Government Regulation

[MXGratefulDiver]

[/COLOR]I've seen plenty enough dive operations displaying an 'It'll never happen to us" (accident) mindset as I have divers. In short... a lot...


[/COLOR]
The obvious flaw there is how the agency learns of those deviations from standards. How many students are aware of the standards their training should be held against - and would know they are broken so report them? How easy is the reporting process? And then, if rapport is good between instructor and student...and the student has a great time in training, there may be strong motivation not to report known standards violations to the agency. Especially so if the instructor has reinforced to the student that they are 'well trained'... and the student believes that, with little for comparison at the time..


[/COLOR]
... in the USA.


[/COLOR]
...and there's an endless supply of unwitting insta-buddies for that diver to endanger in the future.



[/COLOR]External regulation... such as the upcoming ban on cameras at Sipidan Island. The effect of which might be an interesting case study.



That individual would fall into the third category. I don't believe his mindset and persistent criminality represent that of the 'average' diver (who might nonetheless choose to ignore prudent safety advice and do otherwise...). However, if that 'advice' became legal direction... I think most divers would reconsider their adherence to the issues covered.

Again, hoping to stop problems is a pipe-dream. Decreasing problems is an achievable reality.

Andy, my short answer to you is that if you're so hot for the government to regulate the scuba industry, let it start in your country. You're real free with telling other people that their government should pass laws to regulate what they can do. Somehow, I doubt you'd be so supportive if it was your government regulating your choices.

Get back to me when the Philippine government starts passing laws telling you where and how you can dive ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[DevonDiver]

Andy, my short answer to you is that if you're so hot for the government to regulate the scuba industry, let it start in your country....Get back to me when the Philippine government starts passing laws telling you where and how you can dive ...

Firstly, the Philippines isn't "my country", but I do live there.

'My country' is the UK. Diving is quite regulated here, especially instruction. Add to that EU legislation (stuff like the 'MK26') and you've got a whole other layer of regulation too...

For the Philippines...well, there's enough legislation around here, but little enforcement. Take for instance the 'Philippine Commission on Sports Scuba Diving' (PCSSD), which falls under the remit of the Department of Tourism... and applies legislation to all aspects of diving here... Then take, for instance, the varied Baranguays (local councils) and the rules they can apply to their specific areas, especially protected areas of ecology etc.

Here in Subic Bay, an active harbor, diving is very tightly controlled... every dive trip must be cleared with the Harbor Authority, the Harbor Patrol and the Ecology Department.. by fax no less, with full manifest and named dive leader. No diving is permitted other than an authorized dive boat (local business permit for diving). No diving is permitted without a locally approved guide (DM or instructor). No night diving (beyond dusk) on wreck sites. Can get pulled if diving 'off a known/listed site'. Loosen so much as a bolt on one of the wrecks... you're in trouble. Harbor Patrol will intervene with any vessel on-top of a dive site.

So... that's back to you buddy....with bells on..

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Second, we are discussing laws and not the democratic process. If you take the Washington State giant octopus battle it shows how democracy works. A spectrum of people had differing view on what limits should be set on the harvesting of octopi. There was a public and open debate about what should be done, both in the media and in public hearings. The media aired a variety of opinions and views and different stake holders were able to educate the public and the government about their concerns. At the end of the debate, the rules were better defined to protect the rights of everyone without having NWGratefulDiver beating the tar out of some stupid kid. Stupid Kid get to go on with his life intact (if not his reputation). The public (partly divers) are more aware of the issue and fishermen can continue to hunt octopi with a few restrictions, but respecting the rights of others to enjoy the animals in a different non-culinary way.

A rather inaccurate way of describing what occurred ... nobody resorted to physical violence, although I was threatened by dozens, if not hundreds of irate, out of state "hunters" who mistook what occurred as a threat to their god-given right to kill things. But I think I get your point.

The process ... which involved people from all of the interest groups (there were three pro-hunting representatives on the 10-member advisory committee) ... took several months, involved a couple of public hearings, several meetings by the advisory committee, and resulted in no new laws. It simply used existing laws to designate six popular dive sites as "no take" zones. Hunters are still free to hunt as they always have, except for within those six specific sites.

This wasn't so much about regulation as it was about managing the use of public waterways so as to avoid conflicts between different types of users. It restricts no one's rights to use those waterways ... it simply defines what you can do in those specific areas. No different, really, than any other MPA.

What made this effort successful isn't that it was regulated, but that the approach taken was specific and very limited in scope.

The best laws are those that affect the fewest people, and target specifically the people that created the need for them ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

---------- Post added December 30th, 2013 at 10:20 AM ----------

Firstly, the Philippines isn't "my country", but I do live there.

'My country' is the UK. Diving is quite regulated here, especially instruction. Add to that EU legislation (stuff like the 'MK26') and you've got a whole other layer of regulation too...

For the Philippines...well, there's enough legislation around here, but little enforcement. Take for instance the 'Philippine Commission on Sports Scuba Diving' (PCSSD), which falls under the remit of the Department of Tourism... and applies legislation to all aspects of diving here... Then take, for instance, the varied Baranguays (local councils) and the rules they can apply to their specific areas, especially protected areas of ecology etc.

Here in Subic Bay, an active harbor, diving is very tightly controlled... every dive trip must be cleared with the Harbor Authority, the Harbor Patrol and the Ecology Department.. by fax no less, with full manifest and named dive leader. No diving is permitted other than an authorized dive boat (local business permit for diving). No diving is permitted without a locally approved guide (DM or instructor). No night diving (beyond dusk) on wreck sites. Can get pulled if diving 'off a known/listed site'. Loosen so much as a bolt on one of the wrecks... you're in trouble. Harbor Patrol will intervene with any vessel on-top of a dive site.

So... that's back to you buddy....with bells on..

Well I can understand then why you're so hot to see our scuba activities in the US become similarly regulated ... misery loves company.

So how's all that government regulation working out for ya? I take it there are no scuba-related casualties or reef damage in the Philippines anymore?

No thanks ... I'd way rather rely on personal responsibility, and let those who don't understand what that means remove themselves from the gene pool.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[dbulmer]

Firstly, the Philippines isn't "my country", but I do live there.

'My country' is the UK. Diving is quite regulated here, especially instruction. Add to that EU legislation (stuff like the 'MK26') and you've got a whole other layer of regulation too...
.

Diving is not heavily regulated in the UK.
There is no legal requirement to hold a certification card.

Regulation concerning instruction is largely for those who receive a financial reward.

I have never ever had a problem with MK26 because it is ignored - MK26 is a great example of how stupid regulation can get.

 

[CT-Rich]

A rather inaccurate way of describing what occurred ... nobody resorted to physical violence, although I was threatened by dozens, if not hundreds of irate, out of state "hunters" who mistook what occurred as a threat to their god-given right to kill things. But I think I get your point.

The process ... which involved people from all of the interest groups (there were three pro-hunting representatives on the 10-member advisory committee) ... took several months, involved a couple of public hearings, several meetings by the advisory committee, and resulted in no new laws. It simply used existing laws to designate six popular dive sites as "no take" zones. Hunters are still free to hunt as they always have, except for within those six specific sites.

This wasn't so much about regulation as it was about managing the use of public waterways so as to avoid conflicts between different types of users. It restricts no one's rights to use those waterways ... it simply defines what you can do in those specific areas. No different, really, than any other MPA.

What made this effort successful isn't that it was regulated, but that the approach taken was specific and very limited in scope.

The best laws are those that affect the fewest people, and target specifically the people that created the need for them ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

---------- Post added December 30th, 2013 at 10:20 AM ----------



Well I can understand then why you're so hot to see our scuba activities in the US become similarly regulated ... misery loves company.

So how's all that government regulation working out for ya? I take it there are no scuba-related casualties or reef damage in the Philippines anymore?

No thanks ... I'd way rather rely on personal responsibility, and let those who don't understand what that means remove themselves from the gene pool.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Bob,
I think you get my point, what made the solution satisfying and productive was that there was a transparent system to look at what each stake holder wanted and resulted in an outcome that was satisfactory for the majority. When people talk about "regulation" as dirty word they over look that in a healthy democracy, it should never be played in a winner takes all fashion. At the end of the day we are neighbors. If you want to see how effective winner takes all politics are, I suggest Syria, Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan might be useful examples, not to mention our own Congress, who seem more than willing to shoot our own economy in the foot rather than moving forward with policies that themselves were compromises.

And Bob I am aware that both you and the other diver were subjected to threats and that was the unfortunate part of the incident that both sad and unproductive.

Happy New Year

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

And Bob I am aware that both you and the other diver were subjected to threats and that was the unfortunate part of the incident that both sad and unproductive.

I didn't really take them seriously. First off, I have to thank Yahoo ... when they published their article they linked my name directly to my personal email account. I can only believe they were trying to create an incident so as to have more news stories to publish. I got hundreds of emails, most were supportive, but some were downright scary. But it was obvious that the majority of those anonymous email users were from out of state ... and I felt it unlikely they were going to trouble themselves to take the pickup truck off the cinder blocks and drive it all the way to Seattle to carry out their threats.

But yes, I got your point ... I just wanted to comment on the process and disabuse anyone that there was any violence associated with it. I wish the young man well, and was in touch with his mom pretty much through the whole process ... their family went through its own version of hell, and in anything remotely like a civilized country that never should have happened ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Frosty]

Guys in my industry I find the best way to avoid gubbiment sticking their mitts into a situation is to be pro active. If there is nothing to fix then theres nothing for gubbiment to get involved in.
The only issue as I see it is getting those in charge of the various certification agencies to agree and set in place a fixed set of standard requirements -self governing if you will.
The way I see it its like a driving school-a driver must pass certain tests to proove his competence.
THAT is the minimum standard. Should a driving school or dive instructor decide to go waaay beyond that requirement then great good on em.

 

[Trace Malinowski]

I think we already passed critical mass on government regulation of diving following the 9/11 attacks after the FBI and other LEOs investigated the threat diving technology might pose to national security. Whenever there is an accident it garners its 15 minutes of fame and is forgotten once a bigger story breaks. Between the self-policing that goes on within the industry by training agencies meeting ANSI and ISO standards and local government regulations for diving on public lands, I don't foresee any major push to regulate the sport.

We have to be diligent, though, of government because those in Washington do not know how else to govern other than create more laws which usually gives government more power.

 

[drrich2]

"I thought your definition of liberty or freedom is what a lot of people would say, but it is a popular misconception. The "I'll do what ever I want" mentality easily becomes a pretext for ignorance, arrogance, stupidity, recklessness, laziness and selfishness. There is often little consideration of the longer term consequences of the behaviour. Ironically, this is precisely the kind of behaviour that necessitates government intervention and laws. I'd redefine liberty as doing whatever you please providing you always do what is right and good. "

Much ignorance, stupidity, laziness and selfishness are not illegal, and some recklessness is not, either.

A government that tried to legislate people to the point they only had liberty to do what the State thought right and good would be seen as a fascist state, I believe.

In fact, 'rights' are often formally recognized so as to provide protection when you do things other people don't agree with, rather than when you do. Who needs liberty to please other people? It's when you want to do things that tick them off that you may need a 'right.'

Richard.

 

[Trace Malinowski]

In fact, 'rights' are often formally recognized so as to provide protection when you do things other people don't agree with, rather than when you do. Who needs liberty to please other people? It's when you want to do things that tick them off that you may need a 'right.'

Richard.

Great perspective.