The Ethics of Promoting Cave Diving

[NAM001]

I have to agree with the idea of promoting and taking divers on dives one level above their current certified level, in a training environment. Without that ow's could not cross the 60' depth in persuit of AOW. The concept has its place. I personally have a line drawn between rec diving catagory dives and technical catagory of dives. Those catagory boundry's should not be able to be freely crossed. I know , I know but there are those that do not believe in limits and that the basic OW card is good to 130 ft and therefore a dive with an instructor to 150 is not a problem. As cave goes the cavern course should be considered the same as OW training. An technical category entry point course in which cave entry can not be done without outside of training leading to certification. I have had no problem with rec classes promoting follow on courses because they promote increased skils and compitance with in the diving area of 0-130 rather than promoting more dangerous technical styles of diving. Likewise I would have no problem promoting follow on training classes in the field of current training should also be acceptable. You cant very well say I cant talk about the intro course cause you are only in cavern. I have much less concern about technical courses than that of rec courses because when you are in the tech arena you probably understand just how invincible you are not.

Then again I see rec diving a multistep category ow/aow/deep to 130. As such I would not consider taking an OW to 120' as prudent. Would I take an aow to 120, YES.

 

[kafkaland]

Would you kindly explain to us how much preparation you had in terms of planning the dive? i.e. Did you discuss the implications of diving beyond your "official" training? Did you discuss the implications for diving beyond the 1/6 rule? Did you go over how the "T's" would be negotiated and how you would have 100% confidence that when exiting and coming back to the "T" you would be exiting in the correct direction?

Sure. It was an extensive dive planning process, comparable to the dive planning in the course. We calculated estimated turn pressures, length of dive, penetration, NDL, based on depth, sac, typical swimming speed, lack of flow, etc. and went extensively over navigation, with a sketch of the cave, including all permanent arrows where jumps might be tied in, how we'd cookie them if there was one, how our cookies are personalized (visual and tactile), etc., and did the final gas matching and calculation of turn pressures for each tank (we were in sidemount) in the water.

Of of course I don't know what I don't know, and what may have been missed, but it was certainly thorough and didn't leave me with any nagging questions. Also, as mentioned before, the guide was my Intro Cave instructor. I would not have done the cave course with him, and certainly not come back for more if I had any doubts that he would teach me all I need to know for the dives we did.

 

[Capt Jim Wyatt]

kafkaland:

Thank you for your reply. It sounds as if the instructor did a good job and that you were not only safe but that you learned something too.

 

[TSandM]

I'm thinking about the whole "promoting cave diving" thing from the perspective of living in a very strange corner of the diving world. When you get involved with GUE, at any level, you are immediately exposed to cave diving (something about which I knew absolutely NOTHING before that) and deep wreck and exploration diving. Exploration is part of the ethos of the organization, and it's really built to create exploration divers. Although it's perfectly fine to do Fundies and stop, a lot of people don't, so their fellows see them moving on to cave and tech classes, and it seems kind of a logical progression. I think a lot of people who originally wouldn't have voiced an interest in that kind of diving, end up doing it because they are immersed in a culture where it is done. I'm not sure there is anything wrong with that.

 

[boulderjohn]

I'm not sure there is anything wrong with that.

I am similarly puzzled. It seems to me that talking about the importance of diving caves safely (good idea) is indistinguishable from promoting cave diving training (bad idea).

 

[TSandM]

I don't think the problem lies in promoting cave diving, or cave diving training. I think the problem is rooted in two things: The student's unwillingness to pay for what he sees as a failure, resulting in the instructor's reluctance to withhold certification because of a need to get paid, or to get other students referred to him so he can continue to make money.

GUE classes are all pay in advance, and the students knows darned well that he may not pass any given class. And a fair number of people don't -- the year I took Cave 2, the instructor taught 4 classes in the second half of the year, and 3 students out of the 12 passed. Yet the GUE instructors I know are as busy as they want to be, despite premium prices and a KNOWN unwillingness to pass students they view as inadequately skilled. Why doesn't this work for everybody?

 

[Capt Jim Wyatt]

I don't think the problem lies in promoting cave diving, or cave diving training. I think the problem is rooted in two things: The student's unwillingness to pay for what he sees as a failure, resulting in the instructor's reluctance to withhold certification because of a need to get paid, or to get other students referred to him so he can continue to make money.

GUE classes are all pay in advance, and the students knows darned well that he may not pass any given class. And a fair number of people don't -- the year I took Cave 2, the instructor taught 4 classes in the second half of the year, and 3 students out of the 12 passed. Yet the GUE instructors I know are as busy as they want to be, despite premium prices and a KNOWN unwillingness to pass students they view as inadequately skilled. Why doesn't this work for everybody?

All of the instructors I am close to get payment in advance also. The students are told that they are paying for the training and not the certification. Most of have agreed this is the correct wy of doing things so as to not be subconsciously tempted to pass someone who is not yet ready in order to ensure fee collection.

The method would work for everybody if they employed it because students for the most part want to be properly/safely trained and are clearly willing to pay.

When we get the bargain shoppers as students and they find the lowest bidder instructor then we have a problem. These are the same ones with substandard gear and a poor attitude toward being a student and a poor attitude for teaching.

 

[Oldbear]

...
When we get the bargain shoppers as students and they find the lowest bidder instructor then we have a problem. These are the same ones with substandard gear and a poor attitude toward being a student and a poor attitude for teaching.

I have never really put this correlation together before, but OMG I have seen these individuals and they stick out like a pink elephant at a cheese tasting festival for mice.:mouse:

 

[The Chairman]

Why doesn't this work for everybody?

We may never fully understand the 'why' of this, but culture goes a long way to explain it. However, implicit in your statement is the obvious conclusion that it does not work for everybody. I've ridden horses before but never in the manner you do. That's also a matter of culture and again, it simply doesn't work for everybody. My best friend Dan and his wonderful wife have a dog that they have cage trained. The obedience in that dog is amazing, but she's no Fang. I would never treat my Fang that way. That too is a matter of culture and you'll find a wide range of how people treat/train their pets. We're all different and that makes each of us more interesting. Viva la differance!

Just because our values differ doesn't make one of us bad and the other good. I have long decried the underlying badditude I have seen in dive shops, instructors and divers since I entered this industry: 'If I don't sell, teach or dive it, it must be crap!' It's a flawed approach to communication and a horrible way to promote yourself or your business in this information age. I was just PMing BoulderJohn about the renaissance of public discourse that has arisen out of the interwebs. I think it's wonderful but it has a few pit falls. One of those pit falls is to our critical thinking. Far, far too many post to prove themselves and their methodologies right rather than to figure out what is right. It's the Socratic method gone awry. The chest thumpers and POV Warriors are the logical children of this devolution. Rather than improve their skills of reasoning and communication, they simply silt out the discussions they become involved in.

To bring this back to Cave Instruction, there are more than a few approaches to teaching Cave Diving. It's important for you as a diver to find the methodology that suits you and the instructor, not the agency, is a critical aspect of that. Just because it's different doesn't make it superior/inferior. However, that doesn't make all Cave Instructors adequate by default either. Some do the caves and our industry a huge disservice as they simply don't impart the common core of safety and cave etiquette to their students. Unfortunately, it seems that worse the instructor, the more students they get. The culture of mediocrity is self perpetuating, just as the culture of excellence is self limiting.

​

 

[kensuf]

it's my opinion that this is still the case. I have yet to meet the instructor that got into it for purely fiscal reasons. Sure, they think it's a neat idea that they can make their living DOING what they love, but that's mostly secondary.

I even think that the motive behind the "First rule about cave instruction is that you don't talk about cave instruction" was a good one. Unfortunately, it did not work the way it was intended to. Instead of putting the kibash on overly eager/under skilled divers it created an elitest mentality: one that many instructors and divers think is wrong. Getting to full cave should never be a race or a struggle. It should never be unnaturally impeded so that the student feels they have to push hard, ergo making it a race. I think that Ben McDaniel (Vortex 2010) is a perfect example of this.

The way to circumvent that type of mentality is to bring instruction completely into the light. Publish the standards, outline and promote the path to full cave and beyond and also discuss what happens when cavers go rogue. Encouraging instructors to actively promote training will go a long, long way to educating people just why it's important and how deadly it is to go it alone.

I hope I don't come across as being simply argumentative here. These are issues I've raised with a few of my cave mentors over the years. But then, I'm an internet kind of guy, so you can call me biased. It's OK.

I doubt Ben is in Vortex.

Let's talk about the father and son in Eagles Nest. How many people believe part of the reason they lacked any training was cost of instruction? "Why do I need to spend $2000 on something I can read on the internet?"

I think they are an extreme example of Jim's bargain bin shoppers, but I think it's an example of the problem.