Favorite "pet-peave" arguments against solo diving

[jagfish]

I saw this quote a week or so ago, and was going to expand on it. Actually, for someone who enjoys the aquatic habitat, having a buddy would keep me from seeing the things I like to see. Sometimes, I dive under river rapids, and watch trout feed. Or I hold my breath a few seconds, and have a bass come up to my face. Or I photograph small salamanders mating. Or I observe red-sided shiners mating, and being fed upon by Northern Pike Minnows (large fish that used to be called "squawfish" in the Pacific Northwest). Or I wait and photograph commensal amphipods on a large anemone that nobody else had ever seen. Or I observe a small sculpin using a rose anemone as a hiding place, establishing for the first time a cold-water fish-anemone commensal relationship.

I could go on, but none of these activities would be easily accomplished with a buddy. For instance, I had to tether myself to a bottom rock in a six knot current to get the photos of the red-sided shiners spawning. I'm not sure a buddy could have handled that.

Getting back to the quote, I'm not sure fmw625 would have been able to touch that deer if there was someone with him.

SeaRat

Sounds like some dang enviable diving, especially the fresh water stuff!

 

[MikeFerrara]

I saw this quote a week or so ago, and was going to expand on it. Actually, for someone who enjoys the aquatic habitat, having a buddy would keep me from seeing the things I like to see. Sometimes, I dive under river rapids, and watch trout feed. Or I hold my breath a few seconds, and have a bass come up to my face. Or I photograph small salamanders mating. Or I observe red-sided shiners mating, and being fed upon by Northern Pike Minnows (large fish that used to be called "squawfish" in the Pacific Northwest). Or I wait and photograph commensal amphipods on a large anemone that nobody else had ever seen. Or I observe a small sculpin using a rose anemone as a hiding place, establishing for the first time a cold-water fish-anemone commensal relationship.

I could go on, but none of these activities would be easily accomplished with a buddy. For instance, I had to tether myself to a bottom rock in a six knot current to get the photos of the red-sided shiners spawning. I'm not sure a buddy could have handled that.

Getting back to the quote, I'm not sure fmw625 would have been able to touch that deer if there was someone with him.

SeaRat

My wife and I do dive like that all the time. You just need the right buddy.

 

[Fire_medic_RescueDiver]

I feel the same as most of the replys. For me doing a solo dive is the most relaxing time. I only have one person to take care of and that is me! I my job when the tones drop I have at least 3 or more to persons to keep take of and take care of. So for me it is a time to be by myself and I enjoy every sec of it. I have just know started looking into get my dive cert for solo diving from SSI but have not done so yet. I am getting tired of sinking around and looking over my should thinking that the buddy police are come after me when I suface. So enjoy yourself and RELAX people.

 

[John C. Ratliff]

Mike,

I've tried finding a buddy, but they are rather scarse. My wife politely declined too. She's more of a runner than a diver (we enjoyed a nice hike yesterday in the Columbia Gorge--gain of 2200 feet for about a six-mile hike). But diving is not her joy.

Many of the dives I described were done on my noon "hour" (more like an hour and a half, and I made it up by extending my work day) in a small rural community. A buddy was simply not available at the times I could get away. While others were out running, playing tennis, or handball, I was diving. I was fifteen minutes away from the river, and it was something I really enjoyed. It also was quite a stress relief for me from the job.

John

PS--the dives concerning the commensal amphipod/anemone relationship occured many years ago, and some were with a buddy, some without. Visibility was about 3-5 feet in Yaquina Bay, Oregon.

 

[DEEPLOU]

Actually dove with a "buddy" on Sat, but I volunteered to show him around. The vis was about zero, and he followed me around the wreck, I constantly looking over my shoulder to be sure he was still there.
Yesterday, Sunday, was different story, fella on boat wanted to buddy w/me, when he got in front of me it was like the zero vis on Saturday, but there was actually 20 ft of vis.
That's enough for now.
Unfortunately when I go south, I don't have the proper gear for solo, so I sucumb to having a buddy.

 

[lovells19]

Dived both with buddy and solo.

I do alot of underwater photography, so having another photographer buddy will be advanatages cos there's 2 pairs of eyes spotting.

Its great if your buddy is someone you know well and is someone that is coorporative underwater, someone whom will wait for you and not rush or swim off by himself. will be great if your buddy is a good spotter and patient diver. after dives, during the surface intervals, the discussion on what we have just found would go on till the next dive.

Dives can be screwed by non cooporative buddies. a few actually did. some even crushed the subject and my head. i hate that..

I did a few Solo dives on the island while waitin for the main group to arrive. and i simply love it. i dive at my own rate.. no one to lookout for. only myself. check constantly that my air is sufficient. only thing i have to look out for is the subject to shoot. fishes, turtles, morays tend not to shy away when you're alone. i managed to shoot quite a few good close ups with the beauties while doing the solo dive.

I had so much time i could slowly scan the sea bed for nudis. and managed to spot quite a few really tiny ones. around 10mm. Looking forward to my next Solo dive

 

[Sven-G]

I'm sure we all have them...the argument put forth against solo diving that just does not hold water, and maybe you hear it a lot...

That's easy: "It isn't as safe as diving with a buddy".

I'm still waiting for anyone to show statistics demonstrating that buddy diving actually is safer than solo diving instead of the other way around.




-Sven

 

[DORSETBOY]

Sven, it'll never happen, all you'll see is a bunch of folk on here stating opinions to the effect of "x is 50% safer than y" without backing it up with any evidence whatsoever. The mods seem to think it's totally acceptable so don't expect that to change in a hurry!

 

[MikeFerrara]

That's easy: "It isn't as safe as diving with a buddy".

I'm still waiting for anyone to show statistics demonstrating that buddy diving actually is safer than solo diving instead of the other way around.

Why do you need statistics? I'll bet we make a thousand decisions every day, many concern safety in one way or another, and we make most of them without statistics.

If you are alone and you need help the probability is ZERO that you will get it.
If you have a buddy and you need help the probability that you'll get it will vary with quality of your buddy but could be 100%.

We don't need statistics where common sense will get us by.

Statistics in diving solo would be close to meaningless anyway. The probability that you will need help has no relationship to the probability that I will need help. One of us may be a far better diver than the other. One may have far better equipment. One of us may only dive very easy conditions.

Why does it have to be safer? Why don't you justify doing it by just saying tha you like to do it rather than mounting some lame arguement that it's "safer" or "as safe".

I dive...deep, in caves, in wrecks and under ice. I don't consider any of it safe and I don't decide to do any of it based on a statistical safety arguement.

 

[Sven-G]

Why do you need statistics?

Mike, you missed jagfish's question, the question I was answering: "I'm sure we all have them...the argument put forth against solo diving that just does not hold water, and maybe you hear it a lot..."




-Sven