Do you Need a Snorkel

[MXGratefulDiver]

There we part company, but then you've likely never been in a situation where you've had to justify every diving equipment choice to a board of experts, often down to make and model. Doing that for thirty years, or so, changes one's perspective.

But even then it is a choice to put yourself in that position.

But you are correct ... I am not part of a research community that holds themselves to rigorous standards of academic excellence. Neither, I'll bet, is the person who asked the question. Context is everything ... and recreational divers (this IS Basic Scuba Discussions forum ... remember?) do not have to rigorously defend their diving choices.

Damn sakes, man ... we do this for FUN ... not because it's part of a research project.

And it is likely that you'll go another long period of time before you need one. But when you do hit that situation, you will be sorry that you don't have one.

Describe to me ... using your own standards of "rigorous justification" exactly what that situation would be? I'm hardly an inexperienced diver, Thal. I've exposed myself to a lot of difficult diving conditions ... probably more than the majority of people who scuba dive. And I am having a hard time wrapping my brain around the sort of conditions that would require a typical recreational diver to NEED a snorkel.

Sure, I can envision lots of situations where someone might PREFER a snorkel ... but that's a personal choice, based on training and experience ... not a situation where not having one will lead to injury or death.

Hopefully that will not be in a really tight spot, but even if it is in a fairly trivial one, my point is that the cost of carrying one is so, very, very, low ... why not do so.

Because I can think of a lot of other things to carry that I find much more useful ... spool and bag, spare mask, wetnotes, spare light(s), etc ... depending on the dive. I subscribe to the philosophy that if you don't need something, don't take it.

Actually it is not, most of the people that I have worked with who resisted using a snorkel did not, in fact, know how to mount it properly or use it properly. Applying such generalities to all and sundry is never a perfect fit, but it does work in most cases.

Ah ... that's a far cry from what you said earlier, which was ...

I have yet to hear any defense of not diving with a snorkel (except in O/H) that doesn't appear to me to translate into anything but, "I'm really not comfortable with it."

I think you haven't heard what you don't want to hear. Because I've seen several valid reasons used over the course of the many discussions we've had on this topic over the years ... and it ALWAYS boils down to the same thing ... choice. And just because someone doesn't choose to use a particular piece of equipment does not, in any way, imply that it's due to a lack of skill.

Diving without a snorkel doesn't fit the Scipps model ... I understand that. I think you should consider that not everybody needs what a research diver needs ... and while that's a perfectly good way to learn to dive, it's no more universally applicable than DIR (which, by the way, mandates no snorkel).

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

The selection of diving equipment is a matter of personal preference. To some, a snorkel is a valuable piece of equipment; to others it's just a superfluous piece of kit.

Whether or not a snorkel is carried usually depends upon a diver's personal experiences. I can understand if a diver has never had cause to use a snorkel, why they would leave it at home. It would appear however, that others have found themselves in different conditions where it's valuable.

When my students do their first open water dive, I have them check their buoyancy for correct weighting (previously done in the pool) then we dive using only MFS (they're equipped with SCUBA but it's not in use). We swim a circuit on the surface, with and without a snorkel and do diver tows and assists in the surf (paying particular attention to the hazard of waves, current and jagged rock). Perhaps if everyone had a similar experience they might look at the snorkel a bit differently, as the last place you want to be is on your back unless you're the victim. I do agree that for some diving conditions, it's not required.

I learned (YMCA) and teach (NAUI) snorkeling skills as part of the confined water session. As I think you know, NAUI mandates certain freediving skills be taught, and encourages a freediving dive as part of the basic OW checkout dives.

Using a snorkel is a good skill to learn.

Where I part ways with people is when they start overstating its importance and referring to it as "safety equipment". It is hardly that. It is a piece of gear that may or may not be useful to some, depending on what other gear and instructional choices they have made, what skills they've acquired, and the conditions in which they dive.

That, really, is ALL it is.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Illegal, you are kidding? So, state or provincial legislatures or federal congressmen and senators actually voted a federal or state statute stating that scuba divers must have a snorkel, I don't think so.

Some localities pass ordinances that apply to City or State parks, and divers who access the water from those locations.

The one I recall was a city ordinance in Laguna Beach, CA that required divers to have a snorkel ... and that one was rescinded in 2007 ...

Believe it or not, scuba ABC agencies do not have the authority to pass legislation or to enforce anything at all.

N

But that won't stop people with strong opinions or a business agenda from promoting agency recommendations as though they were law. Some folks just can't get it through their head that scuba diving is essentially an unregulated activity ... and that the majority of divers would prefer to keep it that way.

God protect us from those who would pass laws to protect us from ourselves ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[peterbj7]

I carry a snorkel when teaching when it is required by course standards. I use it in accordance with those standards. Otherwise I never carry one, not even when I go out "snorkelling". I can comfortably hold my breath for quite a long time on the surface, so I merely pop my head up occasionally and take a breath. I have never experienced a time when I felt I needed a snorkel, and indeed when I used to carry a snorkel on "serious" diving trips involving surface work in rough water I never used it. I find students have fewer mask flood problems underwater when they don't have a snorkel attached, so I encourage them to store the snorkel somewhere accessible on their gear. But, contrary to what Thalassamania might have us all believe, my unwillingness to use a snorkel is not because I have never learned to use it properly, although he might say that must be the case by definition. I have many hours of snorkelling under my belt and am reasonably competent with one; I don't use it simply because I don't feel the need.

 

[svnipp]

Ok fair enough. With me, I put my reg in my mouth to swim out to dive sites as I always have heaps of air (can't remember the last time I ended a dive based on my remaining gas). This might be needed in other places but for the diving I do, if I want to see the bottom whilst swimming out, reg is fine, just don't need the extra air

With the heavy chop, I have had long waits on the surface and if it is choppy I keep my reg in my mouth or I time my breath with the waves. For the former, I have never been in a situation where I couldn't sit on the surface breathing off my reg for a long while. So I guess if a helicopter flies past me, I will just keep my reg in my mouth also.

On the other points, to clarify, for the mouth to mouth, are you talking about in water transportation for the first point on this?

Please bear in mind that I haven't even taken my OW cert class yet and have never actually dived... Isn't the general idea to maximize bottom time? If you are wasting your air on the swim out, this does reduce your bottom time, does it not? I may be completely missing something here, but I always envisioned tank capacity as THE limiting factor on a dive. I understand that there may be situations where air is not what limits your dive time, but I would think this the exception rather than the norm.

 

[juanfr22]

The snorkel just saves air from your tank if you need to swim to the dive site...my instructors have never used one, mind you. I use it like that...if im the first one to jump off the boat I rather breathe through the snorkel while the others jump instead of wasting tank air. this mainly happens when we have to dive in large groups of people (wich I hate) but when im off diving with my family I rarely use the snorkel.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Please bear in mind that I haven't even taken my OW cert class yet and have never actually dived... Isn't the general idea to maximize bottom time? If you are wasting your air on the swim out, this does reduce your bottom time, does it not? I may be completely missing something here, but I always envisioned tank capacity as THE limiting factor on a dive. I understand that there may be situations where air is not what limits your dive time, but I would think this the exception rather than the norm.

It depends on the diver, the size cylinder, and the profile of the dive.

For new divers, the amount of air in your cylinder is usually the limiting factor. This is primarily due to the fact that new divers tend to breathe pretty hard, and that they typically use smallish size cylinders. And for this reason, the "surface swim" argument may hold some validity for those divers.

As you become more experienced, your air consumption rate will drop ... due primarily to improved technique and greater comfort level in the water. Many experienced divers purchase their own gear, and many opt for larger cylinders when they purchase their own. At that point, no-deco limits (NDL) will typically become the limiting factor. At that point, you will have plenty of gas in your cylinders to use some surface swimming ... myself and most of the experienced folks I dive with will typically surface with anywhere from a third to a half of our gas remaining after a 60-70 minute dive.

Another consideration is learning how to surface swim comfortably ... which is typically on your back. Not only does it put your head higher out of the water, but it makes kicking easier and more comfortable over a long period of time.

You may find that a snorkel will be useful to you for a time ... and as you gain experience, it becomes less useful for those surface swims. Or you may grow accustomed to using one, feel perfectly comfortable with it, and continue using it. Either way, it will be a matter of preference rather than need.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[vladimir]

I carry a snorkel when teaching when it is required by course standards. I use it in accordance with those standards. Otherwise I never carry one, not even when I go out "snorkelling". I can comfortably hold my breath for quite a long time on the surface, so I merely pop my head up occasionally and take a breath.

I lost my snorkel on a Cocos liveaboard trip--a fact I discovered in a futile scramble around the panga in preparation for a snorkel on the fringe of a baitball. So I used your method. I was okay underwater for a minute or so at a time, but I missed my snorkel when it came time to breathe because there were always at least a half-dozen silky sharks close by--among at least a hundred in the vicinity--and I would have preferred to keep a constant eye on them, they way they did on me.

 

[Herk_Man]

Just say No to snorkels.

 

[k11dorf]

Just say No to snorkels.

My buddy Ethan would agree with you. Here's the full "Ask An Expert: Are Snorkels Necessary" from the August 2009 Scuba Diving: http://www.prodiveusa.com/images/Scuba-AskanExpertAug09-web.pdf