|Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Chamber Day Dive|
Posted by Mike Meagher on May 07, 2009 at 14:55:27:|
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Chamber Day Dive posted by ridendive on May 07, 2009 at 12:12:56:
I agree with much what ridendive states prior, and is well said, however I must take exception to the statement:
"If the chamber cannot operate because of lack of funds, and someone dies...then that should be on the conscious of any captain that bailed."
I think that points blame at the wrong person, the dive boat captain, and not on the individual diver.
Its up to each diver to take personal responsibilty (including financial responsibility) for their actions.
It simply is not right to try to place "the guilt blame" on a dive boat owner for whatever reason they opted out of Chamber day funding.
The chamber / county should try to find some other means of funding this valuable resource, instead of depending on donations and charity events, and should not expect any one doner group to be consistent.
Shure, the dive boat industry should participate because to a point, they benefit from a save diving experience. Shure they have a vested interest, and should participate somehow. All the captains I know DO care alot about diver safety.
Simply assuming that they opted out of Chamber day for one reason or another, be it weather, financial, does not mean they are not concerned with diver safety.
Pehaps chamber funding would be better accomplished if it was funded by the individual divers directly.
After all,it is the individual divers that take the risk of jumping into the water, swimming as deep as they want, and taking on the risks they take. No one forces a diver to enter the water.
Personally, IMHO I think all So. Cal. divers should share directly in the cost of having a great resource like the Chamber. Perhaps it is better accomplished via a per diver "chamber fee" collected from each diver hopping on a dive boat(along the lines of the National Marine Park fee you have to pay when diving in Bonaire).. or by some other direct means. Just some ideas... but you get the drift of my thinking. Heck, you have to "buy a license" to hunt for lobster (the license fee being intended for managing that resource). Why not be required to pay a "chamber fee" to dive in So. Cal.. where the funds then go to the Chamber....?
Seems to me that if the divers themselves were required to support the chamber a bit more directly, then the Chamber's need to rely on charity fund raising events and the charity of the Dive boat industry.. would become moot.
|Optional Link URL:|
|Optional Link Title:|
|Optional Image URL:|
|Post Background Color:||White Black|
|Post Area Page Width:||Normal Full|
|You must type in the
scrambled text key to
This is required to
help prevent spam bots
from flooding this BBS.