caledfwlch
Guest
Was on another forum and they were discussing gloves, to wear or not to wear. Thought it'd be great to hear some opinions.
----------------
The intent is to assure the safety of the reef by minimising damaged caused by divers; the strategy is to remove gloves. The intent is excellent, the strategy is flawed.
Yes, divers damage reefs by accidentally or intentionally contacting them. They grab the reef to stabilise themselves, kick the reef or bottom and land on the reef or bump into it, all due to poor buoyancy, trim or finning skills. Sometimes they touch an organism intentionally - to satisfy a human desire to interact with it, to shift it to a better position to photograph, or simply to see it move. Removing gloves only partly addresses grabbing the reef to stabilise position.
Gloves are PPE. Removing them places that diver at rick of injury. I've seen divers incur lacerations and fire coral stings. The risk of infection in such an injury might be high - and can become deadly. And this was just coral. It could easily have been dangerous marine life.
Divers frequently use ascent / descent / anchor lines die to current and conditions. The remains of jellyfish are often found wrapped around such lines. Some are not dangerous, but deadly species are widely distributed around the world. Without gloves, divers can get stung and develop mild reaction, or worse.
I've witnessed appalling injuries to divers returning to the boat or shore, from tripping and falling against rocks to ripping hands on sharp edges of ladders to bare hands slipping due to lack of traction. A bare hand underwater is also very bright and can be mistaken for food or become a target for an aggressive fish. Again, even 'inconsequential' injuries can become highly consequential - not to mention the expense of medical treatment or the loss of diving time on an expensive dive holiday.
And why gloves? Since just as much damage caused by fins and other body parts, why not require divers to dive without thermal protection of fins? That would be crazy, wouldn't it?
A superior reef protecting strategy is education. Teach, coach, or even challenge divers to develop buoyancy and finning skills. Engage divers with a culture of 'look, but don't touch', and they, in turn will reinforce this culture. Resort operators often provide service strategies to support divers who might need assistance developing these skills and attitudes: continuing education, naturalist briefings, thorough predive briefings, assessment of skills, dive site selection and using quality dive guides.
The bottom line is divers should have the freedom to protect themselves from accidental injury. Gloves, like wetsuits, prevent potentially deadly injuries to a diver as well as minor injuried that might initially seem inconsequential.
As someone who values both reef and the well being of divers, I see a great miscarriage of intent with a policy of removing divers' gloves; it is but a bandage on a wound that needs a much larger dressing.
----------------------------------------------
I'll post an opposing view later
----------------
The intent is to assure the safety of the reef by minimising damaged caused by divers; the strategy is to remove gloves. The intent is excellent, the strategy is flawed.
Yes, divers damage reefs by accidentally or intentionally contacting them. They grab the reef to stabilise themselves, kick the reef or bottom and land on the reef or bump into it, all due to poor buoyancy, trim or finning skills. Sometimes they touch an organism intentionally - to satisfy a human desire to interact with it, to shift it to a better position to photograph, or simply to see it move. Removing gloves only partly addresses grabbing the reef to stabilise position.
Gloves are PPE. Removing them places that diver at rick of injury. I've seen divers incur lacerations and fire coral stings. The risk of infection in such an injury might be high - and can become deadly. And this was just coral. It could easily have been dangerous marine life.
Divers frequently use ascent / descent / anchor lines die to current and conditions. The remains of jellyfish are often found wrapped around such lines. Some are not dangerous, but deadly species are widely distributed around the world. Without gloves, divers can get stung and develop mild reaction, or worse.
I've witnessed appalling injuries to divers returning to the boat or shore, from tripping and falling against rocks to ripping hands on sharp edges of ladders to bare hands slipping due to lack of traction. A bare hand underwater is also very bright and can be mistaken for food or become a target for an aggressive fish. Again, even 'inconsequential' injuries can become highly consequential - not to mention the expense of medical treatment or the loss of diving time on an expensive dive holiday.
And why gloves? Since just as much damage caused by fins and other body parts, why not require divers to dive without thermal protection of fins? That would be crazy, wouldn't it?
A superior reef protecting strategy is education. Teach, coach, or even challenge divers to develop buoyancy and finning skills. Engage divers with a culture of 'look, but don't touch', and they, in turn will reinforce this culture. Resort operators often provide service strategies to support divers who might need assistance developing these skills and attitudes: continuing education, naturalist briefings, thorough predive briefings, assessment of skills, dive site selection and using quality dive guides.
The bottom line is divers should have the freedom to protect themselves from accidental injury. Gloves, like wetsuits, prevent potentially deadly injuries to a diver as well as minor injuried that might initially seem inconsequential.
As someone who values both reef and the well being of divers, I see a great miscarriage of intent with a policy of removing divers' gloves; it is but a bandage on a wound that needs a much larger dressing.
----------------------------------------------
I'll post an opposing view later
