View Full Version : what is dive marshal supervision
Hi,
I'm a BSAC sports diver training for dive leader.
Throughout the BSAC club training material there is constant reference to .......and "under the supervision of a dive marshal". eg a sports diver can conduct dives with an ocean diver ..."under the supervision of a dive marshal". Similarly the sports diver can extend his experience by diving with a dive leader or higher, but only "under the supervision of a dive marshal"
At sea I can understand the need for on surface supervision but if diving say at the inland site Stoney Cove does it realy mean you need a third person on the side or acting as dive marshal in the water (diving therefor as a threesome) or does it mean that the diving officer when giving permission for the pair to dive nominates the sports diver (in the case of sports diver/ocean diver senario) or the diver leader in the other case to be the dive marshal for that dive.
The BSAC literature doesn't appear to address exactly what dive marshal supervision means. Any advise will be greatfully received. Thank you Bremar
Nigel Hewitt
25-11-2005, 11:30
Hi,
I'm a BSAC sports diver training for dive leader.
Throughout the BSAC club training material there is constant reference to .......and "under the supervision of a dive marshal".This is BSACspeak for "provided somebody the DO trusts says it's OK"
If I'm going out doing some wreck on a charter boat and some guy in the club asks if we have a space they might be all chuffed with their new SD sign-off but I might be making a rash assumption as to what SD means when the cold, low vis and tide close over us. I need to take advice and that's what it is telling me. I have the DO's mobile number...
This is BSACspeak for "provided somebody the DO trusts says it's OK"
If I'm going out doing some wreck on a charter boat and some guy in the club asks if we have a space they might be all chuffed with their new SD sign-off but I might be making a rash assumption as to what SD means when the cold, low vis and tide close over us. I need to take advice and that's what it is telling me. I have the DO's mobile number...
It is also to make sure there is adequate cover - an ocean diver has done little rescue training and therefore if an SD who is buddied with an OD gets in trouble they will need someone else to rescue them. Somewhere like Stoney the cover is probably going to be sufficient a shore dive from a deserted beach will be very different.
Thankyou Pete and Hello Nigel,
Nigel you have responded to some other requests of mine on another forum for advise and that advise has always been sound. Thannk you.
Pete that's a ver good point about sports diver /ocean diver pairing (that the OD hasn't yet been trained in rescue) On this point my club actually continues training the trainee OD's in rescue in the pool whilst they are doing the open water OD training. So in practice by the time our OD trainee's have qualified as OD's they have done a fair bit.
Back to dive marshalling though. I understand what you are saying but from a BSAC club point of view and to comply with BSAC requirements may the Diving Officer nominate the more qualified diver of the pair as the dive marshal therefor avoiding the necessity to have a third person going to Stoney Cove as the ........supervised by a dive marshal"?
Brett
Adrian Kelland
25-11-2005, 15:01
Brett,
The stipulation regarding Dive Marshall supervision is about the dive planning and post dive stages, not the 'in water' dive itself. The marshall does not have to dive with you. You could of course be diving with the DM in a buddy pair.
Adrian
The stipulation regarding Dive Marshall supervision is about the dive planning and post dive stages, not the 'in water' dive itself. The marshall does not have to dive with you. You could of course be diving with the DM in a buddy pair.
At it simplest dive marshalling means making sure someone out of the water knows where and when you jump into the water and when you are expected back, that person is the dive marshal. Simple, basic safety.
Any BSAC club dive will have a marshal who oversees the diving, they may dive themselves in which case they will have an assistant (or two). ODs shouldn't dive without out of water supervision by someone more qualified.
In practise that may be a charter boat skipper or a divemaster on some exotic foreign holiday, but on a club organised dive it'll be the trip organsier or their helpers.
but if diving say at the inland site Stoney Cove does it realy mean you need a third person on the side or acting as dive marshal in the water (diving therefor as a threesome)
Hmm, this made me think.
I really think you need someone out of the water, on site if at all possible. The people at Stoney or where ever aren't logging you in and out, so if you have a problem underwater it could be the end of the day when the staff ask 'who does that car belong to?' before the alarm is raised, by whihc time you are dead.
I have never come across a trip in my club that was just two SDs or SD/ODs going diving in a quarry, there has always been at least one DL and normally at least 3 people, so you can always have someone on shore.
I have, on one or two occasions as an instructor, taken a trainee in with nobody from my club onsite, on those occasions I have always agreed beforehand and phoned another instructor to check us in and out remotely wiht the understnading that they call the emegency services if I haven;t rung back by my return time. I don't want to do that again though it is a bit too close to being on my own.
If SDs or ODs want ot go on a charter boat, then they will have a skipper.
Lou Whitehouse
25-11-2005, 17:53
I really think you need someone out of the water, on site if at all possible. The people at Stoney or where ever aren't logging you in and out, so if you have a problem underwater it could be the end of the day when the staff ask 'who does that car belong to?' before the alarm is raised, by whihc time you are dead.
I completely agree with this. From time to time a couple of people want to go to an inland site and do a couple of dives but can't find another buddy pair to go along so that they can marshal each other. In those situations I've always said that there should be someone on shore even if it's a non-diver friend that knows when to expect them back and can raise the alarm before things reach the "last car in the car park" stages.
Lou
From time to time a couple of people want to go to an inland site .................always said that there should be someone on shore even if it's a non-diver friend that knows when to expect them back and can raise the alarm
Lou[/QUOTE]
I may be mistaken but there always seem to be dozens of pairs of divers diving without marshals at Stoney Cove and with very few personel left on the side to monitor the dives?
bremar
I really think you need someone out of the water, on site if at all possible. The people at Stoney or where ever aren't logging you in and out, so if you have a problem underwater it could be the end of the day when the staff ask 'who does that car belong to?' before the alarm is raised, by whihc time you are dead.
I don't really think this makes any difference at Stoney. Lets say you go for a dive with a planned max length of 45 minutes. If you don't come back how long will it be before the alarm gets raised and an effective search gets underway? At Stoney they are very good at this so it is likely to be a very quick ten minutes or so. So if you have the problem at the very end of the planned dive (no more likely than at any other time) you will wait at least ten minutes before someone finds you, if the problem is earlier in the dive then you wait longer. Realistically you are stuffed.
If you have a problem at any time during the dive and get to the surface then Stoneys excellent rescue crew is your best hope not anyone standing on the side watching for you, and as anyone who has dived Stoney knows anyone getting to the surface with a problem tends to get spotted by mutiple people straight away.
So I think on shore marshalling at Stoney (Guildy, Capenwray, etc.) has limited use.
What I don't think you should underestimate is the oversite on the dive planning side, making sure the dive is planned with due consideration of who is diving. This can be done before hand subject to the DO knowing his divers capabilities. Done properly this will reduce the risk of a problem and if one does occur give the greatest chance of the divers getting to surface and help.
Of course where you don't have a dedicated rescue crew (Lulworth Cove, Chesil Beach etc) then the situation is completely different and it is imperative to have shore cover
Alan Ewart
25-11-2005, 19:47
From time to time a couple of people want to go to an inland site .................always said that there should be someone on shore even if it's a non-diver friend that knows when to expect them back and can raise the alarm
I may be mistaken but there always seem to be dozens of pairs of divers diving without marshals at Stoney Cove and with very few personel left on the side to monitor the dives?
bremar
Lou, no you would not be mistaken. Many people undertake dives every day of the week without surface cover. I suspect the difference is that they are not BSAC branch or BSAC training dives. On Branch organised dives someone should take responsibility for marshalling the dive. On many occassions this is done very informally.
Alan
Alan
Adrian Kelland
25-11-2005, 19:49
I may be mistaken but there always seem to be dozens of pairs of divers diving without marshals at Stoney Cove and with very few personel left on the side to monitor the dives?
bremar
That could well be the case, but DO YOU want to be the casualties who are not known about until the staff go to close the gates?
This is not just about doing what other people do, but about doing what is safe.
Adrian
Lou, no you would not be mistaken. Many people undertake dives every day of the week without surface cover. I suspect the difference is that they are not BSAC branch or BSAC training dives. On Branch organised dives someone should take responsibility for marshalling the dive. On many occassions this is done very informally.
Alan
Alan
This thread seemed to start in one direction and then go off in another:
1. At sea it is different. But what good is it having a dive marshal on the side at Stoney Cove. I would imagine if you don't come up safely then there is nothing the dive marshal can do to help you. If you surface and need help from what I've seen at Stoney Cove the dive marshal is again superfluous The rescue crew there respond extremely fast (at sea you would need someone to raise the alarm).
2. Someone said that they have dived as a pair for traing purposes without a dive marshal on the side. However it is either OK by BSAC or NOT?
3. Putting Ocean divers to one side. Are we definitely saying you cant dive as a pair of divers (sports diver/sports diver or eg dive leader /sports diver)under BSAc rules without a dive marshal on the side or can one of the diving pair be nominated the dive marshal to do take responsibility for the before dive and after dive safety assessments. OR is there in fact some uncertainty in what BSAC means by ".................under the supervision of a dive marshal" when it defines a sports diver?
I have to say I am still confused because I am sure there are BSAC sports divers diving as a pair at Stoney Cove and also trainers taking down one trainee without dive marshal cover.
Bremar
Alan Ewart
25-11-2005, 23:10
This thread seemed to start in one direction and then go off in another:
1. At sea it is different. But what good is it having a dive marshal on the side at Stoney Cove. I would imagine if you don't come up safely then there is nothing the dive marshal can do to help you. If you surface and need help from what I've seen at Stoney Cove the dive marshal is again superfluous The rescue crew there respond extremely fast (at sea you would need someone to raise the alarm).
2. Someone said that they have dived as a pair for traing purposes without a dive marshal on the side. However it is either OK by BSAC or NOT?
3. Putting Ocean divers to one side. Are we definitely saying you cant dive as a pair of divers (sports diver/sports diver or eg dive leader /sports diver)under BSAc rules without a dive marshal on the side or can one of the diving pair be nominated the dive marshal to do take responsibility for the before dive and after dive safety assessments. OR is there in fact some uncertainty in what BSAC means by ".................under the supervision of a dive marshal" when it defines a sports diver?
I have to say I am still confused because I am sure there are BSAC sports divers diving as a pair at Stoney Cove and also trainers taking down one trainee without dive marshal cover.
Bremar
OK from the horses mouth (or BSAC safe diving practices)
Authorised Branch Dives
An authorised dive by a BSAC Branch is one carried out with the prior knowledge and approval of the Branch Diving Officer. A properly qualified and appointed dive marshal shall be present and shall be in charge of all diving activities for the duration of the
dive/expedition. All Branch dives should be carried out in accordance with current BSAC rules and recommendations for safe diving.
So as I state above if it's a Branch dive a dive marshall should be appointed by the DO. NOTE I say if it's a branch dive! This includes training dives!
and so does this mean that the DO can appoint (formally or informally) one of the pair (the most trustworthy/sensible) as the dive marshal so he has responsibility to consider dive safety etc both before the dive and after, and thus allow two divers to dive at say, Stoney Cove, where there is rescue cover, without a separate dive marshal on the side?
Is this what BSAC really means by ..........supervised by a dive marshal? at least in the case of Stoney Cove. Any chance of a consensus on this?
Bremar
Alan Ewart
25-11-2005, 23:55
and so does this mean that the DO can appoint (formally or informally) one of the pair (the most trustworthy/sensible) as the dive marshal so he has responsibility to consider dive safety etc both before the dive and after, and thus allow two divers to dive at say, Stoney Cove, where there is rescue cover, without a separate dive marshal on the side?
Is this what BSAC really means by ..........supervised by a dive marshal? at least in the case of Stoney Cove. Any chance of a consensus on this?
Bremar
Can I refer you to the dive leading manual. page 70 which states
The dive Marshall is the person with ultimate responsibility for diving operations and so must be accorded decision making power. Typically the dive marshall will remain at the surface supervising the diving activities. (read into 'typically' what you will suggests to me the DM could be the senior buddy)
I emphasise once more that this is applicable for Branch dives. IMO there is nothing to stop a pair of sports divers buddying up and going for a dive under their own steam. This would fall outsideof the Branch structure.
An example. Last week I was out in the carribean. Does my DO want me to phone him & 'seek permission' to go diving? I think not!! Clearly my diving is outside of branch activity.
If however I towed the club rib off somewhere then it would be a club dive and I must meet the safe diving practice. In reality this isnt too hard. The boat Cox would act as Dm whilst we dive.
I think if you want a more in depth explanation you should give Alaister Reynolds at HQ a ring and ask for an interpretation.
Alan
John Williams
27-11-2005, 07:55
It does not matter who you ring/contact - there is no definitive anser on this one.
This is because there is no definitive dive, no definitive pairing, no definitive DO and no definititve set of conditions.
The onus is on the person proposing the dive to their DO to show that the risk assessments have been done and that the results are acceptable.
To use some of the examples above:
A holiday dive in the caribbean...the DO should be told, out of courtesy (and to make them jealous!) that you are going. You might get a discussion about safety aspects and some sound advise from the DO about what "nasties" you might find in foreign waters - and the need for a good local guide/good brief. There will be no restrictions (how can there be?) - just interest from the DO and an opportunity for you to receive advice that will improve your trip - perhaps the DO knows someone who has already been and can give you useful advice on the best pubs! What have you got to lose from discussing it with the DO?
A trip to sea - why are we ALWAYS advised to have a responsible person ashore with details of our plan and of our estimated time of return? Why are we ALWAYS advised to inform the Coastguard of our plans - and to keep them informed of when we commence/cease diving activity? This is all part of the DM getting Marshalling support from outside the group to manageand reduce the risk. People need to now where we are and what we are doing. Otherwise the first reason for others to be alarmed is when your boat washes up on the beach or you don't show for work on Monday! (far too late to be of any help!)
Diving at Stoney - as a DO I've always encouraged any divers from my branch to have at least one person on the side with the logs ...that way it becomes clear when you are 10 minutes overdue and the site emergency procedures for a "lost diver" can be activated. I'd rather be found unconscious on the bottom with 20 bar left than be left there until the staff notice my car in the car park 4 hours later! When a pair has gone to a managed inshore site alone I've always encouraged them to check in with the shop just before diving and again as soon as they get out (not ideal ..but it's in the same league as checking in with the Coastguard?) I also ask them to mention their presence to the nearest person with a clipboard as they enter the water and give an estimated time of surfacing (not ideal - but the same as leaving word ashore of estimated time of return for a sea dive)
I'd not encourage a group going off sea diving without a radio and someone ashore. I'd not encourage a pair going diving at a non-managed inshore site without someone being on the side to monitor the dive (and with a proven means of contacting outside help ..i.e. a mobile with service!). Should that person be dive trained, should they be first aid trained (or diving first aid trained?). The risk assessment will have considered these points and made a decision that reflects the perceived risk.
As a DO the people I apppoint to be DMs all complete risk assessments and I trust their judgement - they set the example of how it should be done! I obviously have no authority to stop people going off and doing their own thing and ignoring risk assessments (but then I'd question the quality of training they received and their continued presence in a branch for which I have overall safety responsibility).
I am DO of a "virtual" branch - so I've not met many of the members let alone dived with them - but I trust their qualifications and I welcome the opportunity to share their diving plans and contribute to them. I hope my members see me as a resource and not as a busybody who wants to restrict them...the opposite is true! (I'm here to facilitate and encourage their diving and to make it safer and more rewarding for them ...and to nick info about the good sites they visit for use by all my other members - including me!)
If you like I am the Branch Dive Travel forum and report section rolled into a real live person... and similarly - I'm only as good as the info provided!
The only person whose opinion matters in YOUR case is YOUR DO. If you are a DO and don't have an opinion on this (or your opinion is at odds with either BSAC or the branch DM team)...speak to your Marshalling team and perhaps ask your Area Coach to facilitate the discussion - but you really should have an opinion on this - and be able to "sell" it to your branch (you will not be able to "impose" it!)
HTH
John
richie771
27-11-2005, 20:30
Hi,
I thought I would put the Military slant on this.
Under Joint Service Regulations, Any dive that involves Service personel must be properly supervised.
This entails a SADS (Joint Service Sub Aqua Diving Supervisor) being present on the surface during all diving.
The only times when a SADS is not required is when the dive is being conducted during a period of leave (Holiday) and no Military equipment is being used durinfg the dive and when a serviceman is using a registered school (BSAC or PADI).
I feel that even when diving for pleasure (Sport Diving) the fact that the Military insists on the presence of a SADS has helped towards our excellent safety record.
I have seen some terrible incidents over the years such as RHIBS left buoyed unmanned whilst the divers below carry on thier dive below and numerous quarry dives without any surface cover.
Not saying that we are perfect - But at least when there is always surface cover present, there is a better chance to effect a rescue.
Richie
Mike Halligan
27-11-2005, 20:42
Richie,
Well said, that man!
Marshaling cannot be effective IMHO without properly briefed, attentive and competent surface cover (shore / boat as appropriate), to whom divers are bound to report outward and inward. That does not mean (to me, personally) that such a person has to be a trained diver when suitable resources are to hand (e.g. commercial inland sites, the best charter boats, etc.).
Of course the nominated Marshal might well dive, in which case there must be an adequate deputy for that period of time.
For pity's sake, this is not rocket science. Neither, IMVHO, need it become an exercise in semantics. The military have simplified and documented an already simple concept. Surely it is not only the military that can KISS?
All absolutely personal opinion and worth what you paid for it :cool:
Mike
Our branch is located close to a major Naval base and a minor Army camp. For all the time I have been a member (10 years) we have had a regular string of mob members who would rather not mix business and pleasure. One of the major complaints I hear is the difficulty in locating a SADS or just going diving.
BSAC operate a simple chain of delegation in the branches, DO then Dive Marshal then whomever is leading the dive then buddy. As far as I am concerned what is being delegated is responsibility. Someone is always responsible and the DO should ensure someone takes on the responsibility of diving safely. This is more important than the paperwork that proves it I feel. If a Sport Diver wants to take on the risks of diving without surface cover, it is a matter between them and their DO.
I will not support measures that make independant diving more attractive than BSAC membership. Insisting on surface cover is one such measure.
Neither do I support differentiating the dives that BSAC members make. We should be encouraging a responsible attitude to risk whether diving with another PADI diver, another Sport Diver or twenty others from a BSAC branch.
Thousands of dives are made perfectly safely and without incident each weekend. What is the justification for potentially excluding those people from diving with the BSAC?
John Williams
28-11-2005, 08:08
There is no justification for excluding them from the BSAC!
Indeed - these are the very people who are taking uneccessary risks ....and would benefit from being a part of the BSAC and taking on board the lessons learned and taught by the BSAC.
There can be no doubt in ANYONE's mind that diving with proper safety cover is safer than diving without it - can there?
I'm pretty sure that you would not advocate diving without safety cover (and also certain that you practice what BSAC preach - do you always have cover for your dives?)
So ...let's get these people who go diving without cover into the fold and teach them a better way/provide them with the resources/structure to go diving in a safer manner!
On the flip side .... for those people within the BSAC who do not follow simple suggestions to keep themselves safe (like providing adequate surface cover/marshalling). Wake up, smell the coffee! You are putting yourself and olthers, and the BSAC reputation, at risk!
Please don't do it! Listen to your training, think about the consequences (don't just assume that things wont go wrong! You might be right 99% of the time...but when it does go wrong and you've no back up - you'll be dead and your family will be left to pick up the peices!)
I'm not saying that proper marshalling provides a guarantee of safety - what everyone here is saying is that proper marshalling reduces the risk!
Why would you want NOT to reduce your risk?
John
jens_hucke
28-11-2005, 14:45
Hi John,
While I can totally agree with the intent, what happens in the case that was initially mentionned with Stoney? A pair of divers including a NQI plan to do a dive / training session, but the person expected to provide shore cover isn't available.
do you :
a) Cancel?
b) Do the dive but no training?
c) Get the NQI to Marshall while on shore, and get a remote cover via phone to log in/log out and raise alert if the pair don't make contact within the pre-arraged allotted time?
d) Ask a total stranger, whom you don't know?
regards
Jens
Andy Wade
28-11-2005, 14:59
Hi John,
While I can totally agree with the intent, what happens in the case that was initially mentionned with Stoney? A pair of divers including a NQI plan to do a dive / training session, but the person expected to provide shore cover isn't available.
do you :
a) Cancel?
b) Do the dive but no training?
c) Get the NQI to Marshall while on shore, and get a remote cover via phone to log in/log out and raise alert if the pair don't make contact within the pre-arraged allotted time?
d) Ask a total stranger, whom you don't know?
regards
Jens
Well it wouldn't be the first time I've hooked up with another unattached pair of divers at Stoney or similar and we shore covered for each other. In all cases they were perfectly happy to do it.
As for total strangers?
Well, this world is just full of friends that I haven't met yet.
:)
I've found that all it takes is to make the first contact and break the ice first.
Hmm, this made me think.
I really think you need someone out of the water, on site if at all possible. The people at Stoney or where ever aren't logging you in and out, so if you have a problem underwater it could be the end of the day when the staff ask 'who does that car belong to?' before the alarm is raised, by whihc time you are dead.
I have never come across a trip in my club that was just two SDs or SD/ODs going diving in a quarry, there has always been at least one DL and normally at least 3 people, so you can always have someone on shore.
I have, on one or two occasions as an instructor, taken a trainee in with nobody from my club onsite, on those occasions I have always agreed beforehand and phoned another instructor to check us in and out remotely wiht the understnading that they call the emegency services if I haven;t rung back by my return time. I don't want to do that again though it is a bit too close to being on my own.
If SDs or ODs want ot go on a charter boat, then they will have a skipper.
Yep
Absolutely spot on, we always try and have a 3rd diver as cover at Stoney when we have two sports together (or less).
Not always possible of course, but they are then asked quite details questions by the D.O if going as a pair.
Was there not a case at the new inland sight of divers lost and they only found out when their cars where the onlt ones left in the car park?
Purdy
Hi John,
While I can totally agree with the intent, what happens in the case that was initially mentionned with Stoney? A pair of divers including a NQI plan to do a dive / training session, but the person expected to provide shore cover isn't available.
do you :
a) Cancel?
b) Do the dive but no training?
c) Get the NQI to Marshall while on shore, and get a remote cover via phone to log in/log out and raise alert if the pair don't make contact within the pre-arraged allotted time?
d) Ask a total stranger, whom you don't know?
regards
Jens
Hello all,
I posted the original question about the requirement to have ".............supervision by a Dive Marshall." It would appear that everyone is agreed that "out of the water, Dive Marshall cover is a requirement in the case of sea diving or similar where there is a lack of other suitable surface rescue cover to respond to a diver on the surface indicating trouble.
Where there is such surface rescue cover, and in particular I am talking about Stoney Cove the jury still appears to be out?
I have to say that my gut feeling was that I expected the answer about pairs training or diving together at Stoney Cove to be that Dive Marshal cover on the side was unnecessary and that it would be OK for the DO to appoint one of the divers as the Dive Marshal, thus covering the safety angle.
From what has been written with regard to Stoney Cove, I am still stuck with the idea that the only benefit of having a Dive Marshal on the side (in whatever guise) is to raise the alarm about missing divers earlier rather than later. It would appear not to improve thier actual safety? or did I miss something
Bremar
Andy Wade
29-11-2005, 00:30
Hello all,
From what has been written with regard to Stoney Cove, I am still stuck with the idea that the only benefit of having a Dive Marshal on the side (in whatever guise) is to raise the alarm about missing divers earlier rather than later. It would appear not to improve thier actual safety? or did I miss something
Bremar
I'd say that having a dive marshall does improve the safety of the divers in the water.
Dive marshalling is far more than just being there in a rescue, they are also there to help you in and out of the water should you need it, a fall on a slippery slope can cause a lot of damage to a person and/or his kit, a cold diver will benefit from a helping hand and maybe quicker access to a hot coffee than if they have to fend for themselves after a cold dive, they also should keep an eye on your deco requirements between dives and for the next one. I'd always welcome someone else having a scan over my deco figures for the next dive.
They could also be ready with the first aid kit and oxygen if you've troubled to take it to the site.
Lots of things can go wrong that don't require the services of the rescue boat.
There are many good reasons for having shore cover, but I can't think of any good reasons for not having it.
And if nothing else, one of them could be in the queue for the bacon sarnies whilst the other one helps you out of the water on the last dive of the day.
:D
There is no justification for excluding them from the BSAC!
Indeed - these are the very people who are taking uneccessary risks....and would benefit from being a part of the BSAC and taking on board the lessons learned and taught by the BSAC.
There can be no doubt in ANYONE's mind that diving with proper safety cover is safer than diving without it - can there?.Completely agree.
I'm pretty sure that you would not advocate diving without safety coverI do not.
(and also certain that you practice what BSAC preach - do you always have cover for your dives?)No. With a suitable buddy I am prepared to accept the risks of diving without shore cover at sites such as Selsey Life Boat Station and similar local sites. We would obviously leave word on shore.
So ...let's get these people who go diving without cover into the fold and teach them a better way/provide them with the resources/structure to go diving in a safer manner!Well at least tell them what the risks are that they are taking.
On the flip side .... for those people within the BSAC who do not follow simple suggestions to keep themselves safe (like providing adequate surface cover/marshalling). Wake up, smell the coffee! You are putting yourself and olthers, and the BSAC reputation, at risk!Scuba diving is not without it's risks. Once those risks are understood it is a personal choice whether to take them. There are some risks which BSAC allow and I will not contemplate. Others that BSAC do not allow which I will take in order to enjoy my diving.
Please don't do it! Listen to your training, think about the consequences (don't just assume that things wont go wrong!Completely agree.
You might be right 99% of the time...but when it does go wrong and you've no back up - you'll be dead and your family will be left to pick up the peices!)I consider this before every dive. Shore cover is only one small part of safe diving.
Why would you want NOT to reduce your risk?You can reduce diving risks to 0 by never diving. Risk is subjective and it is a personal decision as to how much one may be willing to accept. Had I wanted a life without risk I would not have started diving.
Where there is such surface rescue cover, and in particular I am talking about Stoney Cove the jury still appears to be out?You should check with the site operators.
At Horsea lake we are required to provide our own shore cover and O2 kit if Ocean Divers are diving. A letter from HQ requested by the operator's stated the requirements for Ocean Divers a few years ago. Although the site operators have shore cover on standby they will not take on the responsibility.
Horsea is a couple miles down the road and about the safest place I can think of. It is a shame that a full branch outing is required to get our Ocean Divers in. I would suggest you check the position at your local lake.
John Williams
30-11-2005, 11:27
So ...almost complete agreement there then!
The only slight hiccough is in what we consider to be "cover".
In the circumstances you mention I would consider leaving word ashore to be adequate "shore cover".
The OP wanted to go to a busy site, full of divers and confusion about who belongs to who and who is doing drills and who is in real peril (such that it resembles a colony of demented penguins at times!) and merrily plop into the water without leaving word ashore - without identifying themselves to anyone.
That cannot be right!
Neither can the "I'll use my mobile to ring the DO to log in/out" option. Can you imagine the DO trying to ring the shop and say "My mate John has not rung to log out. I don't know where in the pond he's gone, who he's with or what colour his kit is (he was there to try out a new XXX)"
I know Stoney has DiverLog ... but who else does? And what good does it do under those circumstances?
The bottom line - as you so eloquently put it - is that the risks should be properly assessed and then the diver chooses what is an acceptable risk to them. It is courteous to involve the DO in the decision as to what is/is not acceptable - and you MUST follow the rules of any private site which you are visiting.
Safe Diving Everyone!
John
John Williams
30-11-2005, 11:36
You should check with the site operators.
...and with your own DO!
You must follow the rules of any private site you visit - but it is courteous to involve the DO in the decision as to what is/is not acceptable risk. Wether or not it is an official branch dive - the DO may be called to a coroner's court to answer for safety decisions made by branch members!
It's not fair to exclude your DO from decisions which may affect them so much!
The only time they are unlikely to be called is when you are diving under the control of a commercial outfit (such as your holiday tour operator). If diving with another branch it is possible that BOTH DOs will be called...so mention to your DO that you are diving with other branches (or groups not recognised as branches) too!
Remember that Regional Coaching Teams are "other branches" - hopefully your DO will not feel the need to question their competence at Marshalling - but it is courteous to mention planned attendance at Regional Course - especially when they involve diving!
I'm always baffled when teaching a Regional Course about the number of delegates who have not let their DO know where they are!
(How can you expect to go back to your branch and practice new skills, or to discuss new methods, if you kept your attendance a secret?)
Your DO will want to have the whole branch benefit from your newfound skills/contacts/ideas ...and if you did not get any whilst on the course...ask yourself "did I go with an open mind/notebook?" if you did and you still came away with nothing new ...ask for your money back!
John
Area Coach - just to remind you!
Helen (AKA Hellvet)
30-11-2005, 15:02
The only slight hiccough is in what we consider to be "cover".
In the circumstances you mention I would consider leaving word ashore to be adequate "shore cover".
The bottom line - as you so eloquently put it - is that the risks should be properly assessed and then the diver chooses what is an acceptable risk to them. It is courteous to involve the DO in the decision as to what is/is not acceptable - and you MUST follow the rules of any private site which you are visiting.
What he said!
Basically what the DO says goes - they're the ones the buck stops with!
Our current DO is happy for training dives and branch dives to go on with a NQI and a trainee at known sites with known risks, if we check in with a Dive Leader or above, or her before and after the dive.
If its 2 OD's she tends to ask for shore cover by a diver, if its 2 SD's she's happy with a phone call, but individual decisions are made in each case depending on the divers concerned and their levels of experience.
And of course if the DO changes they're entitled to make their own decision...
The fluffiness in the BSAC recommendations is kinda designed to give some of this responsibility to the DO i think...
Hi.
Dive Marshall is somebody who is on the diving site running the show, from ashore to in water dive site.
He/She pairs up the divers according to qualifications/politics and known skills, they should have a sound knowledge and be trusted by the divers to make the right call on the day, what ever it is.
The dive Marshall is totally in charge, and what instructions are given to the divers have to be complied with, Example, make sure you fasten on to the shotline with your reel, and come back up the line, do not come up on your DSMB unless it is in an emergency it looks as though it may be getting a sea up and you might not be seen on the surface, or even get on dive site and find it is getting to rough, and call off the dive. make sure you sort out fairly who is up boat handling on the first dive, a big area of discontent,:confused: The list of responsibilities are endless, after all you are acting as the DO's representative on site.
A good dive Marshall can make the day, a bad one can ruin it!.
A lot of being a dive Marshall is down to (street cred) :D
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.