sports diver [Archive] - BSAC Scuba Diving Forums

Neil Carter

12-04-2005, 09:53

BSAC Sports Diver qualification level "allows" two Sports Divers to buddy each other and to dive together within the limitions of their qualification, ie depth limits etc, so no going down the Pit at Stoney. On the other hand there MAY be requirements within your Club Constitution which state something like, "x" many divers are required on site for a dive to be recognised as a "Club" dive, or minimum DL cover on site for similar "Club" dive recognition. Although, from the BSAC"s point of view, as far as the BOH (Branch Officer's Handbook) is concerned, all that is neccesary for a dive to actually BE a "Club" dive is that the DO should be made aware of the dive in advance. Practically, your DO cannot "forbid" you to dive anywhere, and realistically should be encouraging as much diving to new divers as possible. After all, that's why we started diving in the first place, to go diving. And the more diving we do, the better divers we should become.

However in today's litiginous society, where someone else is always to be held accountable for our own failings, the duty of care devolving onto a DO's shoulders is particularly onerous. So while you can quite happily swan off to Stoney and do your own thing, irrespective of what your DO might say, it would be better to work with him, or her, to find a way whereby you can complete this, and as many other dives as you might want, with the DO's blessing. One point to consider is that if there are only two of you(??) going to do the dive, how will you organise your shore cover? Better to have at least two buddy pairs so that you can dive one pair in the water and one pair on stand-by, although I know that many divers dive at Stoney, depending on Stoney's own incident response, and number of other divers on site to cover any emergencies, it's not necessarily right, but it is what happens.

HTH

Neil Carter
DO ISIS Divers

iainmsmith

12-04-2005, 19:56

Although, from the BSAC"s point of view, as far as the BOH (Branch Officer's Handbook) is concerned, all that is neccesary for a dive to actually BE a "Club" dive is that the DO should be made aware of the dive in advance.

...and must agree to it.

Depending on your club rules, you may require your DO's authority to be able to hire club kit, at which point he can effectively set any requirements that he likes before granting this.

Of course, if neither of you need to use club resources, you can pretty much do what you like. However, it may be worth considering _why_ your DO would not want two unsupported SDs going off to Stoney on your own.

Iain

dennis wilson

12-04-2005, 21:09

so the whole idea of diving and have fun come`s in where? i`ve been diving for 3 years loads of dives been to 33 metres with instructor both of the divers competent the whole idea of diving is to dive and get the experience need to make them a better dive yes the dive officer should be told of the dive it not as if the dive is a unknow place and there is cover let staff at stoney know or caperwray i love diving and will always be bsac but i think it`s time the dinosaurs got thier heads from up there ass and started to let people enjoy their diving

Dave

12-04-2005, 21:46

Neil Carter

13-04-2005, 09:58

Indeed. Just go off and have your fun; it is nothing to do with your DO whatsoever and it isnt his right to tell you what you can or can't do on your own. If you need any kit, then hire it at Stoney ( or wherever )

Dave

Sorry Dave,

As BSAC Divers, and members of a BSAC Club, what you say is simply not correct. This is what it says in the BSAC Branch Officers handbook.

" 4.5.1 What is a Branch Dive?
The National Diving Committee has defined an official Branch dive:

"As one that is carried out with the prior knowledge and approval of the Branch Diving Officer."

This suggests that it is possible for a Branch dive to involve no more than two people. However, such a dive would lack adequate safety cover and support, and only if supported by a Risk Assessment and in exceptional circumstances would it be acceptable.

While not wishing to define the minimum number of persons present necessary to make a dive official, the National Diving Committee advises Branch Diving Officers to consider the qualifications and experience of those seeking approval of their dive, and to study the dive plan, Dive Marshal (Section 4.7.1), Risk Assessment and safety precautions carefully before granting approval.

Guarding Against Unsafe Dives:
There is of course, no way of preventing members taking part in dives which do not have the Branch Diving Officer's approval - indeed, the BSAC Public Liability Insurance still applies so long as the dive is carried out in accordance with the BSAC diving recommendations (including a Risk Assessment). One danger of such dives is that Ocean Divers or partially trained divers might be tempted or encouraged to take part in dives, which are beyond their capabilities. The Branch Diving Officer should guard against this by explaining to and reminding all members of the dangers of diving without adequate training, supervision and control, and by asking experienced divers not to encourage members to take part in dives for which they are not prepared or experienced. It should be remembered "Ocean and trainee divers are ONLY allowed to dive on properly Marshalled dives".

Non-Authorised Dives:
Occasionally members insist on going ahead with plans for dives that the Branch Diving Officer considers unwise, unsafe or beyond the experience of someone in the party. In these circumstances the Branch Diving Officer's reservations must be expressed in writing to all members involved, and a copy kept in the Branch records. Inclusion as part of the Branch Diving Officer's report at the next Committee Meeting will ensure there is a record in the Minutes (Section 3.3.4). Where the advice of the Branch Diving Officer is ignored or disregarded the Branch Diving Officer should take disciplinary action against the individuals. Note: The act of DOING NOTHING could compromise the Branch Diving Officer's defence if a claim was made. This will help safeguard the Branch Diving Officer and the Branch Committee in the event of an accident and any subsequent legal proceedings that may follow, in that it will show that they made reasonable efforts to forewarn, prevent and discourage those involved."

Obviously, as consenting adults, there is nothing to actually stop, or "forbid" you diving anywhere, anytime, any way. However, as Club members you have a responsibility (sorry to use such a non-PC word here) to your DO, to your other Club Members, and of course to your own buddy, to dive sfely, within your own limitations, and (here we go again) responsibly. It is far better to get your DO on side here, inform him of the dive and the dive plan, complete a Risk Assessment,(have a look here for Risk Assessment Info <a href="http://www.bsac.org/techserv/ra/raintro.htm" >http://www.bsac.org/techserv/ra/raintro.htm</a>) make sure as far as possible that there will be more than two divers in the dive group, and as long as the dive plan is within the limitations of your Diver Qualification level, there shopuld be no reason why the DO cannot grant approval to the dive. In fact he/she should be more than happy to encourage such responsible diving activities as evidence of enthusiasm for the sport we are all here to encourage and enjoy.

I have to say that if one of my divers came to me with all the above info asking for my approval for a dive, assuming that his/her Diver Qualification limitations were being observed, I would have little hesitaion in approving the dive, allowing for the caveat of two divers only being less than ideal.

HTH

Neil Carter
DO ISIS Divers

dennis wilson

13-04-2005, 10:41

i always inform the D.O of my diving but your saying that a branch dive can be two divers ? so like you say where is the surface cover? i think the book needs to be updated as i know of bsac divers that go in the north sea to see if the viz is good on their own fair enough there is surface cover but it seems to me one rule for one and another rule for another (and there were 2 D.O`s there when this happened)

David Walker

13-04-2005, 11:48

be no reason why the DO cannot grant approval to the dive. In fact he/she should be more than happy to encourage such responsible diving activities as evidence of enthusiasm for the sport we are all here to encourage and enjoy.

But if they're not happy to give their approval, then as others have already said you don't *need* their approval for it. There may be a lot of reasons for that decision that we don't know, and I would suggest talking to them to understand their reasons for saying 'no' before just ignoring their judgement. They may have legitimate concerns about your safety for whatever reason, and it would be sensible to listen to those and discuss alternatives, such as finding a more experienced buddy to go with you too. If on the other hand they have no good reason for saying no, and just seem to be discouraging diving for the sake of it, thenby all means off you go and enjoy yourself!

David

john williams

13-04-2005, 12:24

There are two sides to every story.

This is a VERY old story!

On the one side is a relatively inexperienced diver (who may be very good, and may be very responsible...but may NOT be either!) who wants to do as much diving as possible. (That's the sum total of their involvement/understanding/duty)

On the other is a very experienced and highly qualified diver who has offered his/her services to provide overall safety and training advice to the branch - all on a voluntary basis. It takes time, committment and hard work to be a DO. There is also a legal responsibility called "duty of care"...which could take the poor chap/ess to court to defend/explain the actions of branch members. The DO also wants people to do as much diving as possible - but their key factor is SAFETY.

I think we all agree that diving with a group, that is supported by properly trained and vigilant marshals, providing surface cover at all times is preferable to going off half-cocked and untrained to deal with what might go wrong.

So where should the line be drawn?

I don't know!

The divers who want to do something that the DO is not keen on should communicate their concern and ask what the DO needs to change the rules?
(There WILL ALWAYS be rules for one that are different for the other- and so there should be!)

I'm a DO...if a SD came to me with another (implying that it's not the first) fully risk-assessed plan that provided appropriate cover, by appropriately qualified people - and they were someone who has shown responsibility, composure and a willingness to say "NO" when confronted with situations that look like going awry...then they'd probably get the go-ahead from me. Even if they came back and had done things slightly differently - but were prepared to discuss their fall-back plans...I'd trust them next time.

If a SD with a proven track record of a cavalier attitude to safety came to me with a half-cocked plan to go somewhere, sort out cover from whoever turned up, and "muddle through" difficulties ...because getting in the water is the most important thing right!...they'd probably NOT get my approval.

They would need to show me, on properly supervised outings, that they were showing greater responsibility before I'd trust them....just like the first SD had to do before they got their first approval.

Anyone involved in this debate a parent?...it's the same deal!

All parents are overprotective of their kids...just like DOs are overprotective of their junior divers and their safety record.

All kids (keen and enthusistic junior divers) are mad keen to be allowed out to play - but don't really understand or consider the dangers properly.

Kids who come home on time, and follow the rules get trusted more than those who don't.

Junior divers who.....

Bottom line...both sides need to communicate their desires/concerns more effectively.

Don't discuss it here...discuss it in YOUR branch...that's where the issue is.

What works for you might not work elsewhere.
If all else fails...then consider going elsewhere - but think about exactly what you want:

1) total freedom to balls it up and get hurt
2) enough space to learn the hard way
3) someone overlooking your actions who cares and wants to be involved - but also wants you to learn.
4) your hand holding every step of the way
5) a totally controlled - but VERY safe environment to go diving in.

And DOs...which one are you?

You the person who just fills the seat (number 1)?
You the tyrant who fits number 5?
Are you really operating at number 3...or are you drifting up/down?
(have you asked the divers in your branch where THEY think you fit?)

John

Dave

13-04-2005, 12:25

I have to say that if one of my divers came to me with all the above info asking for my approval for a dive, assuming that his/her Diver Qualification limitations were being observed, I would have little hesitaion in approving the dive, allowing for the caveat of two divers only being less than ideal.

Regardless of what you state any 2 divers can go diving without getting nanny DO's blessing and permission. The DO has *no* authority to tell someone that they cannot go diving without it nor should he try doing so.

The original post queried the following

"what is the ruling if to sports divers want to go off and dive at a know site say stoney does there need to be a dive leader there from your branch as my d.o says we can`t go ture or bull sh** "

The Do has no right to tell them that they cannot go, if it isnt a branch dive it is nothing to do with him, nor does he need even be told of the intent

Dave

john williams

13-04-2005, 12:30

You are, of course, quite right!

but bloody rude!!...and probably going to be looking for a new branch (and certainly a new DO) if you treat their concern with such contempt.

I'd certainly not volunteer to take responsibility for divers with an attitude like yours...and I don't know many with the qualifications to be a DO who would!

Think about longer term consequences than just this weekend!

John
(we can all state black and white issues as bluntly as we like...but sometimes diplomacy and tactful communication produce a better result!)

dennis wilson

13-04-2005, 13:05

Dave

13-04-2005, 13:18

You are, of course, quite right!

but bloody rude!!...and probably going to be looking for a new branch (and certainly a new DO) if you treat their concern with such contempt.

There was nothing in the original post to suggest anything other than a statement from the DO that the people could not go diving on their own; nothing to suggest particular concerns with such an activity.

No DO should make such statements that are beyond his authority; if he has concerns over a particular activity if he is told about it, it would be quite reasonable to to so; the people are free to take the advice or not

There is nothing particularly rude here; it was a simple yes or no question, there is imo no grey area

TBH, I would find it hard to find many issues with 2 SDs going diving in Stoney ( other than the concept of wanting to go diving there in the 1st place ... not my idea of a fun location :) )

I'd certainly not volunteer to take responsibility for divers with an attitude like yours...and I don't know many with the qualifications to be a DO who would!

I would not expect a DO to take responsibility for my actions on a private dive; I am quite capable of making my own assessments of what I plan to do and acting accordingly

I would have zero interest in being part of a club run in such a manner as to dictate what people may or may not do

(we can all state black and white issues as bluntly as we like...but sometimes diplomacy and tactful communication produce a better result!)

Indeed I can; a question was asked, which is a simple black or white question, to which I answered , I would say, accurately. If the OP wishes to use that information, then they are free to be as tactful or as blunt as they like.

Dave

iainmsmith

13-04-2005, 17:14

so the whole idea of diving and have fun come`s in where?

In a context where one can dive safely.

i`ve been diving for 3 years loads of dives been to 33 metres with instructor both of the divers competent

And you didn't say any of that. "Two SDs" could mean two SDs with no experience outside training dives. In comparison, I've been diving for 10 years and been to 60m without an instructor. Almost inevitably like your DO, I've had my share of scrapes, problems and narrow escapes underwater - in other words, the things that we really learn from. In his position, I too would have certain reservations about allowing relatively inexperienced divers go off without surface cover, because if something _does_ go wrong, it would be my responsibility.

the whole idea of diving is to dive and get the experience need to make them a better dive

And to do so _safely_.

yes the dive officer should be told of the dive

Indeed...and if he has concerns about the dive planned, then it would be well worth taking on board his reasoning. (I am assuming that he actually had reasons for saying, "No" that he explained to you? If he didn't, then at least some of the generic concerns about such an unsupported dive have been outlined elsewhere on the thread)

it not as if the dive is a unknow place and there is cover

Is there? Are the staff specifically looking out for you? Do people not die every year at Stoney, despite it being a known site with very rapidly responding boats? If I recall correctly, the Stoney DiverLog regulations specifically state that centre staff do _not_ provide formal surface cover.

let staff at stoney know

They do know - you have signed in, after all. However, if you ask them to specifically provide cover for you, I suspect you will find that they will say, "No".

i love diving and will always be bsac but i think it`s time the dinosaurs got thier heads from up there ass and started to let people enjoy their diving

Do remember that these same dinosaurs were once keen, enthusiastic SDs, desperate to get in the water. We do know where you are coming from! However, with experience of organising and marshalling trips, as well as having dealt with stuff happening underwater, a certain degree of caution does creep in, for very good reasons.

Iain

john williams

13-04-2005, 22:05

lets get this right i would not and do not go agaist my D.O`s wishes i respect the fact that he`s the D.O all i asked was it right to stop the two sports divers diving on their own after all to keep the peace all they would have to do is not tell him and he would be in the clear...

That's the key point!

He/she would not be in the clear. They would just be ignorant of the facts when asked to defend/explain them.

If a diving incident occurs then the person responsible for training the divers (your DO) could be called into court to prove that you had indeed covered all the training that was required for your grade.

They would be asked if the divers had been told of the dangers of diving without the support of the branch - and if they had ...why that lesson was not effective (since they went on a "private" dive!)

They'd run the risk of being dragged into court to provide this proof.

Whilst you are a member of a club you should be polite enough to inform those that take responsibility for you of what you are doing to put them at risk. Their only concern will be to keep you safe when you get into the water!

Not sure what the format is for BSAC direct - except that members of BSAC direct should follow "Safe Diving Practices" and dive within the rules/recommendations of the group they are diving with (provided that these also comply with SDP).

There's far more to it than that old chestnut "plausible deniability" - the fact is that not knowing about it is no defence if you SHOULD have known about it!

John

john williams

13-04-2005, 22:16

I would not expect a DO to take responsibility for my actions on a private dive; I am quite capable of making my own assessments of what I plan to do and acting accordingly

Who says that you are quite capable?
If you are a SD then you have not necessarily been trained and assessed in all aspects of Dive Marshalling and Management.

So - you could be making all the wrong assumptions and following a course that will lead to danger. The DO takes responsibility for assessing capability - that's why you should go ask permission!

The DO's goal should not be a blanket ban on SDs going diving without the branch - their goal should be to recognise enthusiasm and work with it to prepare a proper (safe) plan to enable the dive to occur.
Hang about...that's training and will lead to you being trained and ultimately assessed in your claim to be capable!
So then you will be allowed to go...becuase you are capable!

Just because you think you can does not mean you should avoid the possibility of someone who KNOWS whether you can giving you good advice to NOT go...yet!

Oh...and BTW
There's really no such thing as a "private" dive. This is a flawed concept designed by those that think they know better to avoid taking responsibility for their irresponsibility.
(and I include ANYONE who says...the rules don't count here because I'm not "on duty" - or because "I've not told the DO" - or because "I'm on holiday"). These are simply excuses to avoid responsibility.

Unless, of course, you pay for all the emergency services, healthcare provision and everything else to be on standy to assist you when it goes wrong. Otherwise it's a dive insured by PUBLIC money - for which the courts may hold the person who trained you responsible!

John

Dave

13-04-2005, 23:41

Who says that you are quite capable?
If you are a SD then you have not necessarily been trained and assessed in all aspects of Dive Marshalling and Management.

Except that I am. You decided to make it personal and referred to me not to the details of the OP. I am not an SD

Oh...and BTW
There's really no such thing as a "private" dive. This is a flawed concept designed by those that think they know better to avoid taking responsibility for their irresponsibility.
(and I include ANYONE who says...the rules don't count here because I'm not "on duty" - or because "I've not told the DO" - or because "I'm on holiday"). These are simply excuses to avoid responsibility.

Rubbish. A private dive is one which I undertake privately and are of no concern to any branch.

Unless, of course, you pay for all the emergency services, healthcare provision and everything else to be on standy to assist you when it goes wrong. Otherwise it's a dive insured by PUBLIC money - for which the courts may hold the person who trained you responsible!

Please find me something significant to support this assertion which shows that if training was completed within the guidelines of the agency , then the instructor can be held liable for what happens later.

Dave

Nigel Hewitt

14-04-2005, 09:18

There's really no such thing as a "private" dive. This is a flawed concept designed by those that think they know better to avoid taking responsibility for their irresponsibility.

Oh come on. If I am hauled out cold from a wreck penetration that I got horribly wrong nobody is going to drag my poor BSAC DO over the coals. The other guys on the boat will say we seemed to be all setup but the buddy who buddy checked me is the only person who would know and he's the other subject of the inquest. It wasn't a club dive, we just paid our share of the charter, everything seemed ok but we just didn't come back.

Misadventure.

Mark Papp

14-04-2005, 11:12

Oh...and BTW
There's really no such thing as a "private" dive. This is a flawed concept designed by those that think they know better to avoid taking responsibility for their irresponsibility.
(and I include ANYONE who says...the rules don't count here because I'm not "on duty" - or because "I've not told the DO" - or because "I'm on holiday"). These are simply excuses to avoid responsibility.

I've been following this thread with increasing incredulity. Despite the OP discussing Sports Divers, you seem to be stating that nobody can do a "private dive", so:

I'm not a memeber of BSAC, but I've been considering it for some time. I've been diving for a number of years and have, in the past, been an active PADI instructor and have a handful of non-PADI certs including mix etc. I decide to join a branch and suddenly I'm no longer allowed to simply buddy up with a mate and go diving? I have to tell somebody and rely on their approval? Please tell me you're having a laugh.

Regards,

Mark

matt

14-04-2005, 11:52

Unless, of course, you pay for all the emergency services, healthcare provision and everything else to be on standy to assist you when it goes wrong. Otherwise it's a dive insured by PUBLIC money - for which the courts may hold the person who trained you responsible!

Hmmmm. I am a member of the public, I pay my NI. I choose to scuba dive. So how is that different from say choosing to play football and expecting an ambulance to pick me up should I break a leg.

I can't recall hearing of 1000s of driving instructors being hauled into coroner's courts to explain why they did not know a fateful journey was taking place, and to defend their actions after their former student has killed himself and several others.

Why is scuba so different?

John,

If what you describe is accurate, allowing it to persist unchallenged would seem a very good way to encourage trained divers to leave BSAC in droves. I am not suggesting it is your fault or that you should have the answers. I am not suggesting that this subject should be taboo - that would be irresponsible.

We have more than enough evidence to prove that divers who belong to amateur scuba diving clubs are _far_ less likely to have incidents. It is in no ones interest to discourage DOs from doing there best by demanding that they do the impossible. It is in everyones interest to encourage divers to focus on avoiding incidents rather than avoiding liability subsequent to one.

How do we communicate to the powers that be the way in which BSAC has made a hazardous sport less hazardous for over 50 years? We have good samaritan presidents for first aid volunteers, why not DOs? Or do we just take it up the backside until everyone is diving independantly and BSAC branches are but a memory of the good old days?

Tony Dwyer

14-04-2005, 11:53

:=I would not expect a DO to take responsibility for my actions on a private dive; I am quite capable of making my own assessments of what I plan to do and acting accordingly

Who says that you are quite capable?
If you are a SD then you have not necessarily been trained and assessed in all aspects of Dive Marshalling and Management.

So - you could be making all the wrong assumptions and following a course that will lead to danger. The DO takes responsibility for assessing capability - that's why you should go ask permission!

The DO's goal should not be a blanket ban on SDs going diving without the branch - their goal should be to recognise enthusiasm and work with it to prepare a proper (safe) plan to enable the dive to occur.
Hang about...that's training and will lead to you being trained and ultimately assessed in your claim to be capable!
So then you will be allowed to go...becuase you are capable!

Just because you think you can does not mean you should avoid the possibility of someone who KNOWS whether you can giving you good advice to NOT go...yet!

Oh...and BTW
There's really no such thing as a "private" dive. This is a flawed concept designed by those that think they know better to avoid taking responsibility for their irresponsibility.
(and I include ANYONE who says...the rules don't count here because I'm not "on duty" - or because "I've not told the DO" - or because "I'm on holiday"). These are simply excuses to avoid responsibility.

Unless, of course, you pay for all the emergency services, healthcare provision and everything else to be on standy to assist you when it goes wrong. Otherwise it's a dive insured by PUBLIC money - for which the courts may hold the person who trained you responsible!

John

There is a principle of British law that holds; 'No person is responsible for the individual acts of another.'
This is of course subject to the duty of care that we all have for one another. If we see a hammer about to fall on someones head, we have a duty to warn them. If we don't see it, it cannot be our fault and we have no responsibility.
Similarly, if a student has received all the lectures, has demonstrated understanding through passing the exam and has done the required supervised dives, then they are deemed to have received the appropriate information.
It is faintly possible that a D/O might get called to court to explain what training a diver had received, but vanishingly unlikely that he or she would be held responsible for the student divers behaviour whilst out of the D/O's immediate supervision. The court would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the D/O had directly influenced the outcome. I would suggest this is probably impossible. The D/O would simply need to state that the appropriate training had been given. Unless the statement could be authoritatively gainsaid, then he/she would be in the clear.
Unless fault can be directly assigned and proved, it is very hard to find against anyone.

The current BSAC Instructor Manual defines a Sports Diver as competent to;

'Conduct dives with an Ocean Diver within the restrictions of the conditions already encountered by the Ocean Diver during their training and under the supervision of a Dive Marshal.

Conduct dives with another Sports Diver Diver within the restrictions of the conditions already encountered during their training or previous experience.

Conduct dives with a Dive Leader or higher grade, to expand their experience beyond that previously encountered, under the supervision of a Dive Marshall.

Conduct dives where other divers, capable of providing assistance and rescue management skills, are available at the surface'

So the implication is that two Sports Divers do not need a Dive Marshal to supervise them. It would of course be sensible to ensure that appropriate safety precautions are taken. The 'presence' of others on site that have appropriate skills is enough.

Thousands of non BSAC certified divers go diving every week. They don't have the luxury of a D/O to haul over the coals when they themselves commit a whoopsy. Equally I believe that 1000's of BSAC qualified divers go off diving every week without bothering their D/O. Do all those BSAC Direct members ring up the NDO each week before they go off for their plonge. I think not.

TerryH

14-04-2005, 13:02

:=Oh...and BTW
:=There's really no such thing as a "private" dive. This is a flawed concept designed by those that think they know better to avoid taking responsibility for their irresponsibility.
:=(and I include ANYONE who says...the rules don't count here because I'm not "on duty" - or because "I've not told the DO" - or because "I'm on holiday"). These are simply excuses to avoid responsibility.

I've been following this thread with increasing incredulity. Despite the OP discussing Sports Divers, you seem to be stating that nobody can do a "private dive", so:

I'm not a memeber of BSAC, but I've been considering it for some time. I've been diving for a number of years and have, in the past, been an active PADI instructor and have a handful of non-PADI certs including mix etc. I decide to join a branch and suddenly I'm no longer allowed to simply buddy up with a mate and go diving? I have to tell somebody and rely on their approval? Please tell me you're having a laugh.

Regards,

Mark

Wouldnt knock yourself out over this Mark. There is a BIG
difference between a Sport Diver and Instructor/Diver.

I'm actually a higher grade and have more tickets than our
DO. I actually taught some of his stuff, but I still let
him know what I am doing be it private or otherwise. Yes, he
trusts me, but I'm in a club where we all work together. It's
simple common courtesy to keep him informed.

So if I plan one of my foreign jaunts with 25 members, I have
to show him ALL the details. If it's a dive with a mate on the
w/end then it's just a where are you going, what are you doing?
That's more a mate beeing interested in a dive then a DO, but
it has the same effect of informing him.

Never heavy and never seen as intrusive. VERY diferent to a
couple of Sport divers. This would be seen as a neccesary part
of the DO's job.

So dont think that all BSAC clubs are boot camps. Many (like
ours) are populated with multi-agency members and apply common
sense to informing the DO. Like always and all clubs, you do
need to look around to find one that suits.

TerryH

john williams

14-04-2005, 14:05

:=There's really no such thing as a "private" dive. This is a flawed concept designed by those that think they know better to avoid taking responsibility for their irresponsibility.

Oh come on. If I am hauled out cold from a wreck penetration that I got horribly wrong nobody is going to drag my poor BSAC DO over the coals. The other guys on the boat will say we seemed to be all setup but the buddy who buddy checked me is the only person who would know and he's the other subject of the inquest. It wasn't a club dive, we just paid our share of the charter, everything seemed ok but we just didn't come back.

Misadventure.

In order to arrive at that *verdict* there must have been a court procedding...and all sorts of people will have been called to provide the coroner/sheriff with the evidence to make that call.

Including some searching questions of buddies, marshalls, DO and others.

John

john williams

14-04-2005, 14:07

:=
:=:=Oh...and BTW
:=:=There's really no such thing as a "private" dive. This is a flawed concept designed by those that think they know better to avoid taking responsibility for their irresponsibility.
:=:=(and I include ANYONE who says...the rules don't count here because I'm not "on duty" - or because "I've not told the DO" - or because "I'm on holiday"). These are simply excuses to avoid responsibility.
:=
:=I've been following this thread with increasing incredulity. Despite the OP discussing Sports Divers, you seem to be stating that nobody can do a "private dive", so:
:=
:=I'm not a memeber of BSAC, but I've been considering it for some time. I've been diving for a number of years and have, in the past, been an active PADI instructor and have a handful of non-PADI certs including mix etc. I decide to join a branch and suddenly I'm no longer allowed to simply buddy up with a mate and go diving? I have to tell somebody and rely on their approval? Please tell me you're having a laugh.
:=
:=Regards,
:=
:=Mark

Wouldnt knock yourself out over this Mark. There is a BIG
difference between a Sport Diver and Instructor/Diver.

I'm actually a higher grade and have more tickets than our
DO. I actually taught some of his stuff, but I still let
him know what I am doing be it private or otherwise. Yes, he
trusts me, but I'm in a club where we all work together. It's
simple common courtesy to keep him informed.

So if I plan one of my foreign jaunts with 25 members, I have
to show him ALL the details. If it's a dive with a mate on the
w/end then it's just a where are you going, what are you doing?
That's more a mate beeing interested in a dive then a DO, but
it has the same effect of informing him.

Never heavy and never seen as intrusive. VERY diferent to a
couple of Sport divers. This would be seen as a neccesary part
of the DO's job.

So dont think that all BSAC clubs are boot camps. Many (like
ours) are populated with multi-agency members and apply common
sense to informing the DO. Like always and all clubs, you do
need to look around to find one that suits.

TerryH

Eaxctly the good manners and common sense approach that will encourage safe diving and allow good DOs to provide constructive feedback to those just setting out on the road to organising safe dives.

Branches area support and nurturing mechanism...not boot camps!

John

john williams

14-04-2005, 14:15

Thousands of non BSAC certified divers go diving every week. They don't have the luxury of a D/O to haul over the coals when they themselves commit a whoopsy.

But if they do have someone who has stepped forward to take responsibility - AND - they have chosen to join a branch that works under his authority then they should follow common courtesy to seek his constructive advice regarding the plans that he may be called into court to explain.

Equally I believe that 1000's of BSAC qualified divers go off diving every week without bothering their D/O.

Perhaps they SHOULD seek the support and advice of their DO. She might provide some useful info. If they are competent and capable the DO may even give them blanket permission to do what they like. Until that point they should ask their DO for help when making plans.

Do all those BSAC Direct members ring up the NDO each week before they go off for their plonge. I think not.

I've already said that I don't now what the situation here is...but I'd be willing to bet that any conditions revolve around Safe Diving Practices and the rules/recommendations of the outfit you are diving with.

BSAC has very few rules - because they cannot be polied..so we rely on recommendations. Some feel that because they are not being policed that they can get away with ignoring recommendations. The courts take a VERY different view.

I hope that none of you ever get to test that theory for real...because it will mean that something went wrong and the courts have asked for your help to understand the situation (an invitation you cannot refuse!)

John

john williams

14-04-2005, 14:43

Hmmmm. I am a member of the public, I pay my NI. I choose to scuba dive. So how is that different from say choosing to play football and expecting an ambulance to pick me up should I break a leg.

if you choose to affiliate yourself with the FA then part of your affiliation fee goes to insurance. If you then choose to ignore safety rules/recommendations and have an "accident" you drive the cost of insurance up for all members.
As HQ what is the biggest part of our annual subscription. Then ask then what portion is rising faster than any other.
What do yout hink the answer will be?
Insurance!

If people followed safety rules/recommendations then "accidents" would be less liely to occur - and the cost of providing the service would diminish. Same deal in all aspect of life/sport.

True accidents are of course still going to happen - but if everything is planned, and follows guidelines, and has adequate safety backup - then the number of accidents will undoubtedly be reduced.

I can't recall hearing of 1000s of driving instructors being hauled into coroner's courts to explain why they did not know a fateful journey was taking place, and to defend their actions after their former student has killed himself and several others.

It only takes a few for it to hurt...especially if it is you.

Why is scuba so different?

Because "people" perceive it as a "dangerous" activity - the fact that the perception is wrong is irrelevant.

Also - our "accidents" are expensive to put right!

If what you describe is accurate, allowing it to persist unchallenged would seem a very good way to encourage trained divers to leave BSAC in droves. I am not suggesting it is your fault or that you should have the answers. I am not suggesting that this subject should be taboo - that would be irresponsible.

But why would people leave if staying provided suport to stay safer?
We should rather be looking at ways to support our DOs in trying to keep us safe (especially at that delicate portion of our diving careers where we are trying to develop our independence). Once we've proved our capability then DOs will be much happier to let us go and do our own thing - sure that we are keen to work within the accepted SDPs.

We have more than enough evidence to prove that divers who belong to amateur scuba diving clubs are _far_ less likely to have incidents. It is in no ones interest to discourage DOs from doing there best by demanding that they do the impossible. It is in everyones interest to encourage divers to focus on avoiding incidents rather than avoiding liability subsequent to one.

Exactly - and inexperienced divers referring plans to one who is , by definition, qualified to comment constructively is the way forward (and always has been!)
Once a diver become experienced and trusted by the DO a simple courtesy call/email to say "I'm off to Scapa for a week - see you when I get back!" would be more than enough.

How do we communicate to the powers that be the way in which BSAC has made a hazardous sport less hazardous for over 50 years?

By accepting the guidance of our superiors (at all levels) and seeking every avenue to restrict risk.
This debate itself is extremely damaging to our cause. From an outsiders perspective of a "dangerous" sport we have people refusing to take helpful and constructive advice from someone they have appointed to that task. They are pushing the limits of their training to the very limit and expecting to be able to cope with problems outside their experience when things that are not properly planned go awry.

We have an endless debate about "rules" (that no-one can police anyway) and "recommendations" that people openly state that they are only recommendations and therefore do not count. To the Coroner/Sheriff who is not a diver ignoring the safety guidelines set out by your NGB/Training Agency/Common Sense is unfathomable. Such disregard for safety advice is often considered to be negligence (how does the Court know that you understand the principles and can use your judgement appropriatley - where are you given that latitude by the text? The comment - "That is for junior divers and does not apply to Senior/Experienced divers" never appears in the text...so the courts find it difficult to accept.

As divers we all understand the above arguements and can relate to them. We all know that each and every situation is different and that we are trained to weigh the consequences of each action and make judgement calls - but without our prior knowledge and experience how does a court accept that this really is the case?

We have good samaritan presidents for first aid volunteers, why not DOs? Or do we just take it up the backside until everyone is diving independantly and BSAC branches are but a memory of the good old days?

No - we all play by the rules! (and recommendations)
divers and DOs both!

Build sound, common sense relationships, use your DO as a resource, feedback suggestions to the NDO (who is a real person who understands diving better than most - and not just because it is currently Claire...they all do!)

Communicate within the BSAC...show non-BSAC people that we can (and DO) have fun...but that by doing it within the recommendations and in a spirit of co-operation and communication we do it more safely than could possibly be acheived without the support of the BSAC branch and of the wider BSAC.

Utopia...probably!
Do you wanna live there?
I do!

John

dennis wilson

14-04-2005, 15:03

so you`ve not realy agreed onthe anwser then? i think it`s down to personal choice the D.O. should decide whether the sd are compant enough but tell me when some one as come a cropper when diving what ever level their at how many D.O. have been hung drawn and quartered ? cheers for the anwers anyway foood for thought

Mark Papp

14-04-2005, 15:27

Thanks Terry and John,

But I still am surprised that this is thought necessary, even on a "chat over a gin" basis. It would seem that simply joining a club then gives the DO some sort of right to know what you do in your private life.

I fully support the argument that a club's DO has a right to know and veto any dive a member plans if it in any way involves club equipment etc.

If I were to join, for instance, a car club, would its event organiser feel it's their business if I were to go for a pleasure drive one day?

I feel it's a wee bit odd and distinctly nanny-ish.

Regards,

Mark

Tony Dwyer

14-04-2005, 16:01

For the record.

Generally I do let my D/O know what I'm up to with regard to diving. Apart from being the D/O he's also a good mate and generally we agree on most things.

However, I have on occasion been abroad on hols and had the urge to dive. So I contact local diving ops and go diving. I do not see the need to seek the approval of my D/O for something he has no possibility of being involved with.

Depending on the flavour of the dive centre, I will profer my BSAC QRB or one of my library of PADI C cards. Suppose it's my PADI MSDT card, what then? Obviously my freind the D/O has absolutely no interest. What if I dive with a TDI qualified buddy, should the D/O be involved? Particularly if it's him anyway? :>

The mania within BSAC regarding the D/O's responsibility is based on a legal nonsense. Broadly speaking, a D/O (or any person) cannot be held responsible for the personal actions of another, especially when those actions take place without his or her knowledge.
The only grey area is that of the 'Duty of Care'. If a D/O or indeed any other experienced diver is aware that someone is about to undertake a dive that is obviously beyond their level of training or capability, then he or she has a duty to advise against it. Note that I said advise, they cannot in law forbid (unless in the military).

That said, as a member of a BSAC branch, I agree to apply the protocols and inform our D/O of the dives I intend, but here's the caveat, where appropriate. For example my dives using my PADI badge are not his concern.

TerryH

14-04-2005, 19:02

Thanks Terry and John,

But I still am surprised that this is thought necessary, even on a "chat over a gin" basis. It would seem that simply joining a club then gives the DO some sort of right to know what you do in your private life.

Gin??????? What clubs do you know!!!!!!!!
Rum, Whisky, Tequila, but never Gin :-)

I feel it's a wee bit odd and distinctly nanny-ish.

Ok look at it this way.

If you go to the dive store and get a mix, you will be asked
for a card. If you book a boat and even if the skipper is just
a taxi, he will expect you to obey some basic dive rules.
Join a party abroad and the DM will want you in the pack.
Stoney will demand you dont go solo. Horsea you use a SMB etc.
etc.

None of this has anything to do with you as a diver, it's
just that to operate as an entity they have to satisfy
various goverment bodies.

So your BSAC club is very similar. Volunteer club yes, but
they still have to tow the line and that may mean the odd
compromise.

The bottom line here is that the "nanny" element deminishes in
a direct corrolation to your diver grade and experience.

TerryH

dennis wilson

14-04-2005, 22:12

this is were you are wrong and i do diagree you can not choose to be padi one day then bsac the next so make your choice and stick to it

J Abbott

14-04-2005, 22:52

this is were you are wrong and i do diagree you can not choose to be padi one day then bsac the next so make your choice and stick to it

so teaching 16 PADI Discover SCUBA in the morning, teaching a TDI EANx dive in the afternoon before pool training for one of the BSAC clubs to which I belong in the evening is right out of order then?

Its all just diving you know. Not actually difficult and not very different from one agency to another.

John

Dave

14-04-2005, 22:58

If a diving incident occurs then the person responsible for training the divers (your DO) could be called into court to prove that you had indeed covered all the training that was required for your grade.

Can you provide evidence to support your claim. When has this happened or is this your opinion?

They would be asked if the divers had been told of the dangers of diving without the support of the branch - and if they had ...why that lesson was not effective (since they went on a "private" dive!)

If they went diving on their own, there is nothing to suggest that this would necessarily be dangerous anyway or are you now classing all dive charter operations as dangerous?

As long as an instructor has covered the course material as designated by the training agency then he has no liability afterwards if the ex-trainee decides to attempt to win a Darwin Award. If this was the case, then logically Driving Test Examiners are legally liable for accidents since they awarded the qualification allowing them to drive.

No agency would continue to teach if they had onward liability after the training was completed. As long as they maintain records to show that the training elements were completed they are fine

Dave

Nigel Hewitt

15-04-2005, 07:35

this is were you are wrong and i do diagree you can not choose to be padi one day then bsac the next so make your choice and stick to it

No problem at all. Having two sets of training can only add to the pool of knowledge. These are not alternatives but complementary. BSACs current stance that you can re-crossover if you obtain significant qualifications outside the club is a case in point. The whole objective is to produce able and competant divers who go diving not some petty points scoring game.

john williams

15-04-2005, 08:11

The bottom line here is that the "nanny" element deminishes in
a direct corrolation to your diver grade and experience.

... and the trust that your relationship with the DO has engendered.

Previous willingness and ability to toe that line - and discuss plans with the DO (as a courtesy and to see if they have any helpful advice) - will lead to greater trust between you and the DO.

The more you "do it right" the more the DO will expect just that of you and give you more freedom.

The more you sneak about not telling people what you intend - and avoid helpful advice - the more suspect your plan looks (even if it is not!)

Just open up to your DO and see what benefits it brings!
(After all - how can they assess your competence to run trips (for the branch or for your mates) and give you blanket permission to go off and do your own thing if they never see your plans!

John

john williams

15-04-2005, 08:17

:=this is were you are wrong and i do diagree you can not choose to be padi one day then bsac the next so make your choice and stick to it

so teaching 16 PADI Discover SCUBA in the morning, teaching a TDI EANx dive in the afternoon before pool training for one of the BSAC clubs to which I belong in the evening is right out of order then?

Its all just diving you know. Not actually difficult and not very different from one agency to another.

John

No..it's not out of order!
No, it's not incorrect!

When you switch "codes" do you abide by the rules/recommendations of that code (possibly taking the best bits of some codes to enhance the others)?

The courts will ask you to do exactly the same think...except that they don't understand it as we do!
So....they will want you to follow the most coservative advice available to you.
So a court may get confused and limit a BSAC/PADI diver to 40m on air...because that's the most conservative of the two codes
A BSAC/IANTD diver will be limited to ppO2 of 1.4 bar (max 80%) ..because that's the most conservative limit of the two codes.

I thin it's great that people learn different codes and bring wider experience to the BSAC (and to diving) - but the courts simply don't understand why people disregard safety advice (and they do not have the knowledge/experience to consider judgement calls)

John

John

Tony Dwyer

15-04-2005, 08:18

this is were you are wrong and i do diagree you can not choose to be padi one day then bsac the next so make your choice and stick to it

Au contraire. I can be whatever I am qualified to be. Further, I can be whatever I WANT to be.
I choose to be a BSAC member. I also chose to acquire PADI training. I believe this has given me a broader understanding of diving and of my own abilities.

Last weekend I ran a PADI Nitrox course and did some BSAC training dives for my branch members in the gaps. How was that wrong?

john williams

15-04-2005, 08:21

:=this is were you are wrong and i do diagree you can not choose to be padi one day then bsac the next so make your choice and stick to it

No problem at all. Having two sets of training can only add to the pool of knowledge. These are not alternatives but complementary. BSACs current stance that you can re-crossover if you obtain significant qualifications outside the club is a case in point. The whole objective is to produce able and competant divers who go diving not some petty points scoring game.

Fully agree... but making the switch does not entitle you to forget the safety messages of your origninal training agency.

If you have trained to 2,3,4 or more codes then it is a paradox that your understanding and judgement WILL be enhanced - but that you have 2,3,4 or more sets of safety instructions to follow - and the court will hold you to the most conservative of them all....and they will pick and choose to suit their case!
(without the benefit of the training/understanding/experience that you have amassed they can do nought else)

John

Tony Dwyer

15-04-2005, 08:31

I thin it's great that people learn different codes and bring wider experience to the BSAC (and to diving) - but the courts simply don't understand why people disregard safety advice (and they do not have the knowledge/experience to consider judgement calls)

John

In such situations, the court is required to seek the advice of expert witnesses. Guess who that would be. In my case I could present myself as my own expert. Profer my various certifications and assert that I had conducted myself within the limits of my training. Alternatively I could ask anyone else of comparable experience to stand for me.
The court would have to prove that I had not stayed within limits in order to find against me.
Courts in the UK are well used to having to deal with matters which are beyond the knowledge of the officers of the court. It is true that frequently opposing sides 'Experts' disagree with each other. It might be possible for one side to trot out a PADI rep to counter the statements of a BSAC proponent. It would be simple to argue that the PADI rep's knowledge would not be parallel to that of the BSAC rep and may be irrelevent.

It's easy really, when conducting dives under the BSAC banner, stay within BSAC guidelines and 'Safe Diving Practices', same with PADI, TDI et al.

Disregarding established safety guidelines is a Darwinian process.

Dave

15-04-2005, 08:36

:=
:=:=this is were you are wrong and i do diagree you can not choose to be padi one day then bsac the next so make your choice and stick to it
:=
:=No problem at all. Having two sets of training can only add to the pool of knowledge. These are not alternatives but complementary. BSACs current stance that you can re-crossover if you obtain significant qualifications outside the club is a case in point. The whole objective is to produce able and competant divers who go diving not some petty points scoring game.

Fully agree... but making the switch does not entitle you to forget the safety messages of your origninal training agency.

If you have trained to 2,3,4 or more codes then it is a paradox that your understanding and judgement WILL be enhanced - but that you have 2,3,4 or more sets of safety instructions to follow - and the court will hold you to the most conservative of them all....and they will pick and choose to suit their case!
(without the benefit of the training/understanding/experience that you have amassed they can do nought else)

You keep quoting what courts *WILL* do. What are your legal qualifications and coutroom experience in general and in specific to these areas which you are stating as facts? Also your experience of these matters in the country where I reside

Dave

Nigel Hewitt

15-04-2005, 09:56

Just open up to your DO and see what benefits it brings!

BENEFITS????

Open up to your DO and he'll give you a job.

Nigel Hewitt

15-04-2005, 10:10

If you have trained to 2,3,4 or more codes then it is a paradox that your understanding and judgement WILL be enhanced - but that you have 2,3,4 or more sets of safety instructions to follow - and the court will hold you to the most conservative of them all....and they will pick and choose to suit their case!

Stop this paranoia about courts. If, by my error somebody were to die on a dive I organised, I have to live with me. Even if it wasn't my fault.

If I know several versions of what to look for to keep a dive safe do you honestly think I am going to say "That's only a risk for TDI divers so we don't have to worry about it on a BSAC club dive."?

My objective in dive planning to to prevent incidents and have the best possible response ready if there is an incident.
Covering my rear would come after the event if at all. Am I uncommon here? We dive with friends. We see a problem we warn them.

john williams

15-04-2005, 19:06

Disregarding established safety guidelines is a Darwinian process.

So..we agree!

Court is not a nice place to be. It is adversarial and confusing.

You cannot be your own expert! (that is fairly obvious!)
And there are ALWAYS experts with differing views!

Disregarding safety advice is Darwinian ...so follow the advice given and discuss dives with your DO (and take their constructive advice regarding the conduct of same)

John

Tony Dwyer

15-04-2005, 19:11

:=Disregarding established safety guidelines is a Darwinian process.

So..we agree!

Court is not a nice place to be. It is adversarial and confusing.

You cannot be your own expert! (that is fairly obvious!)
And there are ALWAYS experts with differing views!

Disregarding safety advice is Darwinian ...so follow the advice given and discuss dives with your DO (and take their constructive advice regarding the conduct of same)

John

I don't think we entirely agree. You appear to have ignored my observations on responsibility.

I do discuss diving with my D/O - I was responsible for quite a bit of his training. :)

Edward Haynes

15-04-2005, 20:42

Hi Dennis

What a debate you started.

It?s quite simple really. Two Sport Divers can go off and dive wherever they want (providing they have access permission, where relevant). Being courteous and informing your Branch Diving Officer doesn?t make it a Branch Dive. A Branch Diving Officer who has concerns about your diving either brings them to your attention or passively accepts them by keeping quiet. Diving is your hobby after all.

As for liability ? it would be up to you the 2 Sport Divers to show you had complied with Safe Diving Practises, if required.

Asking the permission from your Branch Diving Officer to go diving _is_ required when it?s going to be a Branch Dive, generally when training is undertaken or Branch equipment is to be used; maybe the RIB (your Branch Bye-Laws should contain the requirements).

The only individual in a Branch who cannot do ?private? dives is the Branch Diving Officer (they can?t claim not to know about the dive nor have withheld permission).

Just my opinion as a Branch Diving Officer; I?m also a member of another Branch so do I need to ask . . .

Edward

what is the ruling if to sports divers want to go off and dive at a know site say stoney does there need to be a dive leader there from your branch as my d.o says we can`t go ture or bull sh**

Philip Smith

15-04-2005, 22:42

I've been following this thread with increasing incredulity. Despite the OP discussing Sports Divers, you seem to be stating that nobody can do a "private dive", so:

I agree with you Mark. Of course there can be such a thing as a non-branch ("private") dive. Experienced divers will often have developed links with various groups, friends and clubs. They may be members of more than one club/branch. A diving officer cannot be held responsible for a dive he does not know of or has formally disapproved of. Joining a BSAC branch does not mean that all your subsequent diving must be done under the auspices of that branch.

Philip Smith

Dave

15-04-2005, 22:55

The only individual in a Branch who cannot do ?private? dives is the Branch Diving Officer (they can?t claim not to know about the dive nor have withheld permission).

I disagree. Just being the DO doesn't necessarily mean that you are in a position to approve or disapprove of a dive. There is a difference between the person and the position

e.g.

A branch has a set of rules regarding branch dives such as
Must be announced 3 weeks in advance and have an approved plan . The DO is not in a position to approve the dive before the previous elements have been completed. if the person who is DO just goes for a dive without informing the branch then he cannot have given his approval as DO for the branch dive since the branch procedures have not been followed

There is a big difference between someone making a decision for themselves and making it for an organisation.

Dave

Tony Dwyer

16-04-2005, 09:52

Well said.

regards

Tony

Edward Haynes

16-04-2005, 14:39

johnkendall

16-04-2005, 15:18

Hi Dave

The current definition is (see link):

*** ?As one that is carried out with the prior knowledge and approval of the Branch Diving Officer.? ***

Therefore as the Branch Diving Officer your diving will meet both the 'prior knowledge' and your have your 'approval', therefore you can?t undertake ?private? dives.

One of the BOH Update team did propose an amendment to the definition, during the last BOH update, to enable Branch Diving Officers to conduct ?private? dives, but the current NDO wouldn?t approve it?s use.

Secondly, your Branch rules are only adding to the requirement they cannot contradict it.

Hmmm, In that case I'd better stand down as DO of my branch, 'cos I certainly don't dive within BSAC's SDPs when I go an do my own diving. For one thing I don't use my Drysuit for Bouyancy control. And let's not start up PPO2 arguments again. Certainly Any wreck penetration or Cavern/Cave diving I do isn't covered. Also "It is very strongly recommended that diving in 'odd numbers' be avoided"

So what should I do? Would a trimix dive, in a cave, in a 3, using 50% and O2 as deco gas at PPO2 1.6 Be suitable for a Branch dive?
Because If I do that dive, then according to the SDPs (All Branch dives should be carried out in accordance with current BSAC rules and recommendations for safe diving.) then it can't be a branch dive, yet I'm the DO, so it must be a branch dive. Or maybe we are saying that DOs can't do any advanced diving, that doesn't come under the remit of the BSAC?

Someone needs to rethink something.

John

john williams

16-04-2005, 18:40

:=John

I don't think we entirely agree. You appear to have ignored my observations on responsibility.

I do discuss diving with my D/O - I was responsible for quite a bit of his training. :)

So...your DO will have very quickly agreed that you have proved your responsibility and capability to run a safe, enjoyable dive. (probably during the process of training him to be in a position to take on the responsibility and duty of branch DO)

Out of courtesy you discuss your diving with him. As two senior divers you share your experience and provide support to the more junior divers setting out on their career as Dive Marshalls. Once they have proved their worth to your DO (or any of his trusted Brtanch Marshalls) they will be given the same privilege as you.

The way it should be!

I still think we agree!

John

Philip Smith

16-04-2005, 18:46

Therefore as the Branch Diving Officer your diving will meet both the 'prior knowledge' and your have your 'approval', therefore you can?t undertake ?private? dives.

That is fine in a simple world where every BSAC member is only a member of one branch. It does not take account of the reality that members may have various legitimate diving affiliations. If a BSAC branch is one of those, it cannot claim authority over the others. However, people need to be clear and honest about whose auspices they are diving under.

Philip Smith

john williams

16-04-2005, 18:47

Someone needs to rethink something.

John

I wonder if that someone might be you?

What you are effectively doing with your branch is saying
"Do as I say and not as I do"
Never a good start if you wish to retain the respect and authority that the position of DO requires.

All those SDs who have not got the external training and experience that you have may decide that "what's good for the goose id good for the gander" and decide that they are just as much able to igniore the rules as you are...with disastrous consequences.

How will that look to any investigation when the divers state:

"Well...my DO does it so we thought it must be OK!"

I wonder whether that someone might be you?

John

Mark Papp

16-04-2005, 19:09

Phew - so many deep breaths have been taken before this posting, but...

:=The bottom line here is that the "nanny" element deminishes in a direct corrolation to your diver grade and experience.

... and the trust that your relationship with the DO has engendered.

Previous willingness and ability to toe that line - and discuss plans with the DO (as a courtesy and to see if they have any helpful advice) - will lead to greater trust between you and the DO.

In a club environment I would toe any line any DO cares to draw. My life outside the club is, however, mine. If your "DO responsibility" concept is extrapolated a bit further, the DO would have a say in my eating, drinking and excersise habits, as these affect my diving as much as anything else. Once a DO has any say in non-club activities it's simply a matter of where you draw the line.

The more you "do it right" the more the DO will expect just that of you and give you more freedom.

Ha! I should be OK, what with a Tech 1 cert 'n' all... Sorry, I couldn't resist!

The more you sneak about not telling people what you intend - and avoid helpful advice - the more suspect your plan looks (even if it is not!)

It's nowt to do with sneaking about! It's to do with joining a voluntary organisation and finding that people within it have a veto over how I spend my time.

Just open up to your DO and see what benefits it brings!

It may well do. I won't ever stop learning.

(After all - how can they assess your competence to run trips (for the branch or for your mates) and give you blanket permission to go off and do your own thing if they never see your plans!

But why on earth SHOULD trips I run for my mates have anything to do with them? I don't need anybody's permission to run a trip now, so what the Buffy has my private life got to do with a DO? Why on earth should I care whether a DO considers me competent to organise a trip with people he's never met? Besides, the two culbs I seriously considered have DOs that wouldn't have a clue whether a 70m mid-channel dive were well planned.

I've not yet seen an argument that I'd consider valid that backs up the "DO veto" over private dives. Had I learnt at a club it would be natural that I'd seek the advice of those who'd taught me. I would not join any club that would consider that my private life aquatic is any of their business. (You have no idea how tempted I was to write "...that would have people like me as members"!)

If BSAC is serious about recruiting experienced divers this sort of thing needs sorting out. I couldn't imagine joining a club with these strictures in place and I doubt that any of my experienced buddies would either.

Regards,

Mark

johnkendall

16-04-2005, 19:16

:=
:=Someone needs to rethink something.
:=
:=John

I wonder if that someone might be you?

What you are effectively doing with your branch is saying
"Do as I say and not as I do"
Never a good start if you wish to retain the respect and authority that the position of DO requires.

All those SDs who have not got the external training and experience that you have may decide that "what's good for the goose id good for the gander" and decide that they are just as much able to igniore the rules as you are...with disastrous consequences.

How will that look to any investigation when the divers state:

"Well...my DO does it so we thought it must be OK!"

I wonder whether that someone might be you?

Ok, So I've spent time and money getting trained, and experienced to do the kind of diving I want to do, but because I'm the DO of a branch I can't? What kind of nonsense is that? If I step down as DO then I can go and do anything I'm qualified to do, yet as a DO I can't?????????

John

Nigel Hewitt

16-04-2005, 20:34

yet I'm the DO, so it must be a branch dive.

No. You just refuse to approve it as a club dive because it is outside the SDPs.

DOs don't have to be unreasonable. When I was doing a set of work up dives for my trimix rebreather course one of the people I dived with was a previous DO. DOs tend to be useful for things like that as they think about the sort of diving you want to do and can contribute to it. He was also diving some new kit and it certainly wasn't a club dive.

Dave

16-04-2005, 21:18

Hi Dave

The current definition is (see link):

*** ?As one that is carried out with the prior knowledge and approval of the Branch Diving Officer.? ***

Therefore as the Branch Diving Officer your diving will meet both the 'prior knowledge' and your have your 'approval', therefore you can?t undertake ?private? dives.

One of the BOH Update team did propose an amendment to the definition, during the last BOH update, to enable Branch Diving Officers to conduct ?private? dives, but the current NDO wouldn?t approve it?s use.

Secondly, your Branch rules are only adding to the requirement they cannot contradict it.

IF the branch has rules in place regarding branch dives over and above the BSAC requirements...

e.g.
Dive must be announced 2 weeks in advance
A sheet for signing up to be put up
When list of intended divers is complete then
submit to DO for approval

This would be quite valid. This would mean that the DO has no authority to approve a dive before the 1st steps have been completed. As such, a dive undertaken by a DO which did not comply with the previous elements could not be a branch dive since the diver cannot approve the dive as DO.

As the BOH says, the dive has to be undertaken with the knowledge*AND* approval of teh DO. If additional requirements are in place at a local level regarding branch activities, then the DO may NOT be entitled to approve it => the dive is being conducted with the knowledge not the approval of the DO => A private dive

Dave

johnkendall

16-04-2005, 22:39

:=yet I'm the DO, so it must be a branch dive.

No. You just refuse to approve it as a club dive because it is outside the SDPs.

DOs don't have to be unreasonable. When I was doing a set of work up dives for my trimix rebreather course one of the people I dived with was a previous DO. DOs tend to be useful for things like that as they think about the sort of diving you want to do and can contribute to it. He was also diving some new kit and it certainly wasn't a club dive.

Yet Edward says "Therefore as the Branch Diving Officer your diving will meet both the 'prior knowledge' and your have your 'approval', therefore you can?t undertake ?private? dives."

I have to say that I currently take it the way you suggest Nigel, However this appears to be against the rules.

Heyho
John

john williams

16-04-2005, 22:49

Ok, So I've spent time and money getting trained, and experienced to do the kind of diving I want to do, but because I'm the DO of a branch I can't? What kind of nonsense is that? If I step down as DO then I can go and do anything I'm qualified to do, yet as a DO I can't?????????

John

The position of DO comes with responsibilities to follow and encourage adherence to what is laid down in SDP. You do not act upon your own authority - you act with the devolved authority of the BSAC NDO...which you cannot overrule!

If you do not feel able to do that then perhaps you should question (note I say question) your suitability for the role.
Perhaps the branch should do the same.

As Edward has pointed out - the DO (of all people) is never "off duty" - they always have to set an example to the people for whom they accept responsibility.

I would argue that Instructors who teach one thing and do another are in a very similar position. I would seriously question the ethos of a BSAC instructor who advocates (and employs) skills that are outside the BSAC SDPs.

If something needs changing - there are ways to influence BSAC policy on such matters...ignoring established guidelines and just doing your own thing (and encouraging others to do the same) is not one of them!

John

john williams

16-04-2005, 22:56

If I know several versions of what to look for to keep a dive safe do you honestly think I am going to say "That's only a risk for TDI divers so we don't have to worry about it on a BSAC club dive."?

No..you have to say
"I've been made aware of dangers not covered within the BSAC SDPs - I cannot, in good conscience ignore them...so I will include them in my risk assessment when planning a BSAC dive"

You should also do the reverse on a TDI dive .

In ANY situation why would you ignore dangers that you know about.

"We dive with friends. We see a problem we warn them."

So ...we agree as well!

John

bobg

16-04-2005, 23:16

Reading through the answers that have been given I do wonder if there is a pointer in there to why BSAC are losing membership.

Divers want to dive, thats why they do the training. The first level that gives you independence, within BSAC, is sports diver. Unless something has changed it allows 2 sports divers to dive, unsupervised, as a pair.

If a DO is going to put demands on divers that dont allow them to do this then they will simply go and do it anyway, without the DO knowing. And from there they get to thinking on what they get out of the club if most of their diving is done "outside" it. Note the lower number in the subscription column come AGM time.

In fact and in the real world, I doubt that most DO's know what divers are diving of a weekend.

I would hope it is possible to dive safely within the confines of the BSAC rulebook without the need to add unnessessary rules.

johnkendall

17-04-2005, 00:27

:=Ok, So I've spent time and money getting trained, and experienced to do the kind of diving I want to do, but because I'm the DO of a branch I can't? What kind of nonsense is that? If I step down as DO then I can go and do anything I'm qualified to do, yet as a DO I can't?????????
:=
:=John

The position of DO comes with responsibilities to follow and encourage adherence to what is laid down in SDP. You do not act upon your own authority - you act with the devolved authority of the BSAC NDO...which you cannot overrule!

If you do not feel able to do that then perhaps you should question (note I say question) your suitability for the role.
Perhaps the branch should do the same.

As Edward has pointed out - the DO (of all people) is never "off duty" - they always have to set an example to the people for whom they accept responsibility.

The only people in my branch who are around on the dives I'm talking about are my buddies, who have the same training that I do. I don't see the issue with showing other people in the branch that if they want to move onto more advanced diving, they need to get additional training (From outside BSAC) and then train continuously to keep their skill level high. The training I have received from outside BSAC has made me a much better diver, This makes me a much better instructor. I'm not saying that BSAC training is worse than anything else I've received, but by definition Overhead training gives you a better skill level.

I would argue that Instructors who teach one thing and do another are in a very similar position. I would seriously question the ethos of a BSAC instructor who advocates (and employs) skills that are outside the BSAC SDPs.

I don't teach Trimix Diving to my Branch, I don't teach overhead environments to my branch. I do teach bouyancy control using the BC rather than the Drysuit though. I don't teach the use of PPO2>1.4 on Nitrox courses in the branch.

If something needs changing - there are ways to influence BSAC policy on such matters...ignoring established guidelines and just doing your own thing (and encouraging others to do the same) is not one of them!

I never said that I'm just doing my own thing. I stick to the limits of the qualifications I have. I don't ignore the training that I've received. However as of yet, BSAC haven't taught me how to do Trimix dives, or Overhead environments. If I take what you have said above, then I can't dive an overhead environment while being a BSAC Brach DO. If this really is the case, then It needs to be widely advertised.

It strikes me that my not allowing DOs to do Private Dives we might be closing the door on exactly the people we need filling those roles. i.e Those people with multiple qualifications, who do more advanced diving, are more educated in different types of diving.

John

Edward Haynes

17-04-2005, 05:59

Nigel Hewitt

17-04-2005, 08:10

Yet Edward says "Therefore as the Branch Diving Officer your diving will meet both the 'prior knowledge' and your have your 'approval', therefore you can?t undertake ?private? dives."

Perhaps the simplest example is depth.

Say the DO and I both head off and to a reputable school with an instructor we trust and increase our normoxic trimix qualifications to full trimix. We then undertake a series of build up, experience gaining dives to target a particular wreck we are both interested in at 95meters.

Given choice of buddies for a dive like that he would be very high on the list but what makes it a branch dive just because he is there? We would have to dive that under the procedures we had just learnt. If, during our 70 mins at 6m, I start to twitch, point to my chest, signal problem, signal BAD PROBLEM and then quietly expire on him questions might be asked about my UKSDM, about my training and build up but not BSAC SDPs as they don't cover that sort of diving. He wasn't diving as DO but 'privately'.

I'm not sure if my DO would chose to dive with me to 95m but that's another issue. I suspect he has more sense. However he is allowed a private dive or two. Like when he goes on holiday.

Dave

17-04-2005, 10:42

Hi Dave

This sub-thread has moved onto 'private' dives for the Branch Diving Officer only, not any Branch member.

I'm a BDO and a member of another Branch so can I do 'private' diving, NO. Yet I dive with SSAC, SAA, PADI and others.

This was one of the reasons a suggestion was proposed to change the definition, however, the NDO felt at the time that a BDO should set an example and dive within BSAC guidelines.

Your Branch rules can only complement BSAC guidelines, remember under the AofA (46.C.5) Branch rules cannot be "contrary or inconsistent" with BSAC guidance.

My example was neither contrary nor inconsistent. Where does it say in the guidelines that a branch cannot have procedures to follow when arranging branch dives? If the procedures require a framework for arranging a dive before a DO can approve a dive, then I see no way that this is inconsistent. Just because you have a position of authority doesn't necessarily mean you can use it without procedures to be followed.

Dave

Philip Smith

17-04-2005, 11:51

This was one of the reasons a suggestion was proposed to change the definition, however, the NDO felt at the time that a BDO should set an example and dive within BSAC guidelines.

Diving "privately" does not necessarily mean diving outside BSAC guidelines. There is a risk of confusing several different things in this discussion: non-own-branch BSAC dives, non-branch BSAC dives, non-BSAC dives that nevertheless comply with BSAC's SDP, non-BSAC dives that comply with the guidelines of another recognised (e.g. technical) agency and finally non-branch dives that do not comply with the guidelines of any recognised agency (the only category of concern?).

Your Branch rules can only complement BSAC guidelines, remember under the AofA (46.C.5) Branch rules cannot be "contrary or inconsistent" with BSAC guidance.

I think you mean 46.C.4, which says that Branch Bye Laws shall not be contrary to or inconsistent with the Memorandum of Association or the Articles of Association. Rule No. 3 also says that Branch Bye Laws shall not conflict with the Rules of the BSAC. The definition of "branch dive" is not in any of these documents.

I'm a BDO and a member of another Branch so can I do 'private' diving, NO. Yet I dive with SSAC, SAA, PADI and others.

As a BDO I could do any of the following:
- participate in a dive organised for my own branch
- dive with another BSAC branch
- dive on a regional SDC or national exam
- dive on a BSAC multi-branch expedition
- dive on a holiday not open to members of my branch
- dive with a non-BSAC club
- dive on a survey under the auspices of an organisation such as the MCS or NAS
- dive at work

Only the first of these is truly a "branch dive" of my own branch. The others are organised under the auspices of another BSAC branch, BSAC regionally, BSAC nationally, another diving agency, a dive charter company, or my employer. It is not credible to suggest that the fact that I am a BSAC Branch Diving Officer gives my branch ownership of or authority over all of these other dives.

Philip Smith

john williams

17-04-2005, 20:13

:=This was one of the reasons a suggestion was proposed to change the definition, however, the NDO felt at the time that a BDO should set an example and dive within BSAC guidelines.

Diving "privately" does not necessarily mean diving outside BSAC guidelines. There is a risk of confusing several different things in this discussion: non-own-branch BSAC dives, non-branch BSAC dives, non-BSAC dives that nevertheless comply with BSAC's SDP, non-BSAC dives that comply with the guidelines of another recognised (e.g. technical) agency and finally non-branch dives that do not comply with the guidelines of any recognised agency (the only category of concern?).

:=Your Branch rules can only complement BSAC guidelines, remember under the AofA (46.C.5) Branch rules cannot be "contrary or inconsistent" with BSAC guidance.

I think you mean 46.C.4, which says that Branch Bye Laws shall not be contrary to or inconsistent with the Memorandum of Association or the Articles of Association. Rule No. 3 also says that Branch Bye Laws shall not conflict with the Rules of the BSAC. The definition of "branch dive" is not in any of these documents.

:=I'm a BDO and a member of another Branch so can I do 'private' diving, NO. Yet I dive with SSAC, SAA, PADI and others.

As a BDO I could do any of the following:
- participate in a dive organised for my own branch
- dive with another BSAC branch
- dive on a regional SDC or national exam
- dive on a BSAC multi-branch expedition
- dive on a holiday not open to members of my branch
- dive with a non-BSAC club
- dive on a survey under the auspices of an organisation such as the MCS or NAS
- dive at work

Only the first of these is truly a "branch dive" of my own branch. The others are organised under the auspices of another BSAC branch, BSAC regionally, BSAC nationally, another diving agency, a dive charter company, or my employer. It is not credible to suggest that the fact that I am a BSAC Branch Diving Officer gives my branch ownership of or authority over all of these other dives.

Philip Smith
I agree...but nor is it credible to say that just because I'm not doing a branch dive I can safely ignore BSAC SDPs!
I may have to follow additional SDPs (such as HSE Diving at Work regs)
I may have to follow the local bylaws of the other BSAC Branch
I may have to follow the instructions of the dive guide on the private holiday
But NONE of those should compel me to go against BSAC SDPs (or release me from them!)

John

Edward Haynes

17-04-2005, 20:17

Hi Philip

Ownership of diving activities is delegated to BDOs direct from the NDO, not Branch Committees or anyone else.

We can debate this one for ever, but if the NDO rules BDOs cannot dive other than as stated, that's the privilege of the NDO. Whether I like it or not.

Edward

It is not credible to suggest that the fact that I am a BSAC Branch Diving Officer gives my branch ownership of or authority over all of these other dives.

Philip Smith

john williams

17-04-2005, 20:29

Reading through the answers that have been given I do wonder if there is a pointer in there to why BSAC are losing membership.

Why?...the BSAC and particularly the Branch DO is there to act as a safety net. A "Critical friend" to help people to further their training and become competent. If they express concerns about your ability to organise a dive - listen!
They are only trying to keep you safe.
Follow their advice - and very quickly the concerns of the DO will diminish to the point where he/she is delighted to let you organise dives (both inside and outside the confines of the branch)

Divers want to dive, thats why they do the training. The first level that gives you independence, within BSAC, is sports diver. Unless something has changed it allows 2 sports divers to dive, unsupervised, as a pair.

It highly recommends that they do so under the auspices of a properly trained Dive Marshal acting with the structure and support of the branch resources.
What's wrong with that?

If a DO is going to put demands on divers that dont allow them to do this then they will simply go and do it anyway, without the DO knowing.

They will avoid the support of someone better qualified and more experienced who is trying to keep them safe?
what for?

And from there they get to thinking on what they get out of the club if most of their diving is done "outside" it. Note the lower number in the subscription column come AGM time.

Only if people dig their heels in and decide to be awkward and contrary...and to decide that, despite being new to diving (most SDs are, and virtually all SDs who have these "problems" with a DO are) they know better than the DO - who is following guidelines set out by generations of divers throughout the BSAC.
How is diving ever going to move forward if everyone decides that learning by experience and following hard-earned safety advice is irrelevant?

In fact and in the real world, I doubt that most DO's know what divers are diving of a weekend.

Something I feel to be true...but also lament!
Why are all those people ignoring the support of the DO?
I'm not bothered about the ones the DO has assessed as competent and allowed them to do their own thing (though courtesy would drive me to drop the DO a line about my plans)- I'm only bothered about the ones new to organising dives who would benefit from having their plans overlooked and given the nod (or a tweak suggested) by someone who has a great deal more experience than them.

I would hope it is possible to dive safely within the confines of the BSAC rulebook without the need to add unnessessary rules.

That, my friend, is ALL I'm suggesting we do!
But...I'd like to ask DOs to toe that line as well.
There is no need to add to the safety guidelines set out by the BSAC and it's training programme and SDPs...but they SHOULD be interpreted to account for local conditions.

There is a hell of a difference between diving with

"BSAC Tropical Island" in their warm water home lagoon with max 6m and no water movement and 50m viz and with

"BSAC Outer Hebrides" where drop offs reach hundreds of metres, vis often drops to a few metres, currents of very cold water run at up to 8 knots and surface conditions change at the drop of a fin and everyone else on the boat is diving with gasses other than air.

Local guidelines - set by the local DO SHOULD account for local conditions (as long as they are sensible and agreed by the branch - then branch members should follow them!)

John

Dave

17-04-2005, 21:37

Hi Philip

Ownership of diving activities is delegated to BDOs direct from the NDO, not Branch Committees or anyone else.

We can debate this one for ever, but if the NDO rules BDOs cannot dive other than as stated, that's the privilege of the NDO. Whether I like it or not.

Fair enough, but when has the NDO publicly stated this?

Dave

Philip Smith

17-04-2005, 22:29

I agree...but nor is it credible to say that just because I'm not doing a branch dive I can safely ignore BSAC SDPs!

The issue in this part of the thread was whether it is possible for a diving officer to conduct a non-branch dive, not whether they could ingnore BSAC SDPs. However, since you mention it, the type and level of training with another agency may mean that a BDO doing a non-branch dive could safely exceed the limitations of the SDP. An extreme example would be where the BDO's day job was saturation diver. A working dive to 150m could hardly comply with SDP. The SDP recommends those interested in cave diving to contact the appropriate cave diving organisations for specialist training. Diving under the auspices of a cave diving organisation may not be compatible with BSAC's SDP. The preface to the SDP has the following piece of common sense: "These recommendations can be amended depending upon the particular type of diving being planned and the experience and capabilities of the two divers carrying out the dive."

Philip Smith

john williams

17-04-2005, 23:01

:=I agree...but nor is it credible to say that just because I'm not doing a branch dive I can safely ignore BSAC SDPs!

The issue in this part of the thread was whether it is possible for a diving officer to conduct a non-branch dive, not whether they could ingnore BSAC SDPs. However, since you mention it, the type and level of training with another agency may mean that a BDO doing a non-branch dive could safely exceed the limitations of the SDP. An extreme example would be where the BDO's day job was saturation diver. A working dive to 150m could hardly comply with SDP. The SDP recommends those interested in cave diving to contact the appropriate cave diving organisations for specialist training. Diving under the auspices of a cave diving organisation may not be compatible with BSAC's SDP. The preface to the SDP has the following piece of common sense: "These recommendations can be amended depending upon the particular type of diving being planned and the experience and capabilities of the two divers carrying out the dive."

Philip Smith

A sentiment I fully endorse...but the two inexperienced SDs that were being condidered at the beginning of this whole debate hardly qualify under that description.

John

john williams

17-04-2005, 23:17

:=Hi Philip
:=
:=Ownership of diving activities is delegated to BDOs direct from the NDO, not Branch Committees or anyone else.
:=
:=We can debate this one for ever, but if the NDO rules BDOs cannot dive other than as stated, that's the privilege of the NDO. Whether I like it or not.

Fair enough, but when has the NDO publicly stated this?

Dave

Branch Diving Officer's Authority - A Reminder:
The authority of a Branch Diving Officer is not absolute, but is delegated to them by the BSAC National Diving Officer.

from
<a href="http://www.bsac.org/branchmanage/441quals.shtml#factors" >http://www.bsac.org/branchmanage/441quals.shtml#factors</a>

It was also interesting to read:
Candidate's Overall Attitude:
While there is no 'Character Reference' box to tick on any training record page of the member's Qualification Record Book, members seeking a qualification should be expected to display common sense and a duty of care appropriate to the qualification they seek. This becomes progressively more important as they aspire to Dive Leader and Advanced Diver qualifications. Evident absence of 'the right attitude' can be grounds for declining to award a qualification until it changes for the better, but Branch Diving Officers must be prepared to justify / explain to the member involved any delay in awarding a qualification on these grounds, and provide whatever retraining / guidance is necessary

and all of 4.4.4 and 4.4.5 again.

t pertains to "the right attitude" - to diving, responsibility and to authority.

John

Dave

17-04-2005, 23:26

:=:=Hi Philip
:=:=
:=:=Ownership of diving activities is delegated to BDOs direct from the NDO, not Branch Committees or anyone else.
:=:=
:=:=We can debate this one for ever, but if the NDO rules BDOs cannot dive other than as stated, that's the privilege of the NDO. Whether I like it or not.
:=
:=
:=Fair enough, but when has the NDO publicly stated this?
:=
:=Dave

Branch Diving Officer's Authority - A Reminder:
The authority of a Branch Diving Officer is not absolute, but is delegated to them by the BSAC National Diving Officer.

from
http://www.bsac.org/branchmanage/441quals.shtml#factors

It was also interesting to read:
Candidate's Overall Attitude:
While there is no 'Character Reference' box to tick on any training record page of the member's Qualification Record Book, members seeking a qualification should be expected to display common sense and a duty of care appropriate to the qualification they seek. This becomes progressively more important as they aspire to Dive Leader and Advanced Diver qualifications. Evident absence of 'the right attitude' can be grounds for declining to award a qualification until it changes for the better, but Branch Diving Officers must be prepared to justify / explain to the member involved any delay in awarding a qualification on these grounds, and provide whatever retraining / guidance is necessary

and all of 4.4.4 and 4.4.5 again.

t pertains to "the right attitude" - to diving, responsibility and to authority.

An interesting statement but irrelevent to the question I posed which was where has it officially and publicly been stated that a DO cannot undertake a private dive and also where does it state that a branch is not allowed to put in place procedures for setting up branch dives such that process has to be followed before giving it to a DO to approve

Dave

Edward Haynes

18-04-2005, 08:02

Hi Dave

So there is no confusion. I am a Branch Diving Officer and think the definition should be amended to allow me to undertake 'private' dives.

That said, the current definition of a Branch Dive (IHMO) means all the diving I do falls under branch diving. My reasoning:

1. I will know about any dive I am going to undertake in advance.

2. I will give myself permission, otherwise I wouldn't go on the dive.

So the public statement that a Branch Diving Officer cannot undertake 'private' dives comes from the definition.

To answer the second part of your question.
There is nothing to prevent Branches from setting up their own procedures, in fact Branches are encouraged to. The problem comes if these procedures constrain the power of the Branch Diving Officer. Your Branch's Bye-Laws should have an item defining the role and responsibilities of the Branch Diving Officer as delegated by the National Diving Officer (in the model Bye-Laws its item No 8). This is where the Branch Diving Officer?s responsibilities come from. A Branch Committee nor the Membership (at AGM) can put in place rules that restrict the Branch Diving Officer's power, i.e. not approving dives at short notice.

That said, if as the Branch Diving Officer you want to have 2 weeks notice that?s your choice, but your successor doesn?t have to follow suit.

Edward
Project Manager
BOH Amendments

An interesting statement but irrelevent to the question I posed which was where has it officially and publicly been stated that a DO cannot undertake a private dive and also where does it state that a branch is not allowed to put in place procedures for setting up branch dives such that process has to be followed before giving it to a DO to approve

Dave

18-04-2005, 08:36

Dave

18-04-2005, 08:43

:=:=I agree...but nor is it credible to say that just because I'm not doing a branch dive I can safely ignore BSAC SDPs!
:=
:=The issue in this part of the thread was whether it is possible for a diving officer to conduct a non-branch dive, not whether they could ingnore BSAC SDPs. However, since you mention it, the type and level of training with another agency may mean that a BDO doing a non-branch dive could safely exceed the limitations of the SDP. An extreme example would be where the BDO's day job was saturation diver. A working dive to 150m could hardly comply with SDP. The SDP recommends those interested in cave diving to contact the appropriate cave diving organisations for specialist training. Diving under the auspices of a cave diving organisation may not be compatible with BSAC's SDP. The preface to the SDP has the following piece of common sense: "These recommendations can be amended depending upon the particular type of diving being planned and the experience and capabilities of the two divers carrying out the dive."
:=
:=Philip Smith

A sentiment I fully endorse...but the two inexperienced SDs that were being condidered at the beginning of this whole debate hardly qualify under that description.

The original question made no mention of the experience levels of the SDs other than that they were qualified as SDs. All it posed was a "yes/no" question on whether an SD has to have the permission of a DO in order to be able to go diving. Nothing more or less than that. You stated that they do need his blessing and now you are suggesting otherwise.

Dave

Keith Lawrence(BSAC)

18-04-2005, 09:25

We can debate this one for ever, but if the NDO rules BDOs cannot dive other than as stated, that's the privilege of the NDO. Whether I like it or not.

Edward - have you taken this up with the current NDO? If not then I think that now would be a good time to do so.

There is certainly no "requirement" that I am aware of (I could be wrong here) where the DO must be informed of all dives and give permission - I pity the DO of BSAC Direct if that is the case!

If the words are unclear and open to interpretation then let's get some clarity from the NDO and come up with some words that give clarity.

Keith L

Mark Papp

18-04-2005, 09:36

If the words are unclear and open to interpretation then let's get some clarity from the NDO and come up with some words that give clarity.

Thanks Keith,

That would be appreciated.

Regards,

Mark

Edward Haynes

18-04-2005, 11:25

Hi Keith

Yes, the new definition was rejected by Clare for the reason give.

Edward
Project Manager
BOH Amendments

Keith Lawrence(BSAC)

18-04-2005, 11:39

Yes, the new definition was rejected by Clare for the reason give.

Hmmm... this just doesn't feel "right" to me, there is confusion, there shouldn't be. Can you drop me an email with a bit of background Edward, I'll give Clare a call and see if we can get some clarification.

Cheers

Keith L

Edward Haynes

18-04-2005, 12:08

Maybe as a current council member you can succeed where a mere volunteer couldn't.

Edward

:=Yes, the new definition was rejected by Clare for the reason give.

Hmmm... this just doesn't feel "right" to me, there is confusion, there shouldn't be. Can you drop me an email with a bit of background Edward, I'll give Clare a call and see if we can get some clarification.

Cheers

Keith L

bobg

18-04-2005, 12:14

But is this thread (the original post), cos I am only answering this particular one, would you not agree that the DO has added a proviso to the dive that is, in the case of the planned dive, wrong.

I'm not bothered about the ones the DO has assessed as competent and allowed them to do their own thing (though courtesy would drive me to drop the DO a line about my plans)-

In the case of this threead, unless the originator is lying, thie first instance would seem to be the case.

I'm only bothered about the ones new to organising dives who would benefit from having their plans overlooked and given the nod (or a tweak suggested) by someone who has a great deal more experience than them.

Problem on here is we dont know exactly what was planned, but, to be totally honest, shore cover for 2 divers at Stoney Cove is a bit pointless cos they wouldnt get a look in if anything went wrong, in fact I would go as far as to say that they would only get in the way.

I would hope it is possible to dive safely within the confines of the BSAC rulebook without the need to add unnessessary rules.

That, my friend, is ALL I'm suggesting we do!
But...I'd like to ask DOs to toe that line as well.
There is no need to add to the safety guidelines set out by the BSAC and it's training programme and SDPs...but they SHOULD be interpreted to account for local conditions.
There is a hell of a difference between diving with
"BSAC Tropical Island" in their warm water home lagoon with max 6m and no water movement and 50m viz and with
"BSAC Outer Hebrides" where drop offs reach hundreds of metres, vis often drops to a few metres, currents of very cold water run at up to 8 knots and surface conditions change at the drop of a fin and everyone else on the boat is diving with gasses other than air.
Local guidelines - set by the local DO SHOULD account for local conditions (as long as they are sensible and agreed by the branch - then branch members should follow them!)

They shouldnt need to add anything really.

Another bone of contention in this. The club in question is called the BRITISH Sub Aqua Club. IMO the training should be based with British diving in mind. So if there are any genuine concerns or gaps in the training for diving in these waters they should be addressed within the syllabus. I tend to feel that the training syllabus at the present time is more to allow schools, espcially overseas, to compete with PADI than to allow safe diving within the British club scenario.
But thats another discussion

TerryH

18-04-2005, 12:37

Really dont see the problem with all this.

Your Sport divers can be anything from total 20m newbies
up to experienced 35m deco divers. So err on the side of
caution and without any further info, the awnser would be no
to Stoney.

Throw diver experince into the equation and the awnser might
be very different.

As to the DO not allowed a private dive. In our club it's the
entire committee. How can you expect club members to tell the
DO if the committee swans off and does there own thing?
Very hypocritical, so we all have to tell the DO.

Doesnt have to be detailed or even BSAC. We can tell the DO we
are doing a PADI Rescue course or TDO Deco procedures and get
his blessing. It's all about common courtesy.
As long as it's within the standards of an agency, no matter
which one, it's ok.

TerryH

Dave

18-04-2005, 12:45

Doesnt have to be detailed or even BSAC. We can tell the DO we
are doing a PADI Rescue course or TDO Deco procedures and get
his blessing. It's all about common courtesy.
As long as it's within the standards of an agency, no matter
which one, it's ok.

But how could you run , say, a TDI nitrox/adv nitrox course where PO2s of 1.6 or mixes > 80% could be being utilised. The DO could not give his approval for it since it would be against the BSAC rules so surely his blessing could not be forthcoming. A course like this would have to be a non-branch dive wouldnt it?

Dave

nick kay

18-04-2005, 13:10

Problem on here is we dont know exactly what was planned, but, to be totally honest, shore cover for 2 divers at Stoney Cove is a bit pointless cos they wouldnt get a look in if anything went wrong, in fact I would go as far as to say that they would only get in the way.

Have a big problem with the above statement. We were running a DPM course at "a quarry" a few weeks ago. This turned into a real PRM scenario.

Two divers surfaced (not ours) in distress, our group hit the alarm & assisted in the rescue/recovery. CPR (and defib) was carried out on one of the divers. (opinion >>>) They had no marshall / no surface cover (if they did, the were somewhere else / not observing).

Ask the question(s):
1. Should all dives be marshalled?
2. Should all dives have shore cover?
3. Should the DO know of the dives (and amongst other assessments), make sure the answer to (1) and (2) is YES???

In fact, ask any of the students on the DPM course whether they changed their mind from "this course is over-fussy" to "lets do all of this and hope we never need it"...

TerryH

18-04-2005, 13:27

But how could you run , say, a TDI nitrox/adv nitrox course where PO2s of 1.6 or mixes > 80% could be being utilised. The DO could not give his approval for it since it would be against the BSAC rules so surely his blessing could not be forthcoming. A course like this would have to be a non-branch dive wouldnt it?

Dave

Nope. How is a DO going to think bad of you for doing extra
training outside of the branch? That's going to make you
a better diver not a worse one.

When DO (and now as TO) I always encourage members to do any
courses. So our lot would be IANTD, TDI, PADI & RYA as well as
BSAC. The ONLY stipulation is that they choose and dive within
the standards of whatever agency they choose.

So if they go off and dive TDI 1.6, it's fine as long as they
tell the DO and have there own insurance. If they then wanted
to dive 1.6 on a club trip that would be a no and they would
revert to 1.4.

Could still do it if ........
They dived as a buddy pair, paid the skipper direct and had
there own insurance. We wouldnt marshal them as such, but would
be there in case of a rescue same as on any boat.

Any DO should in that position, know or be prepared to know
other agencies, courses and standards. Being objective and
keeping yourself in the loop encourages members to inform
you, rather than keep it quiet. If you create an envoroment
where ANY dives are encouraged as longa s safety protoculs
are followed then members will ask the DO's opnion and sancion
EVEN if it's a non-BSAC dive.

TerryH