Do you dive with a snorkel?

[DrownedRat]

I always dive with mine attached to my mask, but I'm partial to shore dives. A lot of the local wrecks accesable via a shore dive involve 50m+ surface swims. I can see if your're strictly a boat/ocean diver how you my find it useless, but for my personal dive preferences, it's a must.

 

[learn-scuba]

I always have my snorkel on my mask for several reasons.

Least important, is because I'm an instructor and the rules say a snorkel must be worn and worn on the left side. Rules are rules and not mine to be broken. I can exceed standards, I can not modify them.

One of the basic SSI philosophies in their course structure is to teach a single "approach", "method" or "skill set" that will work in all conditions from the best of days to the worst case scenarios. And, of course, we're talking about basic recreational diving for the vast majority of divers... not technical diving or advanced cave diving.

Having a snorkel may be an annoyance most of the time, but not having one when you need it is more than just inconvenient.

The entanglement argument against using a snorkel borders on being a major stretch. First, to be entangled the source of entanglement had to be within two to three inces of your face? Why didn't you see it? Second, just exactly how entangled can you really get in that case? Third, how hard is it to remove the snorkel from the snorkel keeper or use your dive tool to cut free? Lastly... where was your buddy?

The drag argument is just plain funny. it can not possibly be a serious argument, can it?

The annoyance argument is a good one. My snorkel often drives me nuts and I'll freely admit that. I hate when it gets caugt on my inflator hose or gets twisted on my mask strap. But, in time, you come to largely ignore that.

The thing of it is that a snorkel is not just a matter of convenience. It's part of your personal safety equipment. Under normal conditions, you may never need your snorkel... just like you should never need to know how to buddy breath. BUT... that one time you need it can make the difference between a difficult situation and a diving statistic. The number of situations in which a snorkel could be a life saver are nearly endless. Is your life really worth the small bit of annoyance carrying the snorkel with you represents?

Mind you... I wouldn't argue that you HAVE to wear the snorkel at all times. But, frankly, I think you're a fool if you don't carry one with you for emergency use. Maybe it's just because of the amount of time I've spent in the water with students and new divers, but I have witnessed more situations in which a snorkel was more than "nice to have" to know that I would never be comfortable being without one. I wouldn't abort a dive because I had lost my snorkel, but I wouldn't dream of purposely leaving it in my dive bag.

 

[SeaJay]

learn-scuba once bubbled...
I always have my snorkel on my mask for several reasons.

Least important, is because I'm an instructor and the rules say a snorkel must be worn and worn on the left side. Rules are rules and not mine to be broken. I can exceed standards, I can not modify them.

Okay... And fair enough... You're entitled to any opinion you have.

...But the next time I hear someone tell me that DIR people are just "lemmings" or "sheep" following blindly, I'd like to quote your post. It seems that if anything, this proves that DIR specifically ISN'T following blindly.

...Not that you are... I'm not saying that. I'm simply saying that we DON'T follow those "rules," which proves that we are NOT "just following blindly."

I understand that PADI requires a snorkel to be worn in order to be a PADI certified instructor. That's their rules... Period. If you're going to represent them, you must wear a snorkel. Period.

I'm just saying that your words help disprove a popular myth spread about the way *I* dive.

One of the basic SSI philosophies in their course structure is to teach a single "approach", "method" or "skill set" that will work in all conditions from the best of days to the worst case scenarios. And, of course, we're talking about basic recreational diving for the vast majority of divers... not technical diving or advanced cave diving.

Fair enough... And I agree with the teaching philosophy... But I feel that teaching breathing off of your primary would be a better alternative to teaching students to sometimes breathe off of the primary, and sometimes breathe off of your snorkel.

Having a snorkel may be an annoyance most of the time, but not having one when you need it is more than just inconvenient.

I haven't encountered a situation where I needed it. Can you elaborate?

The entanglement argument against using a snorkel borders on being a major stretch. First, to be entangled the source of entanglement had to be within two to three inces of your face? Why didn't you see it? Second, just exactly how entangled can you really get in that case? Third, how hard is it to remove the snorkel from the snorkel keeper or use your dive tool to cut free? Lastly... where was your buddy?

Agreed. The "entaglement issue" that so many people are talking about is something that is common in any community that regularly uses any sort of line... Caving, shooting a lift bag (attached with a line), wrecking, and the like. Simply put, it's not so much that the snorkel causes a serious issue, but more that they're looking to delete ANY snag points, since as a whole, they can be really irritating, and in some cases downright dangerous. Many technical divers also prefer DIN valves to yoke for a variety of reasons; one of the major ones is that with a DIN valve, there is no "knob" to get a line hung up on "back there." The point is that it's not so much of the snorkel being an entaglement issue, but more of a snorkel being a small part of the equipment that causes entanglement issues.

What's more, I've personally found that being so concerned about entanglement issues is even MORE applicable to open-water divers who don't regularly utilize spools, reels, and lines. Ever been hung up in fishing line? The best places to dive are also the best places to fish... And it's really irritating - and in some cases dangerous - to dive in places that have loose monofilament.

The drag argument is just plain funny. it can not possibly be a serious argument, can it?

I don't think it's so much an issue of slowing down the diver as much as it is an issue of the snorkel pulling on the side of your mask in a current. Yes, that's a drag issue, I believe... And it can cause mask floods in the worst of conditions.

The annoyance argument is a good one. My snorkel often drives me nuts and I'll freely admit that. I hate when it gets caugt on my inflator hose or gets twisted on my mask strap. But, in time, you come to largely ignore that.

Okay. We feel, though, that getting rid of the snorkel altogether is a better idea.

The thing of it is that a snorkel is not just a matter of convenience. It's part of your personal safety equipment. Under normal conditions, you may never need your snorkel... just like you should never need to know how to buddy breath. BUT... that one time you need it can make the difference between a difficult situation and a diving statistic. The number of situations in which a snorkel could be a life saver are nearly endless. Is your life really worth the small bit of annoyance carrying the snorkel with you represents?

Of course not. But can you explain to me how a snorkel will save your life?

I've been diving in 6' seas... Complete with whitecaps... And had no problem keeping my head above water. But if I did have a problem, would it not be a better, safer alternative to use your regulator instead? Furthermore, would that diver not be more comfortable at 20' of depth, out of the wave action anyway, if the seas were so bad?

...What I see - right or wrong, it's only an opinion - is that the snorkel seems to me to be a fix for other problems... Not enough air, too high a consumption rate, bad buoyancy (can't maintain 20') or other problems.

When I beach dive, for example, if I have a problem breathing while entering the surf zone, I breathe off of my regulator. Problem solved. If I were wearing a snorkel and a wave broke over my snorkel, I'd get a nice swallow of seawater. Conversely, if the surf zone wasn't bad enough that I needed my regulator, then a simple back swim or frog stroke would be just as effective.

Mind you... I wouldn't argue that you HAVE to wear the snorkel at all times. But, frankly, I think you're a fool if you don't carry one with you for emergency use.

I think that's where our opinions differ. I don't see any emergency where a snorkel would help better than a regulator.

 

[LiquidGuru]

There will always be people who say you must have a snorkel, and there will always be people who hate the idea of having to have a snorkel........ I have been diving in the Caribbean full-time, with over 3000 logged dives for the last five and a half years, and I have never needed a snorkel when not teaching. Practically all my diving is done from a boat in calm water. If I was diving in different conditions, i.e. rougher seas, more shore-diving, then I would probably carry a snorkel with me. Base your decision on a snorkel on whether you want to take oneand the local conditions. Always be responsible and safe.

When I teach students to dive, I always teach with a snorkel, so that the new students are used to having a snorkel dangling from their mask strap. Once they are certified, they can make their own choice. Especially if they are adults.......

 

[learn-scuba]

SeaJay once bubbled...

I think that's where our opinions differ. I don't see any emergency where a snorkel would help better than a regulator.

Okay... I'll leave out the name of the island and the dive operator in question. But here's an example: A group of twelve divers enter the water from a boat operated by a native for an otherwise highly reputable dive operation. The dive site is a about two miles offshore in moderate but highly confused choppy seas. Anyway, as soon as the divers have completed their decent, for whatever reason, the boat operator decided to pull anchor and went back to shore leaving all twelve divers stranded. None of the divers noted that the prop they were hearing was their boat leaving them (not that it would have likely mattered by the time they could have surfaced).

The first of the group to return to the surface did so with a bit over 900psi remaining in the tank... the last had slightly less than 500psi. The first emergency response to the situation was for everyone to achieve positive buoyancy (duh) and hang out at the site (one should not normally leave the dive area in this sort of situation). However, after quite some time had passed (well over an hour and approaching twilight) it became apparent that for whatever reason the boat operator was clearly not returning for the divers and they faced the choice of hanging out overnight in the dark in the hopes that someone would come for them or making a swim for shore.

it shouldn't take much thought to realize that a night at sea was a poor choice for a myriad of reasons. So, the group had to swim for shore. Even with positive buoyancy this is not a light undertaking... fatigue, navigation, conditions and quite a bit more make swimming the distance in the face down position the most efficient (and therefore survivable)

I'll not get into all the gory details of the trials and tribulations of that swim. I can assure you no one arrived on shore with air in their tanks -- those without snorkels were out of air before we started the swim -- breathing off the regulator was no longer an option. The choices remaining were to stay the night in the open ocean, do battle with swimming a couple of miles and breathing in the chop without a snorkel or use a snorkel.

Those who did not have snorkels had a long list of problems to contend with. Granted, those with snorkels didn't have it easy... but they sure had fewer problems. The one thing that stood out above all else was those with snorkels were, by the end of the swim, the ones doing the work as nearly every non-snorkel member of the group was being towed by someone with a snorkel for one reason or another. I've always wondered what the outcome would have been had no one had a snorkel.

Yes... it's a worst case scenario... but it's always a chain of failures (as opposed to a single factor) that leads to accidents. While having, or not having, a snorkel is not in and of itself going to be the cause of a dive accident, it can easily be one of the links in the chain that if otherwise broken might have prevented the accident.

 

[SeaJay]

I wanted to hear other peoples' reaction to your story.

To put it bluntly, I'm pretty sure that this did not happen to you.

If it had, you'd have found out in the first five finstrokes that chop or no chop... Swimming on your back in full scuba gear works a lot better than swimming face down - even if you have a snorkel.

I can assure you that every emergency situation I've ever been in like this has involved getting buoyant, leaning back in your gear and finning gently to shore. 2 miles? Should take three to four hours or more with no current.

Then I would have sued the dive shop for attempted manslaughter. I'm sure you would have, too.

You might be sunburnt and dehydrated, but if that's your biggest problem with the above scenario, then you got off light.

I'm surprised that nobody threw the BS Flag before me.

See, dude, the problem is that if people read your junk and believe it, then make decisions about their own gear based on your lie.

...So you do a grave disservice to Scubaboard. Aside from making yourself look like a liar, you probably have a net effect on others that's not so good.

You know, I'd have had more respect for the answer, "I just like snorkels," or, "I'm worried that this might happen..."

 

[learn-scuba]

SeaJay once bubbled...
See, dude, the problem is that if people read your junk and believe it, then make decisions about their own gear based on your lie.

Okay... first of all... what gives you the right to judge if you weren't there. Second, the "right" way is to do it with your gear off. Third, did you catch that the incident took place just ahead of twilight? Forth, have you ever tried to sue anyone for anything in a third world country?

Who is kidding who?

In any case, I'm not interested in a pizzing match. Believe what you like and best of luck to you.

 

[SeaJay]

learn-scuba once bubbled...


Okay... first of all... what gives you the right to judge if you weren't there.

I think that was a question, and should have ended with a question mark.

...But no, I wasn't there. I'm not "judging" anything, other than the fact that I think your story is made up.

I don't think you were there either.

I thought you might get defensive after that post.

Second, the "right" way is to do it with your gear off.

Pardon?

...So you're recommending you ditch your gear and swim face down with a snorkel? You don't think it's a better idea to at least keep your BC on?

...Aside from the fact that you don't have to throw your gear away!

This is getting silly. What the heck sort of protocol is that?

Third, did you catch that the incident took place just ahead of twilight?

Yes... Likely when the ocean was relatively calm. With few exceptions, the coming night is a calmer time than mid-day. Thus, there's even more reason to not need - or even want - a snorkel. A simple recline into your BC and a gentle kick - as if you were sitting in a big Lay-Z-Boy called the "Atlantic" or "Pacific" or whatever - would have been the best option.

Forth, have you ever tried to sue anyone for anything in a third world country?

No. If this all happened in a third world country, then I'd have shot his a$$ when I got back to the dock.

Who is kidding who?

Well, it wasn't my story, dude.

In any case, I'm not interested in a pizzing match. Believe what you like and best of luck to you.

Fair enough. Sorry it upset you so much.

 

[learn-scuba]

SeaJay once bubbled...


I thought you might get defensive after that post.

I'm sure being called a liar wouldn't upset you a bit. yes, I was offended and I thought I did a respectable job of maintaining a level tone and respectful response.

Pardon?

...So you're recommending you ditch your gear and swim face down with a snorkel? You don't think it's a better idea to at least keep your BC on?

No... the easiest way is to remove your BCD and use it like a float to support your head and lungs out of the water while you swim on your belly with the regulator or snorkel in your mouth to protect against splashing and oversloshing. Furthermore, lifting your lungs further out of the water makes breathing easier and the added height of your head from the water surface reduces the amount of splash you deal with. In addition, you have both better swimming capability, strength and stamina on your stomach than on your back.

...Aside from the fact that you don't have to throw your gear away!

This is getting silly. What the heck sort of protocol is that?

Your incorrect assumption... not my advice.

Yes... Likely when the ocean was relatively calm. With few exceptions, the coming night is a calmer time than mid-day. Thus, there's even more reason to not need - or even want - a snorkel. A simple recline into your BC and a gentle kick - as if you were sitting in a big Lay-Z-Boy called the "Atlantic" or "Pacific" or whatever - would have been the best option.

Try it and let me know how it turns out.

No. If this all happened in a third world country, then I'd have shot his a$$ when I got back to the dock.

~grin~


Just as an aside... did you know that many of the so-called "dive masters" in Roatan don't even carry entry level O/W cert cards. Check it out sometime.

 

[crispos]

Let's not prove the old saying....

Opinions are like *******s, everyone has one, and every one but your's stinks.