Suit filed in case of "Girl dead, boy injured at Glacier National Park

[boulderjohn]

but if all of these claims actually make it to trial and there are big judgments against those defendants, it could well scare a lot of people.

If the owner of the property in New Mexico where I do most of my diving (and all my tech training) were to read this and the Ginnie Springs thread today, we would be closed out of the site tomorrow. I guarantee it. That would end almost all of the technical diving in several states, and I would certainly retire as an instructor.

 

[Angelo Farina]

Fipsas in Italy improved its own materials and standards about tech and cave diving few years ago. Quite drastically as far as I know. But I am NOT an insider, so keep my knowledge lightly please

True. I am a FIPSAS instructor, and several years ago I was an active member of the organisation, up to the position of director of the federal diving school of Parma (my town), and member of the national didactical technical commission.
Inside FIPSAS two "souls" coexist, one pushing for extreme innovation (of which I was part) and one quite traditionalist, which still think that the proper way to teach novel students is using the ARO (pure-oxygen CC rebreather, similar to the one used by Navy Seals), as it was done in years 1950-1980.
Luckily the first prevailed! (still, I am proud of having been trained with the ARO, at my time - but this is the past!)
And yes, also the no-profit, club-based approach has its drawbacks, which should be mitigated.
BSAC in UK had a similar evolution, and nowadays in UK if you want modern training and advanced technologies you better search for a BSAC-affiliated club, not for a commercial diving shop affiliated with PADI or the like.
I do not know what's happening in France...

 

[cerich]

If the owner of the property in New Mexico where I do most of my diving (and all my tech training) were to read this and the Ginnie Springs thread today, we would be closed out of the site tomorrow. I guarantee it. That would end almost all of the technical diving in several states, and I would certainly retire as an instructor.

Do you not like the owner of the quarry you train at?

 

[boulderjohn]

My solution was to leave.

OK, that's your personal solution, but in this and other threads you seem to be cheering for certain changes in the industry. I am trying to piece them all together, but you will have to correct my misunderstandings.

• You are hoping for the ending of agencies. You want them to be simply sellers of information, I suppose like textbook companies like McGraw Hill.
• You want each individual instructor to be on his or her own, setting up an individual shop with an individual inventory of gear, and tanks, paying for his her own pool time, etc. This individual will not be part of an agency, so he or she will negotiate with an insurance company for liability insurance, assuring that company that his or her standards for instruction will meet theirs.
• Okay, I suppose you would be willing to let some of those independent instructors come together to share inventories, etc., but with no agency, they will have to set their own standards and have an insurance company approve of them.
• If there is to be an agency, you want that agency to disavow any instructor who violates standards publicly, making sure everyone knows how that instructor erred.
• If an instructor does err, you want the agency to protect him or her rather than "throw him or her under the bus."

Is all of that correct?

 

[boulderjohn]

Do you not like the owner of the quarry you train at?

I do not know the owner, and it is not a quarry. It is a 280-foot deep sinkhole. It is the only site within many hundreds of miles deep enough to do technical training. (I have to drive 420 miles to get there,)

The previous owner was land poor--owned a big ranch but had little income, so she was willing to allow diving at a high price despite being petrified of lawsuits. She sold the ranch to a wealthy absentee landowner who has no need of income from diving and who allows the previous landowner to manage very limited diving for the modest income derived from it. We have been told repeatedly after the sale that diving is going to end because it is nothing more than an annoyance to the landowner. If he finds out that this annoyance could cost him millions, that would be the end of it.

 

[cerich]

I do not know the owner, and it is not a quarry. It is a 280-foot deep sinkhole. It is the only site within many hundreds of miles deep enough to do technical training. (I have to drive 420 miles to get there,)

The previous owner was land poor--owned a big ranch but had little income, so she was willing to allow diving at a high price despite being petrified of lawsuits. She sold the ranch to a wealthy absentee landowner who has no need of income from diving and who allows the previous landowner to manage very limited diving for the modest income derived from it. We have been told repeatedly after the sale that diving is going to end because it is nothing more than an annoyance to the landowner. If he finds out that this annoyance could cost him millions, that would be the end of it.

honest question, with likely no perfect answer. Is it fair to expose a landowner like that who is ignorant of the risks? I get what you are saying but a landowners ignorance is one thing. I would feel like I was putting them at risk and hiding it from them. In teaching, my goal is to educate on the risks as much as possible and teach skills and knowledge to mitigate them. A landowner isn't a student, but they are a person. Do we need to be paid to care about others?

 

[boulderjohn]

honest question, with likely no perfect answer. Is it fair to expose a landowner like that who is ignorant of the risks? I get what you are saying but a landowners ignorance is one thing. I would feel like I was putting them at risk and hiding it from them. In teaching, my goal is to educate on the risks as much as possible and teach skills and knowledge to mitigate them. A landowner isn't a student, but they are a person. Do we need to be paid to care about others?

He knows the risks in a general sense, and he has threatened to shut it down before. We have to sign a liability waiver specific to the site. As for contacting him to tell him anything more, well, I'm not allowed to. All contact goes through the previous owner's family, who manage the diving there. He allows it as a courtesy to them.

 

[cerich]

He knows the risks in a general sense, and he has threatened to shut it down before. We have to sign a liability waiver specific to the site. As for contacting him to tell him anything more, well, I'm not allowed to. All contact goes through the previous owner's family, who manage the diving there. He allows it as a courtesy to them.

Maybe the answer would be an expensive one. Pay for the landowner to have their own dive specific site liability insurance.

 

[Wookie]

OK, that's your personal solution, but in this and other threads you seem to be cheering for certain changes in the industry. I am trying to piece them all together, but you will have to correct my misunderstandings.

• You are hoping for the ending of agencies. You want them to be simply sellers of information, I suppose like textbook companies like McGraw Hill.
• You want each individual instructor to be on his or her own, setting up an individual shop with an individual inventory of gear, and tanks, paying for his her own pool time, etc. This individual will not be part of an agency, so he or she will negotiate with an insurance company for liability insurance, assuring that company that his or her standards for instruction will meet theirs.
• Okay, I suppose you would be willing to let some of those independent instructors come together to share inventories, etc., but with no agency, they will have to set their own standards and have an insurance company approve of them.
• If there is to be an agency, you want that agency to disavow any instructor who violates standards publicly, making sure everyone knows how that instructor erred.
• If an instructor does err, you want the agency to protect him or her rather than "throw him or her under the bus."

Is all of that correct?

I would actually rather the agency take more control over their instructors, actually providing oversight of instructors, actually auditing and observing them performing instruction in the wild.

But that would make the instructors “agents” of the agency, as I believe students are led to believe they are.

We are often compared to skydiving. I wonder how USPA conducts business? They certify skydiving instructors like a scuba agency certified scuba instructors.

Lacking more oversight from agencies, I’d prefer oversight from OSHA for recreational diving, like HSE provides in the UK.

 

[formernuke]

I think the agencies need to stop encouraging instructors to push classes on those who are not ready for them.