Tulum - what training should I get?

[Doc Harry]

The areas used for these tours are not particularly fragile. They are absolutely NOT confined, and it's damn near impossible to kick up any silt.

I haven't been to every cenote in the Tulum area, but.... I have been cave diving in about 15 cenotes.

And I did see a lot of cavern tours.

And I did swim through a lot of silt being kicked up by people on cavern tours.,

And I see lots and lots of people hanging onto stalactites and grabbing things to maneuver.

Seems my reality and yours are quite different.

 

[Dirty-Dog]

I haven't been to every cenote in the Tulum area, but.... I have been cave diving in about 15 cenotes.

And I did see a lot of cavern tours.

And I did swim through a lot of silt being kicked up by people on cavern tours.,

And I see lots and lots of people hanging onto stalactites and grabbing things to maneuver.

Seems my reality and yours are quite different.

Forgive me. I intended to say "any significant silt". Yes, there is silt. No, I've never seen enough kicked up that it made it the slightest bit difficult to keep visual contact with the gold line.
I still don't see the area used for tours as being particulrly fragile. Sure, there's more contact than desirable, but frankly anything that's going to break off has been broken off for a long time.

 

[TracyN]

There are still many formations that can be broken through a loss of buoyancy control, an errant fin kick, or somebody grabbing onto a formation for control and breaking it off.

 

[Dirty-Dog]

There are still many formations that can be broken through a loss of buoyancy control, an errant fin kick, or somebody grabbing onto a formation for control and breaking it off.

When was the last time you were there? I was in Dos Ojos and The Pit in May, and frankly I don't see that tour area as looking all that fragile. Not without breaking the rules (i.e. being way off the good line).

 

[boulderjohn]

Have you bumped your head? Choose your agency and let me know which one doesn't warn against overhead environments in the course curriculum?

For ****s sake even the OP knows better.

You may have missed the statement earlier that this entire discussion was covered recently on another thread, and the people who were saying it was against standards were challenged to identify the standards. They tried. They couldn't.

Standards,rules,recommendations,hints,and please with sugar on it-semantics for the basic understanding that entering the overhead without training increases your risk. Exceeding risk in this sport unfortunately time and time again has lead to fatalities.

There is a HUGE difference between a standard forbidding any OW diver from entering any overhead environment and information warning people "that entering the overhead without training increases your risk. Exceeding risk in this sport unfortunately time and time again has lead to fatalities." The first does not exist. The second definitely exists.

[/COLOR]Stop interpreting standards to fit your perception of the danger.

Perhaps you should stop inventing standards that do not exist.

You are challenging me to prove that a standard does not exist. The only way for me to do that is to print out all the standards for all the agencies and show that the standard does not exist. It would be easy, on the other hand, for you to prove the standards exist by posting one. Why won't you do that simple thing?

Because not only is there no such standard, there can be no such standard. Agencies have no authority over divers once they are certified. They can provide warnings, but that's it. Agency standards cover the behavior of professionals who are going about their business. They essentially tell instructors what to do with students while they are instructing. they have no authority once the diver goes diving without that supervision. If an agency were to create such a standard, the diver could just shrug and say "Who cares? It's not a law." There was a recent thread in the Cozumel forum in which someone claimed DMs were violating a PADI standard for DMs. The response (which was correct) was that not only does that standard not exist, but there is no law saying that DMs have to follow PADI standards. PADI is not the world's police on diving matters.

Here is one instructor/DM standard for PADI you might find interesting. They are forbidden to enter overheads with students except in the obvious cases of cavern and wreck training and when conducting a local orientation dive in an area with overhead environments. What is a local orientation dive? It shows divers around the area with a professional guide so that hey will be prepared to do it on their own later on.

 

[syntaxerrorsix]

No, you're right. The dangers of overhead are overrated. Do what you like. Trust me dives and overhead environments are clearly a winning combination and there aren't any agencies that stated clearly to the contrary.

 

[TSandM]

karstdvr, your example is perfect: The instructor took the divers off the line. Therefore, one of the criteria I have stated MULTIPLE times was not followed. The rule was broken.

I have said, and continue to believe, that if the rules are followed, these tours are safe. I also believe that, although the guide is in charge, it is the responsibility of the diver to ensure that he has contracted with an operation that follows the APSA rules, and during the dive, it is the diver's responsibility to watch the guide and the guideline.

I totally agree that novice divers should not do these dives. You shouldn't do them until you have enough control of yourself in the water that you won't damage anything. WAY too many people do these too early -- even a pair of our students, just out of OW, did them AGAINST our advice.

 

[karstdvr]

.
I still don't see the area used for tours as being particulrly fragile. Sure, there's more contact than desirable, but frankly anything that's going to break off has been broken off for a long time.

Sounds like these areas are beat to hell. Coral when damaged will eventually repair,and dry caves too,but not in our lifetime. A vadose cave that is submerged,is damaged forever. Opps,I exaggerated about forever maybe 2.6 million years when we have another ice age.

 

[TSandM]

The area right along the line is often pretty beat up, but the lines are generally run away from anything remotely fragile. A lot of the time, even in the decorated caverns, you are swimming above slabs of limestone with no formations. Or you are swimming in large open spaces where it would take execrable control to contact anything. As I said before, the caverns with delicate formations are generally not much discussed, and are reserved by guides for clients who have proven their skills.

I have seen just as much damage in the cave in upstream Carwash as I have seen where the cavern tours are run.

---------- Post added July 19th, 2014 at 10:17 AM ----------

Here is an example of a shot from Chac Mool -- see anything fragile here?

From Dos Ojos:

I absolutely do not recommend cave diving without training. Cavern tours done according to the APSA rules are safe enough. Clearly the feeling about this is not unanimous, nor are we going to convince one another by continuing to argue in this thread.

And my status as a SB moderator doesn't come into this at all . . . we are ALL, on SB, enjoined not to promote unsafe diving practices. There is enough controversy about this particular one that it doesn't trip that switch.

 

[scubastingray]

You may have missed the statement earlier that this entire discussion was covered recently on another thread, and the people who were saying it was against standards were challenged to identify the standards. They tried. They couldn't.

There is a HUGE difference between a standard forbidding any OW diver from entering any overhead environment and information warning people "that entering the overhead without training increases your risk. Exceeding risk in this sport unfortunately time and time again has lead to fatalities." The first does not exist. The second definitely exists.

Perhaps you should stop inventing standards that do not exist.

You are challenging me to prove that a standard does not exist. The only way for me to do that is to print out all the standards for all the agencies and show that the standard does not exist. It would be easy, on the other hand, for you to prove the standards exist by posting one. Why won't you do that simple thing?

Because not only is there no such standard, there can be no such standard. Agencies have no authority over divers once they are certified. They can provide warnings, but that's it. Agency standards cover the behavior of professionals who are going about their business. They essentially tell instructors what to do with students while they are instructing. they have no authority once the diver goes diving without that supervision. If an agency were to create such a standard, the diver could just shrug and say "Who cares? It's not a law." There was a recent thread in the Cozumel forum in which someone claimed DMs were violating a PADI standard for DMs. The response (which was correct) was that not only does that standard not exist, but there is no law saying that DMs have to follow PADI standards. PADI is not the world's police on diving matters.

Here is one instructor/DM standard for PADI you might find interesting. They are forbidden to enter overheads with students except in the obvious cases of cavern and wreck training and when conducting a local orientation dive in an area with overhead environments. What is a local orientation dive? It shows divers around the area with a professional guide so that hey will be prepared to do it on their own later on.

So Standard is the wrong word, but you're trying to tell me that an OPEN WATER diver is a-okay to exceed the OPEN WATER environment they were trained in?
Of course there are no scuba police, so PADI can't stop you from doing things. That's why it's a suggestion, not because they condone it.

Also, am I the only one who was taught the five tenants gained form accident analysis? The first (and most important) one is to not exceed your training.

Of course those arguing against the safety factor can't control the behavior of others. I wouldn't want to, any more than I want to stand at a gun store and make it my duty to screen buyers.

However, arguing about the merits of safety is something I will take issue with. Everyone has different levels of acceptable risk, and I think exceeding your training (even if it is a "safe" cavern/cave) is very risky. It is not something I would promote to anyone.


Also, are the guidelines free of fragile pieces because they ran it that way, or because they have been knocked off through repetitive impact?