 |
|
The liveliest letters from the DIVER mailbag...
|
|
With all the talk of the dolphin off Portland, I feel it's a good time to relate events that befell our party of divers off West Wales recently. Four of us (three about-to-become PADI Rescue Divers and one Open Water Diver) went shore-diving off Stackpole Quay, a well-used shore dive site in south Pembrokeshire.
One buddy pair descended and put up a bright orange delayed SMB. I was about to descend with the OWD when I noticed movement in the water. A small black and very whiskered head surfaced between them and us.
It was a seal. It took one look at the delayed SMB, which was partially inflated and therefore making interesting movements on the surface as the diver proceeded below, and promptly pounced on it. It sank its teeth into the top and performed some interesting manoeuvres up and down the SMB!
Whether this seal regarded the SMB as food, a rival, or a potential mate I have no idea. I do know that it took only seconds for those teeth to puncture the SMB, leaving it useless.
Back at the beach after the dive, neither of the two divers in this buddy pair had the slightest suspicion of the cause of the failure of their SMB. They had not seen, heard, or felt anything of the activity 5.5m above their heads !
I hope this animal isn't partial to neoprene. I'll be in the same place again next week!
John Voisey, Newport
I totally agree with John Liddiard's Deep Breath in your August edition (The Dive Computer Is So Primitive). In fact I threw in my job in software two years ago to develop exactly the product that John describes - an underwater housing for a PDA, plus software titles to enhance a diver's experience under water.
So, you may ask, where is the product? Well one of my key criteria for the project was to get external funding. And did I choose a bad time!
The dotcoms were disappearing on an hourly basis and the market had lost confidence in hi-tech. I sank about £40,000 of my own money into the project, but could not take it forward, so find myself back in the software business!
But I do believe, as John does, that the time has come for dive computers to go to the next level, with colour displays, integrated and customisable interfaces and multiple software applications based on interest and diver requirements. Well done, John - and I hope that the dive computer manufacturers hear your call.
I will be first in line to buy one!
Chris Parkhouse, Windsor, Berks
In August's Off-Gassing, Ian Muirhead poses the question: The Snorkel - Why? and makes some very interesting points. Where shall we start?
I particularly enjoyed the comment "as good divers we aim to arrive back at the surface with at least 50 bar left". I do not doubt Ian's planning abilities but if everyone practised conservative diving we wouldn't get divers doing the M2 on their first dive of the year, after six months' inactivity, and ending up in a pot. Life is not like that, and diving certainly isn't.
What happens when you surface after a drift dive, the boat has an engine fault and puts out a PanPan, and you end up at the surface, next stop France, waiting for a helicopter in deteriorating conditions and no air left? Never happens? Check the Portland helicopter log.
Just spend a day watching the divers at Stoney at a weekend, look at the skill level and then tell me that they are all planning to surface with 50 bar. Sometimes surfacing itself appears to be a problem!
People, sadly, are ridiculed if they are first to signal that they need to ascend as their air starts to run low. They push it longer than they should and end up on the surface with 10 bar and a long swim.
Perfect reg recovery? Put the snorkel on the opposite side to the regulator - or is that just too easy ?
The one time I decided not to wear a snorkel was the only time I ever really needed it, during the rescue of another diver while on holiday. I do use the "dastardly tube" on surface-swims as it allows me to save my gas for being where I'd rather be, under water.
As for whether Ian needs enlightenment or therapy - he's a diver, so it must be therapy!
Paul Chard, Penarth
As an instructor I feel compelled to reply to Mr Muirhead's letter about the snorkel.
The human head is heavy, and keeping it up above the waves uses precious energy. Yes, you could use your reg and waste air before a dive, but I prefer to save my air for under the water.
Yes, it is good practice to surface with 50 bar. I did this as a newly qualified Open Water diver during my first season diving off the North-east coast. I, like you, thought my snorkel was a burden, so it stayed on the boat in my net bag.
As we surfaced it had become quite choppy and there was no way I could have breathed without my reg or a snorkel in my mouth. All would have been fine had the boat been there immediately to pick us up but it wasn't. We could just about see it over the waves, but because the sun was low and had cast a glare on the water we were invisible.
Our SMBs were up, we used our whistles, but the boat didn't find us for more than 40 minutes. My air supply was getting very low by then - if only I'd brought my snorkel!
The snorkel is a cheap, lightweight piece of equipment for use at the surface before and after a dive. A lot of divers do swim on their backs, and I do from time to time, but they risk swimming into a boat, a rock or other divers.
Just think of what they could be missing, as well. I often lead a group away from the boat, checking out the site from above and looking for fish life, and have been thrilled to see sharks and rays before the dive has even begun.
In Thailand I was about to start a dive with open-water trainees when I spotted a sea snake quickly approaching the surface for air. I was able to avert their eyes and guide them away, avoiding undue panic, and then reward them with the sight of it casually swimming back down.
You can get folding or telescopic snorkels, so if it gets in the way or snags on things, change the snorkel or clip. That's why some divers strap them to their legs.
Divers carry lots of stuff they don't need - alternate air source, knife, pony bottle, strobe and spare parts kit are all there just in case.
It's time to stop giving the snorkel such a hard time. Set a good example to new divers and wear and use your snorkel. You never know what you might see!
Claire Nichols, South Cave, East Yorkshire
Reading Chris Kitson's letter Dealing With Diving's Outlaws (July) leads me to believe that there is a strange parallel universe in which everything is perfect. Clearly Mr Kitson has found the entrance to it!
His suggestion that dive-boat skippers, dive shops and training sites have a legal obligation to save us from ourselves by checking qualifications is ludicrous. There is only one person responsible for the decision to dive or not, and that is the participant.
If people want to dive, they will dive either by cunning, stealth or downright lies.
You can buy, insure and tax a car without producing a driving licence and, unless you get caught for some misdemeanour, drive it for the rest of your life.
So what makes Mr Kitson believe that dive qualifications for which there is no legal standing can be any better enforced?
Even at buddy level, I would shy away from insisting on seeing the qualifications of an allocated buddy, for fear of reading one of those condescending letters in next month's "buddies from hell" page, describing how a 40-something PADI Open Water Diver challenged an eminently qualified BSAC instructor on his ability to dive!
But when it gets to people involved in diving businesses, anyone who elects to verify qualifications can and will be held responsible in the event of a mishap, ergo: "Mr Jones, as an experienced dive skipper why, when you knew the wreck to lie at 21m and that Mr Smith's qualification as a PADI Open Water Diver allowed him to dive to only 20m, did you allow him to dive the wreck?"
Eventually dive businesses would be too frightened to give advice, let alone allow you to dive!
These people are not policemen any more than those who run PADI, BSAC, SAA or any training agency are. They are individuals providing a service to participants in an adult sport. I say, put the responsibility back on the diver's shoulders.
This is not a case of putting money before safety - for goodness sake, let's start acting like grown-ups!
I suggest we start a movement for self-policing, whereby it becomes socially acceptable for divers to display their qualification on their kit, in the form of an encapsulated card attached to their BC or harness.
Then everyone will be aware of the level of the person with whom they are diving, without any embarrassment or direct confrontation.
I won't hold my breath on this one, however. I think I'll just look for that parallel universe of Mr Kitson's.
Philip Pope, Woodham Ferrers, Essex
On family holidays, I used to be happy to dive with anyone. However, I have returned from my latest holiday realising that there are two types of divers: BSAC and Everyone Else.
If you are buddied with any normal diver, regardless of nationality, training agency, or experience, the talk is of the dive site, what we expect to see and how much enjoyment will be had.
With British BSAC divers, the tale is sadly different. For example, this is the greeting I got from my recently assigned buddy: "Hello, are you a PADI diver? Mmmm, well, that's all right, the diving's easy here. How much weight are you using? Six kilos? Well you should lose at least one kilo, preferably two! What's your breathing like? They have 15 litre cylinders."
At this point I realised that when you dive with a BSAC diver you feel as if you're in some kind of competition, rather than diving for pleasure. At no point did he enquire about my experience - well, I am just a PADI diver, after all.
Later, the divemaster commented on how arrogant this man seemed, and said many UK divers were like this.
So I told him about BSAC divers and suggested that if ever he has a pair on the boat, he puts them together and spares everyone else!
I have been diving for six years with 252 dives. Living in Devon, I manage to dive every week all through the year, weather permitting. Generally my dives are between 30-55m.
There are many more and less experienced divers than me. However, this should not be important when diving on holiday, as surely we all should dive for enjoyment, not competition.
I am sure that all non-BSAC divers in the UK will have had similar experiences, certainly all I've talked to have. So I suggest they dive solo on holidays or in pairs to prevent others having to listen to them. Harsh but true!
D Ireland, Exeter
Comment: Talk about tarring everyone with the same brush! No doubt BSAC divers will have something to say about your comments...
It appears that it's OK for archaeology and commerce to get together and flout laws put in place to protect underwater heritage, but it's another matter for the rest of us.
What archaeologically important information would be gained from raising the American Confederate submarine Hunley, as seen in Mission to the Deep on ITV on 12 July?
I am neither prejudiced against archaeologists or Americans, but this is a classic case of double standards and hypocrisy from academics in the archaeological field who happen to be Americans.
I could be forgiven for thinking that the US diving fraternity is not educated to, or does not aspire to, the same standards as we Brits, because this did appear to be a commercial venture fronted by archaeologists.
It is already known what the Hunley looked like and how she was constructed.
We know about her propulsion method, the conditions in which her crew functioned and ultimately perished, and how her weapons worked and were deployed.
Her tragic mission attempts, the death of her inventor Horace Hunley, how she was recovered and went on to her demise when she engaged the USS Usatonic are also well-documented, as the programme showed.
The crew did not live aboard, so there will be few if any artefacts of archaeological significance onboard to justify raising the Hunley.
This is a war grave, so why was this status and the last resting place of the crew for 130 years not respected under international law?
The programme contained statements from Colin Martin of Britain's Archaeological Diving Unit. Was this an attempt to give it a modicum of respectability for viewers this side of the pond?
It was also stated that the venture to raise the Hunley cost hundreds of millions of pounds. In the end money talks, even where "respected archaeologists" are concerned.
As American professor George Bass says, commerce and archaeology have no place with each other. So where will the Hunley eventually be put on display to the public, and at what cost?
Alan Thorn
At Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia, sightings of whale sharks are as assured as it is possible to be with marine life in the wild.
I saved my money, made my plans and enjoyed stunning encounters with these beautiful creatures. I was full of admiration for the small local community, which has built a business around the whale sharks, humpbacked whales, mantas, dugongs and turtles in their location, making them accessible while still affording them maximum protection.
Then I learnt to my horror that this may soon come to an end. Developers want to build a huge resort right in the heart of the conservation area.
Plans for Mauds Landing were passed in 1896, long before the effects on the environment were understood, and are still the basis for the Coral Coast Resort, which looks to be going ahead.
The proposal is to build on a beach where loggerhead, green and hawksbill turtles nest, and the resort takes in seas in which mantas congregate and through which dugongs pass. We're talking small town here, not hotel complex.
More than 480 extra pleasure boats are expected to go out daily, many crossing the migratory routes of whale shark and humpbacked whales and powering over mantas, dugongs and turtles. Boat strikes, fishing, anchor damage and water pollution would all take their toll.
The small local community has little political voice. All divers with an interest in conservation should help to protect the area.
Log on to www.save-ningaloo.org for more information, and see what you can do to help.
Sue Earle, Exeter
Can anyone explain to me the logic behind sinking old ships to create "artificial" reefs? Seven-tenths of the planet's surface contains wonderful, naturally occurring reefs, yet we systematically destroy a unique environment with short-sighted fishing practices, pollution and the effects of global warming.
Instead to trying to replicate artificially something which nature is far better at creating, wouldn't it make more sense to direct our time, energy and money at trying to conserve the reefs that are already there?
Dale Deacon, Leeds BSAC
We have recently come across a landlady in Plymouth who, although some months ago willing to take reservations for members of our dive club to stay once a month until the end of October, has now turned out to be like so many others and simply after our money.
When the weather forecast on a Thursday predicted very bad weather, we decided to cancel our trip. We live in the Midlands so don't really want the journey and expense if we can't dive.
The landlady went into a major huff and cancelled all our future reservations, even though we gave more than our required cancellation time.
We feel very badly done by, and if anyone knows of good lodgings in Plymouth where we will be treated fairly, please share them.
David Tuckley, Telford
I wanted to shed some light on the letter from Graham Brock in June (One Out of Two Not Good Enough). He had to miss a boat dive because his assigned buddy had an ear problem.
I was on the same boat with my partner and coincidentally staying on the same campsite as Graham's unlucky buddy. Graham says he "held no grievance towards his buddy".
I ask, why not? The buddy had been suffering from a cold for two days before the day in question and was concerned about his ability to dive. Was the dive site the place to make this call?
Is the dive centre to be held accountable for the inconsiderate and irresponsible actions of divers with the "I've driven for 12 hours, I'm getting wet" attitude?
I have dived with this centre many times over two years, individually and in groups. When I visited it alone, the quality of service was second to none. If no buddy was available I was paired up with a divemaster or instructor from the centre.
If it is unaware of a problem, why should it be accountable? I am sure that if the diver with the problem had mentioned this at the centre, provision would have been made.
The dive that morning was OK, but conditions were not the best I have had in that bay. Better luck next time?
J Parker, Windermere
|
|
