Re: Slang & jason responses attached

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by SLANG on August 04, 2000 at 13:36:51:

In Reply to: Slang & jason responses attached posted by MHK on August 03, 2000 at 18:10:35:


I am sorry, but the arguments you and others have listed here I find to be in no way convincing. You may have some valid points, and we are all concerned about the welfare of our diving community, but you're getting way out of touch with the average diver. You repeatedly state that what you are proposing is "not over bearing, intrusive or unreasonable." But, in reality, that could not be further from the truth. How could you possibly be any MORE overbearing or intrusive than trying to have me prevented from even diving on the wreck?

I did my Basic SCUBA cert dives off Leo Carillo beach 27 years ago this month. Since then I have made thousands of dives in all kinds of conditions, all around the world; but most of my diving has been right here off our coast. I have certifications from NAUI, PADI, LA Co, YMCA and TDI; I'm Nitrox and Rescue Diver certified BUT I am NOT a "technical" diver, and I have no interest in becoming one. I'm just a diver; but now you're telling me that I'm not capable of preventing my own death if I get in the water near the Yukon. I'm sorry, but I don't see that you, or anyone else, is more qualified than I am to decide what my capabilities are.

You make comparisons to the wreck of the Palawan in other posts. I agree with you, you can't really equate the two wrecks. You differentiate the Palawan from the Yukon because the Palawan is a dive "beyond recognized limits" so as such, is given a more healthy respect. I think that is just wrong. Depth is nowhere near the intimidation factor that an overhead environment is for the average diver. Having made a number of dives on the Palawan over the years (and survived, amazingly enough) but none on the Yukon yet (although it sounds like I better hurry before you guys have people like me banned), all I can say is, I hope that the Yukon IS a different situation, or you people are REALLY making way too much out of this.

You also keep saying that things have changed now because the sinking didn't go "as planned." I don't believe this changes things to the degree that you are now justified in laying claim to the benefits of the hard work of the many who fought to get this wreck, and then turn around and try to exclude those same people. If you are successful in your plans, do you think anyone anywhere will ever cooperate on anther project like this ever again? They'll just point at this and say, "Why should I work my ass off and not benefit from it?" You keep saying that things didn't go as planned - are you telling me no one allowed for this possibility in any of their contingency plans? When you sink a ship this size, there is a VERY good chance it's not going come to rest upright on its keel. No one ever considered this before? I don't buy it.

You ask me to compare overhead environments - cave v. wreck - and why one should be regulated where the other shouldn't. The thing is, I don't think that public caves systems should be made off limits either. In my opinion, it's foolish to go into either unless properly equipped and trained, but it's not my call to make, nor should it be yours. You also repeatedly reference Ginnie Springs as an example; gates were installed to keep out unqualified divers. What you make no mention of, is that Ginnie Springs is PRIVATE property. I can't tell the owner what to do with his privately owned property, nor would I want to. See, that owner is at MUCH greater risk of liability than a commercial boat owner who is hired to take divers to the Yukon after advising them of the specific dangers and requiring them to sign additional site-specific waivers. Tort law in most states is such that landowners have an increased "duty" to make their property safe (even from trespassers), and the caves at Ginnie would be an obvious "attractive nuisance." Not to mention that I'm sure the gates at Ginnie Springs help ensure that the owner collects all appropriate fees from divers using the springs.

I understand your position as someone who may have to retrieve a lost diver - I sympathize. I can relate, because dead bodies stay with you whether you drag them out of water or somewhere else. But the fact of it is, that's part of the job you signed up for. It's definitely the shitty part, but the choice was yours.

I could go on, but it's pretty obvious that our beliefs will never coincide on this topic. I respect your knowledge, skills and opinions, but I don't agree with you on this one.


Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]