- Messages
- 22,171
- Reaction score
- 2,790
- # of dives
- 5000 - ∞
There are several stereotypical arguments, which does not mean that one is not more "correct" (at least in absolute terms) than the other(s):
There is truth in each of the three points of view, but not the same amount of truth.
What we are talking about is, in most cases, a second or even third order issue, which is not to say that it may not be a matter of "life or death," just not very often. It's kinda like the rigamarole that surrounds an "additional failure point" which is oft a theoretical consideration since that "additional failure point," has never been known, in actuality, to fail and most assuredly has never actually caused an injury or death, but a good theoretical argument can be made that it might.
- Snorkels are of no use, they are like buddy breathing, something that today's divers are not taught, have not mastered and can not properly utilize. In fact, they may, in some circumstances, even be a hazard, if just because the average diver and not use a snorkel effectively, and would be better off not receiving OJT when things have gone wrong.
- Snorkels are of no use to me because I carry a huge air supply, so I can use my regulator. I put my regulator in my mouth before I get wet and I rarely, if ever, relinquish it until I am back on the boat/shore. If it really comes down to it and I have to swim on the surface without and air supply I am happiest either swimming on my back or using my inflated rig like a kick-board.
- Snorkels are of great use, they help me in all sorts of ways. I put my snorkel in my mouth before I enter the water and, though I breath of my tank when underwater, I exit the water with my snorkel in my mouth.
There is truth in each of the three points of view, but not the same amount of truth.
What we are talking about is, in most cases, a second or even third order issue, which is not to say that it may not be a matter of "life or death," just not very often. It's kinda like the rigamarole that surrounds an "additional failure point" which is oft a theoretical consideration since that "additional failure point," has never been known, in actuality, to fail and most assuredly has never actually caused an injury or death, but a good theoretical argument can be made that it might.
- So, in response to number one: yes, the state of diver training and readiness today is atrocious when compared to what it was in the "old days." Divers today and instructors today often do not even know how to properly wear, not to mention use, a snorkel. Such people probably, IMHO, should not be diving, but if they are going to, I'm sure that not knowing how to use a snorkel, or buddy breathe, or calculate bingo air, or do any of a number of other things that I take for granted in a diver are but the tip of the iceberg in terms of their lacks.
- So, in response to number two: also, yes ... if you dive with a huge air supply, and never stray into kelp, and (insert list of other criteria here) then you will never need a snorkel. But you will also never learn to use a snorkel at an instinctual level and your ability to instinctively guard your airway from the incoming flood (something I see as a true potentially life saving attribute) will always be sub-par ... might I recommend always diving a full face mask ... just in case, after all ... you're carrying lots of gas.
- So, in response to number three: also, yes ... there are pluses and minuses to this approach, the problem is that only well practiced, competent divers, will gain the pluses, and with respect to today's average diver, well ... see number one.
