"Term limits" on certifications

[MikeFerrara]

Lamont,

For the most part I agree with your comments about lack of regulation, I'm about as anti-government intervention as can be.

So you want regulation but don't want it to be government? If the sport is going to be regulated I want it to be government. At least then I get to vote. The idiot agencies don't let me do that.

However the flip side of the coin is that to the extent accidents keep piling up, news coverage increases and/or courts continue to keep busy with lawsuits the only way to keep big-brother out is to do a more effective job at self-policing. Everyone knows that if the government gets involved they'll over-regulate the hell out of the sport and dream up idiotic ideas like snorkels and nitrox advertising banners, see Laguna Beach, Ca. for evidence.. So unless we keep the sport below the radar screen from those eager beaver legislators that have little else to do but make new laws then I suspect it will only remain a matter of time before we get saved from ourselves..

I don't think licenscing saves lives...have you been on the highway lately? Signing over our own decision making ability to a certification agency isn't the answer either.

Also government rarely does anything to save any ones life. For the most part they really don't care if you or I bite the big one. They dom, however respond to lobby groups in the interst of getting re-elected and out of pocket costs. If we get killed without costing the government money or getting some lobby group after them there just isn't any reason they would care. In either case I, for one, won't give a cert agency the same power over me that I don't want the government to have. It sounds like trading one tyrant for another and it sounds like you're saying that some one like GUE should decide for us so the government doesn't. again, at least with the government we have a constitution limiting their actions and I get to vote. If JJ gets to drinking and pulls every ones cards there isn't much I could do is there? ok, kind of a silly example but you get the idea.

 

[MikeFerrara]

That many SB members (at least those posting here) seem against the type of "logical" (IMHO) and self-imposed regulation I suggested has been revealing. Hmmm.

Dr. Bill

What your talking about isn't self imposed regulation it's agency imposed regulation. In my experience the agencies are non-diving idiots and I don't want them regulating anything.

I would rather see the idea of flashing a c-card for an air fill or a boat ride go away all together. I can buy a compressor without a card why not a single tank of air? I can by a boat without a card, why would I need a card to buy a ride on a boat?

If agencies only sold training and had no regulatory power then people would only buy training they saw value in and my prediction is that the quality of training would go up.

The problem is that we let the agencies run things now. They respond by selling you a card which you are willing to buy because you need it to buy air. You'll pay for it even if the training is lousy. The whole thing is a hosed up system and hosing it up more won't help. Heck, the biggest agency hasn't even figured out yet that you don't dive on your knees and you want to givce them more power?

If you feel like you need help deciding if it's ok to dive or not just stop by every so often. I'll give you a test, look at your logbook and let you know what kind of dive I'm willing to let you make. ok?

 

[TCDiver1]

So you want regulation but don't want it to be government? If the sport is going to be regulated I want it to be government. At least then I get to vote. The idiot agencies don't let me do that.

I know you said "if" Mike but i can't believe what just came out of your keyboard. Your issues with agencies and manufacturers are well known but good god man, you would have your Reps & Senators dictating scuba rules?

And who do you think the biggest lobby groups for the dive industry would be?

 

[ippy01]

I love it when a thread generates this kind of participation -- makes this board worth visiting. Nice job.

But, I think the "big picture" has been lost here. Given the number of recreational dives that take place every year (millions) vs. the number of deaths/accidents (a handful), there just isn't a big, structural problem with diving. Those of us who use statistics every day in our work know that "n" (in this case, the number of deaths/accidents) is too small when compared to the number of dives to mean anything. Activities like basketball, jogging, and tennis probably have far higher death/accident rates (certainly driving does). So, either the "system" works fine, or diving is such an inherently safe activity that it doesn't matter -- or some combination of the two.

I certainly don't mean to suggest that one should adopt a cavalier attitude about the real risks of diving -- that is a good way to kill yourself. But, any legislative/regulatory effort will have to answer the question "look at the tiny number of problems, is there really a problem here?"

 

[DiveGolfSki]

WOW... I'm amazed at this. I don't think anyone in their right mind would equate me with DIR/GUE (although they raise a number of good points). Very interesting.
Dr. Bill

Well, since I'm not in my "right mind", let me see what you suggested and what GUE suggests:

First, over the years I have become convinced that certificates (at least BOW) should not be life long ... I support the concept of renewable certifications, perhaps after a three or four year period.
Dr. Bill

GUE Policies & Standards 1.8.5 GUE Certified Diver-Re-Qualification
All GUE diver certification cards expire three (3) years after the date of issue. A diver can be re-qualified .... by having having his/her individual dive experience reviewed by either a qualified GUE instructor or by GUE Headquarters.

An individual who could verify achieving that number of dives through a stamped log book, would be automatically renewed (probably for a small fee).

GUE Policies & Standards 1.8.5 GUE Certified Diver-Re-Qualification

GUE divers must a) complete and log at least twenty-five (25) dives at the level of their certification within a three year period and, b) MUST PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF SUCH BY PRODUCING THEIR LOGBOOK OR BY MAILING IN FAXING COPIES OF THEIR LOGBOOK TO A RELEVANT GUE REPRESENTATIVE ...

I've heard instructors and agencies are concerned about potential lawsuits should they deny certification to a person obviously overweight and in poor health. To overcome that possibility, the "hoop" to jump through should be the ability to perform at an acceptable level. I consider myself over weight, but I could easily swim 400 yards.)

GUE Policies & Standards 2.1.2.2 Prerequites for Recreational Diver Course

4. Must be able to swim a distance of at least 50 feet/15 meters on a breath hold.
5. Must be able to swim at least 300 yards/275 meters in less than 14 minutes without stopping. This test should be conducted in a swimsuit and, where necessary, appropriate thermal protection.

Three suggestions you made = GUE FUNDAMENTALS. Hmmm, :33:

You then clarified you position further:

Since I began this thread, and did not suggest that government become involved in the issue (only the dive industry and dive community), I wish people would get off the topic of governmental legislation and interference. It has no relevance to what I posted initially in this thread. I do NOT feel the government needs to or should be involved here, only the industry.

Okay, let's see if I got this right (excuse the pun). Your main points are:

1. requirement for certification renewals
2. physical requirements (swimming X number yards, etc.)
3. Industry oversight (not governmental).

The first two are part of GUE's standards and policies. In your post #67, you stated "My proposal was based on self-enforcement through dive agencies and the dive shops" which I assume is industry oversight. In affect, you're suggesting that dive agencies and dive shops ADOPT certain parts of GUE standards and policies.

While you never used the words "doing it right", you've EFFECTIVELY accepted GUE/DIR fundamentals and proposed "enforcement through dive agencies and the dive shops".

That's my take on your suggestions but since my mind's not quite right ... I may be wrong :yleyes:

Rather than stooping to your level and questioning your mental faculties, I'd like to propose something. Perhaps the meat of the issue is the inconsistencies between the various agencies regarding training, certification, re-certification, standards etc. There are "for profit" agencies (who shall remain nameless but go the initials P.A.D.I.) and a lot of "not for profit" agencies. Each seem to have different motives resulting in different standards and policies between them. PERHAPS, A BETTER SUGGESTION would be the creation of a "Board of Governors" system made up a representative from each agencies. Issues like minimum standards can be suggested. I'm not sure if one exists. More importantly, I'm not sure if you can get the heads of each agency to create or agree to standards.

It's kinda like getting the heads of the five families to talk .... forgetaboutit.

 

[Walter]

PERHAPS, A BETTER SUGGESTION would be the creation of a "Board of Governors" system made up a representative from each agencies. Issues like minimum standards can be suggested. I'm not sure if one exists. More importantly, I'm not sure if you can get the heads of each agency to create or agree to standards.

It's been done. It's the RSTC, although only a handful of agencies have joined.

There are "for profit" agencies (who shall remain nameless but go the initials P.A.D.I.) and a lot of "not for profit" agencies.

I believe most are for profit. There may be more, but the only non profit agency that comes immediately to mind is YMCA.

 

[moxie]

I understand your concern and have been alarmed at the close calls I've seen with out of shape and inexperienced divers. But you yourself point out that the initial certification process itself is flawed. That said, whay would you expect a re-certification program to add any value. No, the only solution is individual awareness and peer pressure.

 

[MHK]

True to form, you and he are saying that there is only one way to dive ... the "safe" way, the DIR way, the GUE way.

I'm not going to get into a back and forth with you about an implication that you suggest, but I did want to take the time to address the oft-cited red herring that you offer. Please be clear about one thing, since all too many demogogue the issue with hyperbole that GUE says there is "only one way to dive.".. That is classic misdirection designed only to move the debate into an area that is frought with mudslinging but yet devoid of factual discussions. So just so we are clear about this, no one at GUE, or in the DIR camp, cares how anyone else in the world dives. It's an interesting paradox you guys have created, because on the one hand you overwhelmingly support the "freedom" of choice associated with any other style of diving, but yet ridicule those that exercise their "freedom" to choose a DIR style approach. Moreover, within the confines of that choice, we choose to dive amongst ourselves within the dynamic of our team, however when we exercise that option, we are called elitist, arrogant, snobs, or even zealots. So it's pretty much damned in you do and damned if you don't so when all else fails many resort to the tired old cliche of suggesting that we say "there is only one way to dive". So I wanted to correct the record and clearly state that we prefer to adopt a style of diving consistent with the DIR system, if you choose not to dive in such a fashion I promise you I won't loose one minute of sleep over it and could care less. You can choose to dive however you want and with whomever you want, just please grant us the same courtesy.

Regards

 

[MHK]

It's been done. It's the RSTC, although only a handful of agencies have joined.

The WRSTC is a classic example of beauracratic, self-serving elitists. In order to have a seat at the WRSTC table you must dedicate 60% of your classes to "recreational" training and you must have a prescence in approximately 30 states. { NOTE: I'm not 100% sure about the 30 state requirement, perhaps someone can research it further, but the point of course is that the entrance requirement is, in essence, rigged in favor of the establishment making entrance next to impossible} In other words, an agency like GUE, for example, doesn't have yet the necessary widespread locations, nor do they dedicate the bulk of their training to "recreational" so would therefore be precluded from joining the WRSTC. So the terms and conditions are already in favor of the "big boys", which makes any future entrance nearly impossible..

Hope that helps..

Regards

 

[DiveGolfSki]

It's been done. It's the RSTC, although only a handful of agencies have joined.



I believe most are for profit. There may be more, but the only non profit agency that comes immediately to mind is YMCA.

I'm not sure of each legal distinction but NAUI is made up of two types of NAUI members - voting and non-voting. Voting members include Active and Sustaining status instructors. Nonvoting members include Active and Sustaining status leadership members, affiliate members, honorary members and associate members. I believe PADI is corporation.

I believe that PADI has more of a "for profit" attitude than the others ... nothing wroing with that. My point was that the motives of each agencies differs vastly.

As far as the RSTC (actually its the WRSTC), thanks for the info. I've read their mission statement "RSTC’s mission is to establish minimum training standards at all levels of recreational scuba diving in order to promote public safety." but what exactly are those minimums? The biggest member is PADI but NAUI is not neither is GUE. I wonder if a consensus can be reached about all these issues.