Taking GPS coordinates of a site... captain's permission?

[MaxBottomtime]

Thanks for the info... very interesting.

Also, I feel everyone here should know exactly what you did for us, the diving community. A quick Google search of the German sub UB88 shows that you went out and found the sub so that its location would be known to all.

"The exact location of the UB88 however, was never released, and so relatively little diving was performed on her until July 2010, when Phil Garner independently located her, posting video and the details of his search. Unlike the original discoverers, Phil posted enough clues in his report to allow others to pinpoint the location, and open the UB88 to the local diving community."

California Diver Magazine ? Dedicated to Scuba Diving California and beyond. Come diving with us! » Diving the UB88 Submarine: California?s WWI Submarine

I applaud you for your selflessness. Thank you

I could never understand why a small number of divers felt that a site within state waters should not be open to all. I knew divers who looked for the sub since the 1940s. When I posted my report of my search Wreckreational Diving - First Dive On The UB88 I received dozens of very nice emails and only one negative one. That was from one of the divers from the original discovery seven years earlier.
With software such as Esri ARC GIS, Global Mapper and Manifold so affordable these days, and some available as freeware, anyone can use the information from the USGS surveys to locate new dive sites. Many of the sites that were "secret" ten years ago are now on Google Earth. I fully expect to see the bottom relief in great detail for the entire world in a few short years. In the meantime, I'll let the old guard be happy with their secrets.

 

[manni-yunk]

Because certain charters have a vested interest in the numbers being wrong?

Charters dont publish charts, books, hang logs, etc.

 

[rjack321]

I could never understand why a small number of divers felt that a site within state waters should not be open to all. I knew divers who looked for the sub since the 1940s. When I posted my report of my search Wreckreational Diving - First Dive On The UB88 I received dozens of very nice emails and only one negative one. That was from one of the divers from the original discovery seven years earlier.
With software such as Esri ARC GIS, Global Mapper and Manifold so affordable these days, and some available as freeware, anyone can use the information from the USGS surveys to locate new dive sites. Many of the sites that were "secret" ten years ago are now on Google Earth. I fully expect to see the bottom relief in great detail for the entire world in a few short years. In the meantime, I'll let the old guard be happy with their secrets.

Phil

I agree with you, to a point. I have much of the same high resolution multibeam NOAA bathymetry that Google used in your area. And I have found wrecks with it, some new some "old". And sometimes I share those locations and sometimes I don't. Its not so much that I am secretly hoarding them to myself. If you bring a GPS on my boat and we're diving something its fine with me if you want to know the location. Waypoint away.

What I won't do is wholesale publish numbers of everything in some grand lat/long website. If you ask me for numbers to something I might share and I might not. Depends on if you have any interesting information or coordinates to share with me or in some other way illustrate that you've been doing your homework and add value.

There are a few more years left before the entire ocean is available with a few mouse clicks. Until that time I think its better to develop wreck hunting and investigation skills in the next generation of divers that are a little more sophisticated than Google searching. I mean really where's the mystery, intrigue and adventure in that?

All the best,
Richard

 

[TMHeimer]

I think cell phone GPS isn't really "GPS", and I've never had a phone's 'gps' work worth a damn away from cell towers.

If the Capt asks you not to, its pretty simple to show him some respect. If you have to sneak around to do it, it kind of shows how much you respect other people and is telling of your personal ethics.

I agree. If I had a GPS I wouldn't use it if the Capt. asked people not to. I have only been on a smattering of boats over the years, but have never heard any talk about GPS's. Maybe it's a recent thing. I asked about how hard it would be to use a GPS without being noticed (ie.--you could just be checking anything these days on your phone), because I assumed most boat Capts. don't mention it and if you did it "secretly" nothing would be said one way or another. No hornet's nests stirred up. Or you could just ask, of course. I personally would just use it clandestinly, figuring if the capt. really cared he would bring it up. There are so many rules everywhere today, I don't think using a GPS on a boat you paid $100+ for is showing a lack of respect for people. As a shell collector,
I ALWAYS insure that it is OK with all in charge that I do this--then again, it's pretty hard to sneak around with that.

 

[jlevine]

I hadn't really thought about this whole matter until I read this thread. I did a quick Google search and found a patent application for a dive computer with GPS capabilities:

Patent US8174436 - Dive computer with global positioning system receiver - Google Patents

I also saw another link about a paper that involves GPS capabilities on diving computers:

ingentaconnect GPS diving computer for underwater tracking and mapping

I see both sides of this issue. I wouldn't be surpirised if GPS capabilities make their way into more kinds of diving equipment over time. Try buying a cell phone without a camera. It's getting hard to do. The main people who use them are defense contractors who go into secure government facilities.

 

[gcarter]

I'll be brief, You too are mistaken.

---------- Post added January 8th, 2013 at 10:41 AM ----------



If that is the rule, than yes. Indeed the captain has that authority. Luckily you have the option to dive on another vessel.

---------- Post added January 8th, 2013 at 10:59 AM ----------



You don't need to make it sound sinister. No threats are ever made. Like any vessel, I have rules which are made clear prior to boarding. Passengers may accept or reject them. Once aboard and underway, they are under the authority of the Captain.... like it or not.

You sound as if you believe that the Captain has unbounded authority. Are you compensating? Because this is blatently untrue.

---------- Post added January 9th, 2013 at 01:04 AM ----------

I am not. Neither were they kidding. It was announced to the boat as we left the dock in a professional manner. I don't believe anyone felt threatened.

Seriously? Bad enough to make such a statement at all, but to wait until leaving dock is definitely bad form. If they feel that strongly, they should be making a big deal of it when booking, before they take your money and cancellation policies kick in.

---------- Post added January 9th, 2013 at 01:10 AM ----------

I know what you mean. If I am standing on the dock and find out GPS use is not allowed, I would still happily go on the dive and forgo the GPS. Finding out on the boat at the dive site, I would be a little upset, but again, wouldn't stop me from diving, although might affect my tipping

However, I like to record GPS coordinates of dive sites for my log book, and so next time diving in the area would probably be with a different operator.

Since I have never had a problem with a boat crew regarding GPS devices, I haven't thought about this much. But, perhaps it should be up to the diver to ask the operator about using a GPS device before booking --- I think this makes more sense.

For clarity, I have never captured GPS info and have no desire to. But I have a problem with this statement. If a service provider whom I am paying has restrictions they wish to place on the provision of that service, it is incumbent upon them to tell me ahead of time. Don't trivialize that responsibility. If you have not stated a restriction, I am perfectly justified to think it is OK unless it is illegal.

 

[TMHeimer]

---------- Post added January 9th, 2013 at 01:04 AM ----------

[/COLOR]

---------- Post added January 9th, 2013 at 01:10 AM ----------



For clarity, I have never captured GPS info and have no desire to. But I have a problem with this statement. If a service provider whom I am paying has restrictions they wish to place on the provision of that service, it is incumbent upon them to tell me ahead of time. Don't trivialize that responsibility. If you have not stated a restriction, I am perfectly justified to think it is OK unless it is illegal.

***************************************



Agree mostly. I think it depends--As I mentioned, I make sure it is OK with the op that I collect shells (if not, I don't go). But that MAY be different from using GPS. The very first charter I took I collected shells and no one said a thing. The next two boats basically tarred & feathered me. None of the 3 made any mention of shells beforehand, so I assumed it was OK after the first boat. But it is more the norm in the S. USA (and alomst everywhere in the Carib.) that you just done take shells. That's why I always ask. I would think it is not the norm for even the topic of GPS to come up on a boat--I may be out of the loop, but I've never heard it. In this case, the op should absolutely mention the no GPS rule beforehand. This might not be the case in the future when everyone has a GPS gadget--then it may just be assumed you don't use it on a boat.

 

[vladimir]

You sound as if you believe that the Captain has unbounded authority. Are you compensating? Because this is blatently untrue.

---------- Post added January 9th, 2013 at 01:04 AM ----------



Seriously? Bad enough to make such a statement at all, but to wait until leaving dock is definitely bad form. If they feel that strongly, they should be making a big deal of it when booking, before they take your money and cancellation policies kick in.

---------- Post added January 9th, 2013 at 01:10 AM ----------



For clarity, I have never captured GPS info and have no desire to. But I have a problem with this statement. If a service provider whom I am paying has restrictions they wish to place on the provision of that service, it is incumbent upon them to tell me ahead of time. Don't trivialize that responsibility. If you have not stated a restriction, I am perfectly justified to think it is OK unless it is illegal.

You don't have to be a marketing genius to turn this responsibility into an opportunity:

Some of the sites we take you to are unknown to our competitors. They took a lot of exploration for us to find. We ask that you respect our investment of time and effort by not taking GPS coordinates of the sites. Thank you.

Feel free to use that, guys. It's not Madison Avenue quality, but it gets the message across and it's grammatically correct.

 

[NAM001]

Thereis just something about this statement that does not compute. Any one that would be considered to be a competitor most likely knows where all you stationary sites are. Stationary being wrecks reefs ect. The moving sites such as where the greatest accumulation of sea life is today is another thing. I am more inclined to believe that boats have just mutually agreed not to cut into each others teritorry. In doing so the boat can offer exclusivity to that boats divers at the destination site. The hype of that keeps them coming back to you. Thge idea that i am going to get the lat lon and rent a boat and go there is not a major threat as the locals probably know of the site and the vacationers are not likely to go it on thier own since the cost to do so would exceed the passage to more of your exclusive sites.

Try this.... you and your wife have a service to boat divers to 12 exclusive "SECRET" sites. You have 6 boats in your business with of course 6 captains. One of your boats is now grounded and you cant employ 6 full time captains with only 5 boats.... The odd captain out now works for your major competitor. How does that fit in the paranoia of a customer knowing the locations. My suspicion is that your competitors have had thier employees on your boat and know the spots you have taken them or thier passive loggers to. The secracy is really a pretty silly concern.

You don't have to be a marketing genius to turn this responsibility into an opportunity:

Some of the sites we take you to are unknown to our competitors. They took a lot of exploration for us to find. We ask that you respect our investment of time and effort by not taking GPS coordinates of the sites. Thank you.

Feel free to use that, guys. It's not Madison Avenue quality, but it gets the message across and it's grammatically correct.

 

[ScubaSteve]

If a service provider whom I am paying has restrictions they wish to place on the provision of that service, it is incumbent upon them to tell me ahead of time. Don't trivialize that responsibility. If you have not stated a restriction, I am perfectly justified to think it is OK unless it is illegal.

Have you ever been told that it is against the rules to take a dump on the deck of the boat? Would you expect to be stopped if you assumed that position and started? IMO, both are within the charter's rights to impose and while it would be nice if they told you ahead of time, sometimes there just are not enough people wanting to perform the action to warrant the preemptive warning. I agree it would be nice but I do not see where the charter will have done anything wrong with stopping you even if they had not pre-warned you. Quite frankly, as long as they approach the issue tactfully (not threatening to throw things over), they only stand to lose "you" (the person being stopped) as a customer only while protecting information which they believe to be key to their success. "You" and maybe your dive buddies is still likely better than having a unique site that is not over run with divers and beat up and tough to moor on is probably better for business than losing a bunch of divers because you now offer nothing unique. I agree that losing the numbers is not likely to ever cause an Op to go under but I can still see the benefit to them for having sites to go to that others do not.