How do you secure your dive flag?

[Deep South Divers]

I've found that the commonly practiced methods work pretty well for not just me, but the other few hundred/thousand diver's in the area.

And every one of them flies a dive flag?

The few hundred thousand divers here don't. And that works for them.

What I can't stand about the old "Do you use a flag or not" argument is that most often the guys that say "oh, it's just a magnet for boats, no one knows what it means, etc, etc" have usually had ONE bad experience where a boater rolled up on their flag.

Well, I've had several - and that's several more situations where the dive flag has been a detriment than a positive.

If YOU don't want to use a flag - then don't use a flag. At the end of the day it's all on you if you get hit.

It's "on you if you get hit" anyway. The only difference is - one way, you accept the risk and take proper steps to mitigate it. When you fly a dive flag, the assumption tends to be that that IS the mitigation, which makes a whole bunch of assumptions about the other party (the boater) - that he knows what the flag means, that he's aware of what his responsibility is, and that he's capable of handling that responsibility, both in terms of maturity and cohesiveness (eg - not intoxicated). These assumptions may not be correct, and it's not going to matter whose fault (liability) it is when you get hit and lose a hand.

For me, what works is accepting my risk completely myself and assuming that nobody else is going to do it for me.

Nothing is fool proof - I'm not disagreeing there. But it just seems to be an unnecessary risk. What is the harm in towing or setting a flag?

Well, for one it's accepting of a philosophy which I disagree with - that someone else is responsible for what you do. This philosophy is harmful in that it can impregnate your entire life... And I think that most people here will agree that the philosophy is a problem today in the US - people tend to not accept responsibility for their own actions.

Two, flying a dive flag is an announcement, "Hey, I'm diving over here." To you, that's a good thing, because you're assuming that the other person's intentions are wholesome and legal. To me, it attracts unwanted attention and announces to other divers where my dive spots are. I don't know how it is in Florida, but here, many dive spots yield artifacts and fossils that can be worth thousands.

Three, a dive flag and float is yet one more piece of gear to have to buy, clean, maintain and rinse at the end of the day. Like the "accept responsibility" mentality, a "minimizing gear" mentality is a great one when it comes to diving - minimalist divers use less gas, can afford to dive more, are more streamlined in the water, and generally less issue-prone. A dive flag is the antithesis of this philosophy.

No, it doesn't. I've been in the situation first hand and I can tell you that it absolutely does not. You can't stop a pedestrian from jumping out in front of your car.

Please cite a reference. I have never seen a situation where the driver of a motor vehicle that struck a pedestrian was not found at fault.

That includes all kinds of motor vehicles, including boats.

...and people that do get hit by boats are doing it intentionally? Accidents happen. Even to those who think they are taking the necessary steps to avoid them. That's the chance we all take.

It's not a "chance," and it's offensive that you imply otherwise... Again, a thought process that comes from a "sidestepping of responsibility" philosophy.

There is no physical way that I can be hit by a boat if I'm just a couple of feet below the water's surface. And yes, boats are very easy to hear, even with hoods and ambient noise going on. Even if the engines don't make noise (they do), their propellers make a tremendous amount of noise. And water is a fantastic medium for sound.

When a boat is barreling down the river (presumably the most possibility for injury to a diver), it makes a tremendous amount of noise. It can be heard from very far away.

If you're diving in an area where there is so much boat traffic that you can't tell the difference between those that are passing by and those that are putting you at risk, then you need to dive elsewhere - or ascend and descend on a line, rode, or piling so that you're not in the way.

Placing a dive flag in a heavily traffiked area does not improve the situation - or mitigate the risks.

...Which is why, philosophically, the diver that doesn't fly a dive flag is probably safer - because he'll take the steps necessary (ascending and descending in a safer area) to stay safe under his own control than fly a dive flag and assume that that will keep him safe.

When you're looking for critters you go where the critters are. That means bridges when it's too rough offshore. It's a common practice and it works quite well actually. But I appreciate the condescension.

I'm not trying to be condescending. We just have differing opinions, that's all.

If you like the bridges, then ascend and descend on the pilings until your head is above the surface and you can see that the coast is clear on your own. They are your "safe harbor" as a diver - no boater is going to come anywhere close to them, for fear of damaging his boat.

...And THAT is much more "bankable" than flying a flag and assuming that they have the understanding and capacity to stay away from it.

 

[SkimFisher]

Please cite a reference. I have never seen a situation where the driver of a motor vehicle that struck a pedestrian was not found at fault.

That includes all kinds of motor vehicles, including boats.

You're talking to one.

If you like the bridges, then ascend and descend on the pilings until your head is above the surface and you can see that the coast is clear on your own. They are your "safe harbor" as a diver - no boater is going to come anywhere close to them, for fear of damaging his boat.

...and we do. Still doesn't mean I won't fly a flag though. My POV on this matter may be fueled by the fact that we are *required* to fly a flag - thus it's second nature. But I like to think that regardless of the law, I'd still do it. The way I look at - if a boater does get too close, they'll never make the same mistake again or at the very least be able to claim ignorance.

 

[Deep South Divers]

You're talking to one.

You've been hit by a boater? What happened? How did they not find the boater at fault?

...and we do. Still doesn't mean I won't fly a flag though. My POV on this matter may be fueled by the fact that we are *required* to fly a flag - thus it's second nature. But I like to think that regardless of the law, I'd still do it. The way I look at - if a boater does get too close, they'll never make the same mistake again or at the very least be able to claim ignorance.

Fair enough. Different points of view, I guess.

I sincerely hope that neither of us are wrong and that the unthinkable never happens. Obviously, we're both after the same idea - safety for divers below. I understand your points, I just happen to have a different opinion on how to get to the same objective.

Our conversation has been enlightening. Hopefully we can both appreciate each other's point of views.

I'm interested in your story.

 

[SkimFisher]

No, I was not hit by a boat. I was involved in an accident in which a pedestrian was struck though. Turns out there is very little you can do to keep someone from throwing themselves in front of a moving vehicle.

 

[Deep South Divers]

...So you were the driver? Obviously you weren't the pedestrian, else you'd say so.

How'd that go down with the authorities? Inquiring minds want to know... And want to know how in the world they found you not at fault.

I agree that there's not much you can do - but nonetheless, the law is written to generally favor the pedestrian.

 

[SkimFisher]

Everyone has to pay attention. Even pedestrians. I'll leave it there.

 

[Deep South Divers]

Why? You wanted to cite your own case, but won't give any details?

Okay, if you don't want to cite your own case, then what other case do you know of where the motor vehicle operator was not found at fault when his motor vehicle struck a pedestrian?

I agree that logically, the pedestrian should "watch where he's going." Unfortunately, the law generally does not see it that way. Generally speaking, the law favors the pedestrian over the motor vehicle operator.

...Which is why, as a diver, I'm not worried about "insurance liability" or "getting sued" by a boat operator when he hits me.

...That said, and having control over myself and only myself, I choose to avoid getting hit rather than choose to fly a flag and leaving the decision up to someone else.