Divers vs Underwater Tourists

[WarmWaterDiver]

Those are 2 different Speckled King Snakes on 2 seperate occassions. See how one has an almost circular pattern on the top of its head, but the other one doesn't?

We like them as neighbors.

 

[elan]

My guess is what OP is trying to say that there are people who just want to get into water and possessing minimum techniques enough to dive particular vacation environment with minimum interest in advancing further in diving which he called "tourist" and those who want to advance , study and practice new techniques whom he called divers. I agree to the point that occasional practice of particular skill can be dangerous as the subject still have confidence from the previous times but w/o enough practice the skill is getting lost with times so when the subjects meets problems that he thought he could handle the reality shows that the skill is lost and he cannot handle the situation properly.

 

[The Chairman]

---

---

A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

This is a friendly forum based on mutual respect.

Various posts have been removed that do not comply with this ToS criteria as well as those which referenced them.

Subsequent meanness will result in not being able to participate in this thread.

Thanks in advance.

---

 

[TSandM]

I know Mr. Bryan personally, and he does not in person have the attitude that unfortunately came across in the OP.

I think, although I don't presume to mind read, that he was reacting to the many threads where people complain that the dive leader on some tropical destination dive didn't keep them safe, or watch their gas, or notice someone having a problem, or any number of things that people think dive guides ought to do for them.

In Puget Sound, we don't have dive guides. You dive off a boat -- the crew tells you what the site looks like and the depth range to expect, and how diver retrieval is going to go, and then you are on your own. We have to learn to fly by ourselves early on. That's why you get this kind of amazed response from PNW divers, when people complain that the guides don't do enough for them. We do it ourselves. If someone helps me on with my fins, I'm just plain grateful.

A couple of years ago, chickdiver made a comment that people who don't live in cave country will never be anything more than line-following cave tourists. It stung, and I resented it, but she was right. A line-following cave tourist is what I am, and what I almost certainly always will be. An underwater tourist is what someone is, if they can't assemble their gear, can't make a dive plan, can't navigate without a guide, and can't monitor and manage their own gas. To that extent, I agree with Gray. How many dives you have to do, and under what circumstances, to achieve those competencies is something different, and I don't know the answer to that.

 

[Guba]

This may have been said before (I'm sorry...I skipped a few pages), but there is an apparent conundrum in the original premise. I think it goes something like this: A person (presumably a new or inexperienced diver) is a "tourist". Therefore, the recommendation is that person utilize a DM until when they dive in order to be safe, at least until they have acquired the requisite experience to be able to take responsibility for themselves. (If I have that summary wrong, please feel free to correct me.)
However the paradox is this: at what point is a person supposed to feel confident enough to quit using the DM? Wasn't that point supposed to be when they earned their cert? Granted, this could be flawed logic too, but there appears to be a couple of assumptions here. The first is that a diver is incompetent and cannot plan their dives and "take responsibility" for themselves on their first outing, hence they need the DM. The second is that diving lakes, rivers and quarries is somehow inherently safer than diving the "big ocean", so that's where a diver needs to do their experience gathering. In my neck of the woods, diving our lakes is, to me, much more risky than "tourist diving". The vis is poorer, there are more entanglement risks, the water is colder, and required gear is usually more elaborate. Task loading can be intimidating for a newbie.
I do appreciate the need for practice and experience in order to make a diver more competent. However, I draw the line at hinting that certified divers are incompetent because they dive infrequently. As long as they stay within their training and capabilities (and I know that could be a big "if") I don't believe they should be the targets of belittlement.

 

[gcbryan]

This may have been said before (I'm sorry...I skipped a few pages), but there is an apparent conundrum in the original premise. I think it goes something like this: A person (presumably a new or inexperienced diver) is a "tourist". Therefore, the recommendation is that person utilize a DM until when they dive in order to be safe, at least until they have acquired the requisite experience to be able to take responsibility for themselves. (If I have that summary wrong, please feel free to correct me.)
However the paradox is this: at what point is a person supposed to feel confident enough to quit using the DM? Wasn't that point supposed to be when they earned their cert? Granted, this could be flawed logic too, but there appears to be a couple of assumptions here. The first is that a diver is incompetent and cannot plan their dives and "take responsibility" for themselves on their first outing, hence they need the DM. The second is that diving lakes, rivers and quarries is somehow inherently safer than diving the "big ocean", so that's where a diver needs to do their experience gathering. In my neck of the woods, diving our lakes is, to me, much more risky than "tourist diving". The vis is poorer, there are more entanglement risks, the water is colder, and required gear is usually more elaborate. Task loading can be intimidating for a newbie.
I do appreciate the need for practice and experience in order to make a diver more competent. However, I draw the line at hinting that certified divers are incompetent because they dive infrequently. As long as they stay within their training and capabilities (and I know that could be a big "if") I don't believe they should be the targets of belittlement.

Well, since I started this I guess I'll have to keep answering for it.

I agree with you and did from the first post that people should be capable right out of class as far as being able to keep themselves safe. I don't think that quarries are "safe" I mentioned them because most people have them nearby and therefore could get some experience more often than just on vacation should they choose to avail themselves of these opportunities.

My point was that there are some who come out of class and then don't dive until and unless they are on vacation and this is sometimes infrequent. Some of these people are the ones who say that they need a DM to keep them safe. I simply labeled those people underwater tourists. Those who continued with their diving I labeled a diver.

I didn't say someone should need a DM. I didn't say vacation divers are less capable than anyone else if they can go on vacation enough to be capable. I was talking about those mentioned in another thread where it was felt that most any newer diver was incapable of being safe unless there was a DM involved. To those I just labeled them underwater tourists since they weren't at that point capable of taking care of themselves. Their assessment not mine. I'm not specifying who can or cannot take care of themselves. I'm just saying that those who say that they cannot take care of themselves could be thought of as underwater tourists and treated accordingly instead of DM's and dive charters having to guess whether their clients are divers or underwater tourists.

I don't see anything arrogant about my remarks. I haven't labeled anyone or set myself up in any category. Rather than wish scuba instruction were more complete or that DM's and charters operated in some ideal way I thought it more practical and helpful to just look at the situation where a diver either can take care of them self or they can't. If they can't then they need to hire a DM as a dive buddy.

I don't really see what the argument is against what I'm saying. Someone who says they can't take care of them self shouldn't hire a DM? Most of the negative comments (not talking about you here) simply haven't read the actual posts. Most of the comments are emotional responses to what they assumed I was saying or thinking not to what I actually did say.

I'm sure it's human nature to read something in the worst light when you think the poster is someone you disagree with but it helps to have an open mind and actually read the posts.

 

[annasea]

<snip>
A couple of years ago, chickdiver made a comment that people who don't live in cave country will never be anything more than line-following cave tourists. It stung, and I resented it, but she was right. A line-following cave tourist is what I am, and what I almost certainly always will be. <snip>

Interesting. I know of at least 3 cave divers who live outside of "cave country" and reside in Florida that would most likely not agree. As well, hopefully her definition of "cave country" included other countries besides the US that have access to cave diving.

 

[Thalassamania]

In the scientific diving world we define an active diver as someone who has made 12 dives in the previous 12 months and who has made a dive to his or her qualification depth (30, 60, 100, 130, 150, or 190) in the previous 6 months. Divers who do not meet the first specification must do a series of work up dives with a specified buddy before resuming regular diving, divers who do not meet the second must do a series of specified, increasingly deep dives to regain their depth qualification. I'm not exactly sure how to translate that to the rec world, but that's what we do and it seems to have worked fairly well.

 

[gcbryan]

Interesting. I know of at least 3 cave divers who live outside of "cave country" and reside in Florida that would most likely not agree. As well, hopefully her definition of "cave country" included other countries besides the US that have access to cave diving.

No personal offense meant here but this is why these threads get so confrontational and get off track. I'm sure you actually understand what Lynne was trying to say and what chickdiver was trying to say. I suspect you actually understand what I was trying to say.

Lynne will not be able to dive in caves as frequently as chick diver. Those in Florida not in "cave country" still are more likely to be able to go there frequently. Those who live in Mexico or elsewhere with caves of course will be able to dive there more frequently.

Most everyone actually understands what was meant by those statement don't they? It would be impossible to start any thread if you cover every possible exception. I would need an attorney to go over every possible thing I write to see if there was any possible exception and therefore nothing would ever get posted or discussed.

I'm not trying to be confrontational here but since I've had to essentially repeat myself many times over the coarse of this thread not defending the spirit of what I said but instead defending the letter of every point I just have a hard time believing that people really don't understand the spirit of most posts even where they may disagree. Maybe I'm wrong?

 

[annasea]

No personal offense meant here but this is why these threads get so confrontational and get off track. I'm sure you actually understand what Lynne was trying to say and what chickdiver was trying to say. I suspect you actually understand what I was trying to say.

Lynne will not be able to dive in caves as frequently as chick diver. Those in Florida not in "cave country" still are more likely to be able to go there frequently. Those who live in Mexico or elsewhere with caves of course will be able to dive there more frequently.

Most everyone actually understands what was meant by those statement don't they? It would be impossible to start any thread if you cover every possible exception. I would need an attorney to go over every possible thing I write to see if there was any possible exception and therefore nothing would ever get posted or discussed.

I'm not trying to be confrontational here but since I've had to essentially repeat myself many times over the coarse of this thread not defending the spirit of what I said but instead defending the letter of every point I just have a hard time believing that people really don't understand the spirit of most posts even where they may disagree. Maybe I'm wrong?

Based on some of the responses this thread has had, I reckon you may very well be wrong.

I can only speak for myself, of course... I wasn't trying to encourage confrontation--I don't have the time nor energy for it--I was trying to clarify the statement in question. Some people may not be aware there is "cave country" outside of the US. I always try to be as clear/specific as possible in my posts, but I realize not everyone else is... hence the need for clarification.

My apologies for the sidetrack...