or messages. So I expect asking about a police report will yield similar results.
Sorry for the rant
Dave,
At least you didn't get tasered.
-S
At least you didn't get tasered.
-S
canadianreefer
Guest
Has anyone seen or heard of the police or cornor's report on this fatality yet? 
We want to take a look at the report, assess on what can and/or should be done on the Cape Breton in the area of the "lobster trap".
There is a lot of discussion about this part of the ship and what should be done. We are well into the season here and want to have a clear consensus on what should or should not be done. That report is vital.
We have a good idea of how this issue evolved and how it can be prevented from happening on future ships.
Any help would be appreciated.
We want to take a look at the report, assess on what can and/or should be done on the Cape Breton in the area of the "lobster trap".
There is a lot of discussion about this part of the ship and what should be done. We are well into the season here and want to have a clear consensus on what should or should not be done. That report is vital.
We have a good idea of how this issue evolved and how it can be prevented from happening on future ships.
Any help would be appreciated.
JeffG
Contributor
Nothing needs to be done.
CCRDolphinDiver
Registered
As soon as you start doing modifications you open pandoras box, where do you draw the line? There are already signs on every opening into the wreck warning about dangers and training requirements, if these are not heeded, do you advocate welding all the holes up on the wreck? where does it end? Do you want to station a team of "nannys" on the wreck 24/7 to verify C cards, and do an in-water assesment of every diver that shows up to dive, and then send a dive guide down with them to hold thier hand? Its a 400 foot wreck, its DANGEROUS to go inside it, even when it was first sunk, moreso now with the silt piling up. Get the training, gain the experience, work up to penetration, run a line, dive conservative....and live a long life.
canadianreefer
Guest
I generally agree with you. I think that the important issues that need to be taken and documented is that the situation on the stern of Cape Breton is assessed and discussed with people who know what they are talking about and "consensus" is established.
Wearing my professional legal hat I get into the issue of "voluntary assumption of risk" in recreational activities. There are a number of factors involved in a judicial assessment of those cases. One of the most important factors is the ability to control the risk within reason.
If you use the standard of mitigating the risks so that a " reasonably trained diver that is reasonably forseen to be in this part of the wreck" is the standard my view is no one should be at that depth entering the wreck without training and must be expected to be using their training appropriately.
The problem is getting a handle on who is likely to be in this area of the Cape Breton. If no inexperienced or untrained divers are getting near this part of the ship the answer is clear.
The important thing is to take the time to ask the question. If we do not the issue will be raised by the inevitable lawyer or journalist looking for a sensational story trying to paint anyone sinking ships as indifferent to the fate of divers.
Trust me " There're out there"
Wearing my professional legal hat I get into the issue of "voluntary assumption of risk" in recreational activities. There are a number of factors involved in a judicial assessment of those cases. One of the most important factors is the ability to control the risk within reason.
If you use the standard of mitigating the risks so that a " reasonably trained diver that is reasonably forseen to be in this part of the wreck" is the standard my view is no one should be at that depth entering the wreck without training and must be expected to be using their training appropriately.
The problem is getting a handle on who is likely to be in this area of the Cape Breton. If no inexperienced or untrained divers are getting near this part of the ship the answer is clear.
The important thing is to take the time to ask the question. If we do not the issue will be raised by the inevitable lawyer or journalist looking for a sensational story trying to paint anyone sinking ships as indifferent to the fate of divers.
Trust me " There're out there"
Similar threads
