Galapagos Scuba Diving Fatality - February 12, 2010 - Eloise Gale

[likestodive]

I haven't been to Galapagos, but I have been to Cocos. I am very sorry for the diver and their family. A couple of points:

Anyone that doesn't understand it is advanced diving must not have read or heard anything about the trip. You can also tell it is advanced while on the boat and from the surface. The waves and obvious currents should have been a good clue. I don't 'buy' that someone didn't know it was for advanced divers and not the easiest conditions.

A divemaster can only do so much. When any of us enters the water in an advanced location (or really anywhere), everyone is absolutely responsible for their own safety. Unless you are literally holding the divemasters hand the odds of them saving you in an accident can be slim to none. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. The same is really true of your dive buddy for that matter. I'm sure lots of people will disagree and say they have an excellent dive buddy, but you and you alone are responsible for your safety in the ocean. I'm not saying to abandon your buddy. I'm saying be prepared to save yourself first in any emergency.

The odds of getting 'lost' from the crowd in a site like that are quite high. In ten days in Cocos just about everyone on the boat got separated from the group at least once - including the divemasters on more than one occassion. The current can just be that high. Again, that is part of diving. Anyone that panics when they find themselves alone is not safe in the ocean - advanced site or not. Even if you are diving in the clearest / calmest waters of the Carribean, it can and will eventually happen.

The idea that the dive master went down fast may be due to the fact he was trying to make a particular site on the bottom. Taking too long could have meant the group would have 'blown off the site'. Part of diving in an advanced place means that you might have to get down quickly. If someone is not capable of doing that then they should not be in the Galapagos, Cocos, and even the more advanced sites on Cozumel or anywhere else there is a significant amount of current.

In Cocos, the current was so fast one day that I soon had the impression I had overbreathed my regulator and just couldn't get enough air. Even a Manta that swam by gave up. I was tempted to panic and bolt to the top and 'suck wind'. Only experience told me to stop, float in the water column long enough to catch my breath, do a safety stop, and abort the dive instead. I still probably drifted a half mile or more before surfacing. I was VERY happy to see the zodiac. Inexperience is NOT your friend in a location like that.

The ocean can be a very dangerous place. It is easy to forget that sometimes. We all need to be honest to ourselves about our abilities and what kind of shape we are in before diving anywhere.

Again, I'm sorry for the accident victim, their family, and really everyone on the trip, including the divemaster that will likely second guess themselves every day.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

For example: write up a statement of understanding that describes the diving and that needs to be signed by the participant and the participants most recent instructor; develop a network of instructors who are empowered to do local checkouts for you; put up videos that show (and explain) the actual diving conditions, insist that participants watch them before signing up; anyone else with ideas?

I'm not sure how practical the statement-signed-by-most-recent-instructor is. Divers move. Instructors don't always stick around.

The network of check-out instructors would be effective at screening out any weaker divers. It would take some organization to set up, though.

I really like the video idea. Marketing videos already exist. Revising the content of those videos or creating additional ones could easily (and cheaply) illustrate how much skill and physical fitness it takes to handle Galapagos dives. You could even post them online. I'd recommend that you go a step further with the videos and "teach" techniques for handling strong currents, avoiding CO2 retention, staying with your buddy, doing a back-roll entry from seated position (coordinated with others on the panga), carrying appropriate surface safety signals, and overcoming downdrafts/updrafts. Perhaps a video dramatization of a typical emergency response from start to finish would serve as a sobering, informative educational experience to Galapagos divers prior to their trip.

 

[Thalassamania]

Part of the problem is the language that we are using, we are saying that diving in the Galapagos is an advanced dive.

What most of the divers in the world are hearing is, "you can dive in the Galapagos if you are a certified open water diver who has completed five adventure dives since your entry level training."

And no one is doing anything about that major definitional gap, they're all pretending that its not there ... ho, hum, there is no elephant in the living room.

 

[RJP]

For example: write up a statement of understanding that describes the diving and that needs to be signed by the participant and the participants most recent instructor; develop a network of instructors who are empowered to do local checkouts for you; put up videos that show (and explain) the actual diving conditions, insist that participants watch them before signing up; anyone else with ideas?

I like the idea of some sort of "video informed consent" for this type of diving. It's one thing to read a description...


11. What is the diving like in Galapagos?
Diving around the Galapagos Islands is more difficult due to its ruggedness, currents and slightly cooler temperatures. Diving from the dinghies has advantages, but can be physically challenging for some.

...and another thing to actually understand what you're signing up for.

Galapagos diving is "more difficult" than WHAT? Than Bonaire? Uh, yeah...a little.

The water is "slightly cooler" than WHAT? Than Belize? Uh, yeah...like ~20F cooler!

There are "currents" and then there are "CURRENTS" - Does Galapagos have currents like a shore dive in Bonaire, or like a drift dive in Cozumel, or like on a wreck 30mi off NJ?

 

[RJP]

Part of the problem is the language that we are using, we are saying that diving in the Galapagos is an advanced dive.

What most of the divers in the world are hearing is, "you can dive in the Galapagos if you are a certified open water diver who has completed five adventure dives since your entry level training."

To be fair Thal, the "we" you are referring to is people on this thread. Aggressor doesn't get involved in the confusion about what is "advanced diving" vs what is "an AOW diver."

While I think the language on the Aggressor site is a bit "under-descriptive" I do give them some credit for saying "Galapagos diving is difficult." There's no "Difficult Open Water" certification that could be possibly confused here.

 

[Thalassamania]

The point is the disconnect between the phase, 'and advanced dive" and the certification as an "advanced diver." I'm not blaming the Aggressor folks for anything here.

 

[merxlin]

I will be on the Aggressor II in September and am really looking forward to it. I am a bit surprised at one fact: why two groups of 7 divers, automatically creating either a solo diver, or a 3 person buddy team? Why not 8 in one group and 6 in the other so you always have at least the opportunity to have true buddy teams?

In this situation, I consider the DM a guide, nothing more. 1 DM cannot be a buddy and lead 6 other divers and keep track of them as well.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

I am a bit surprised at one fact: why two groups of 7 divers, automatically creating either a solo diver, or a 3 person buddy team? Why not 8 in one group and 6 in the other so you always have at least the opportunity to have true buddy teams?

@merxlin: I was curious about this at first, but then I thought about it a little. I suspect the two groups of 7 had more to do with evenly loading the pangas. Seven divers + one DM in each panga means that 8 people are doing back-rolls simultaneously. Then everyone descends with a buddy (or buddies) immediately.

With four teams of 2, there might not be enough room in a panga to accommodate an extra person and it would create an odd number for entry. Furthermore, I don't think it would work for a buddy pair to be riding out in separate pangas either. Considering the strong current, it would probably be pretty difficult to coordinate entry with the other panga and link up with the other lone diver. Just thinking out loud here.

I would never want to be buddied up with a DM who had the additional responsibility of leading the group. I hope that wasn't the arrangement that was agreed upon. I would prefer that my buddy's attention wasn't spread out across 6 other divers. It would be far better to be part of a 3-man team. A majority of my dives are in a 3-man buddy team for local diving, and with good communication and commitment to keep the team together, I think it can actually be a safer way to dive than in a 2-man buddy pair. That being said, it would take some convincing for me to agree to a 3-man dive team consisting of one or more insta-buddies. I definitely wouldn't be doing a challenging dive with an unknown quantity on my buddy team.

I doubt that the dive op forced anyone to dive solo.

 

[Darnold9999]

OK I'll bite - what is an "advanced" diver?

Put three divers in a room and you'll get 4 definitions.

Personally I know it when I see it, and it sure isn't any particular number of dives. I consider myself an "advanced" diver, but only in certain conditions and I know many divers who are WAY more advanced than I.

Advanced is such a meaningless term - I would prefer something that describes the conditions that you will meet - currents of X knots, water temp of X degrees, simultanious back roll entries, hot entries, ability to descend at X rate, blue water ascents in low vis, typical wave hights, etc. etc. would be much more useful.

Research can get you all of this, but few do it.

 

[RJP]

I will be on the Aggressor II in September and am really looking forward to it. I am a bit surprised at one fact: why two groups of 7 divers, automatically creating either a solo diver, or a 3 person buddy team? Why not 8 in one group and 6 in the other so you always have at least the opportunity to have true buddy teams?

You're assuming facts not in evidence. (That the boat forced solo divers or 3-diver teams.)

It's entirely possible that the "7 and 7" simply worked out based on the buddy groups who were on the trip. If they happened to have two 3-diver teams and the rest were buddy pairs...then "7 and 7" would be fine.