DIT damages Cove 2 & causes entanglement incident.

[spatman]

I'm not so sure that would be a good idea given how ignorant media types are of diving. After all, they think we use "oxygen tanks". Also the general public, upon reading of this, aren't going to to know, or care about, the difference between commercial and recreational divers. There are already too many people in the area around the coves that resent divers, period, and I'm concerned that they will use something like this against ALL divers. It's already being handled through the proper channels, let's keep it at that.

all valid points, but this could also be used as a way to educate the media as well as the public in an attempt to change the current misconception of diving and divers.

just my opinion, of course.

[Cold_H2O]

I agree Cove #2 is not a good place for DIT to do their training.
Cove #1 is a much better choice.

Those guys don't dive ~ they lumber along the bottom.

Has anyone spoken directly to DIT?
I know much of the time the person leading the training selects where and when the "dives/training" takes place.
At least that is how it was a few years ago.. Instructor made all the plans.

They need to be aware of other divers in the water.
I think the folks running the school would love to know that their divers are being a danger to us rec divers.

I am sure a lawsuit is something they would work very hard to avoid.

Glad to hear you were safe inspite of everything.

[Sounder]

I agree Cove #2 is not a good place for DIT to do their training.
Cove #1 is a much better choice.

Those guys don't dive ~ they lumber along the bottom.

Has anyone spoken directly to DIT?
I know much of the time the person leading the training selects where and when the "dives/training" takes place.
At least that is how it was a few years ago.. Instructor made all the plans.

They need to be aware of other divers in the water.
I think the folks running the school would love to know that their divers are being a danger to us rec divers.

I am sure a lawsuit is something they would work very hard to avoid.

Glad to hear you were safe inspite of everything.

Well, yes - the City of Seattle has "spoken" with them (I think it was more of an ass chewing with possible fines) and hopefully soon DNR will also be "speaking" with them too.

As for a lawsuit - there weren't any physical damages sustained by me outside of emotional distress (something, however, that IS being considered). I bet there could be an argument made by DNR about distruction of their land though.

[Scubak]

Ya know this is a good thread...
Sorry about what happened to everyone but some of the comments are igonorant and just wasting air...
Please...
I'm beginning to wonder why I read this C@%p!!!
Kirsten

[Sounder]

Ya know this is a good thread...
Sorry about what happened to everyone but some of the comments are igonorant and just wasting air...
Please...
I'm beginning to wonder why I read this C@%p!!!
Kirsten

Would you please be more specific? I think this thread has been excellent. What was said that you consider ignorant and wasting air?

[Grateful Diver]

Ya know this is a good thread...
Sorry about what happened to everyone but some of the comments are igonorant and just wasting air...
Please...
I'm beginning to wonder why I read this C@%p!!!
Kirsten

Would you please be more specific? I think this thread has been excellent. What was said that you consider ignorant and wasting air?

I don't know what Kirstin's thought process is ... but mine's along the lines of handle it through channels (as you seem to be doing) and keep the media and public out of it.

There have been several attempts to close Cove 2 to all diving. Give the wrong people (with an agenda and the authority to do it) an excuse and they'll use it.

On a related topic, the water taxi has just had their season extended through the end of October. All they'll need to make a "safety" issue out of allowing ANY diving in the cove is to hear about divers in the forbidden zone and damage to the boundary line ... they don't make distinctions between commercial and recreational divers.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Sounder]

I agree with keeping the whoop-la out of it. This is why I went directly to the correct people to handle the situation and didn't do anything unproductive or outrageous.

The main reason I didn't go over to them that morning to yell, scream, and jump up and down, was because I didn't know what the deal was surrounding them being there. I didn't want to step on any politics I was unaware of because I know how important keeping the Cove available for diving is.

[coachrenz]

I won't pretend to speak for ScubaK but I would guess that comments about setting landmines, etc are what she was talking about.

I for one, disagree with most of the conversation.

It is a slippery slope determining who can and can't access a public dive site.

First, let's not let DIT dive Cove 2.

Next, let's not let non-DIR divers dive Cove 2.

Next, let's not let (fill in the blank) dive Cove 2.

If there are rules and regulations that they did not follow, then that is an issue. The idea that any one person or group owns a public dive site and has the "right" to decide who can and can't dive there is scary. It seems to me that Cove 2 is one of the sites in the area that seems to have been "claimed" by a group of people who think they have some sort of special right to the site. This thread is only one of many examples that have appeared on this board.

One could argue that classes of divers do as much destruction to the underwater environment and cause "white-out" situations as much as was described by this incident. What about all the line that has been laid by various groups. If I get entangled in that, what then? Do they have permission to lay that line? What is the difference? Rules are rules and should be followed by all.

It will be interesting to see if this group can handle a dissenting opinion. (I have my ideas about what the reaction will be - I guess I will find out shortly)

[Sounder]

First Tim, I personally welcome a dissenting opinion. That how we learn... if we all agreed and knew the same stuff, there'd be no reason for the board.

I think the sticks in the mud and landmines was humor. Certainly they were not being serious.

Regarding OW students and DIT. OW students do disturb the bottom, period. However, I have been part of classes in, and at other times witnessed Cove 2 while there were MANY OW classes being conducted. The damage to the Cove and the diving conditions are ABSOLUTELY NOTHING compared to what it was like when DIT was there. Additionally, OW classes aren't entangling others in their ropes and hoses creating a hazard. There MIGHT be an argument to be made here, but in my opinion after seeing the difference first hand between DIT and OW classes, it is not a strong one.

Only the City of Seattle and WA DNR have the right to say who can and can't be there. Interestingly enough, the City of Seattle has now notified Harbor Patrol that DIT is NOT to be Cove 2 (don't know about the other Coves), and Harbor Patrol will now be more vigilant checking DIT's permits. I made an earlier statement about ethics versus violations... ethically I believe OW classes should be in Cove 1 or 3 anyway. Legally, anyone who is teaching there (operating a business) is required to have a permit (which is included for businesses hanging their license in the City of Seattle). Trouble is, DIT requested and was granted a permit for another location, chose not to obtain it due to the cost, and then proceeded to conduct their training ANYWAY in a known recreational diving park, completely disregarding the laws they CLEARLY KNEW they were to follow.

No group (dive club, DIR or non-DIR group, shop, or otherwise) can or should try to claim ownership of the Cove. It seems you and I share concerns with the APLP project. I agree, rules are rules... for everyone. I bet if someone got tangled in the APLP line and called the city, they'd be hearing from the City as well. The reason THIS situation is different than others, is that I personally blew the whistle following a dangerous encounter in hazardous conditions. Additionally, I thought very seriously twice about creating a hazardous condition for a DIT student to save myself in an emergency... and I would have been 110% justified had I done so.

So whether we're at a stale mate or are in agreement, I think your opinion is as welcome here as anyone elses. I enjoy NWDC for this reason and we all work to keep it that way.

In other news - have you or any of the AATers been able to get to the Honey Bear to check on my Ciona suspects?

[CaptnJack]

WFT is up with the DIR comments? Why is that getting dragged into this?

Seattle Park facilties are not allowed to be used for commercial purposes without a permit, e.g. I had to get a permit to use the Aquarium for a party. DIT had no permit to use Seacrest and should not have been there. They should be punished appropriately for their misdemeanor.

End of story.

[Sounder]

I think the DIR comment came from the APLP stuff and the fact that there are many people who have reported upsetting interactions with the 5thD crowd as they're doing their APLP stuff.

For anyone who isn't familiar with it, DIR is simply a philosophy. Not all DIR divers in this area come from one shop or carry the attitude that has been associated with "all DIR divers" by many non-DIR divers.

That's the extent of the DIR in this discussion. Let's stay away from finger pointing of "who thinks they own the Cove." That's not the discussion I'm trying to have. Clearly, none of us do but we're all equally privledged to be given permission to enjoy it, no matter what philosophy one subscribes to.

[Jeff Kruse]

Damn DIR! It's the rout of all evil!

[Zen Diver]

And before anyone else gets upset, I'm pretty sure Jeff is Kidding!

Now back to your regularly scheduled discussions...

-Valerie

[peo]

I think the DIR comment came from the APLP stuff and the fact that there are many people who have reported upsetting interactions with the 5thD crowd as they're doing their APLP stuff.

Sounder and everyone else,

If you see or hear of any upsetting interaction with the "5thD crowd" or the "APLP" stuff, I'd sure like to hear about it (not that I'm the "project manager" or employed by 5thD, but I personally make a point about trying to break the silos that our community has ended up in). Please PM me.

[Jeff Kruse]

Yes I am kidding. I havent figured out the correct emoticons to use.

[coachrenz]

I have nothing against the DIR community. If you read my post carefully, you will see that I am referring to the slippery slope of banning certain parts of our community from public access.

I very easily could have said: Let's not let divers with yellow hoses dive at Cove 2.

It does seem to me, and I will admit that I have less than 10 dives at Cove 2 - I just don't find it an interesting site and often feel like an intruder when I am there, that those who seem to have claimed the site as their own seem to all belong to the DIR community.

I know and respect some DIR divers and would not ever lump an entire group under one umbrella. That just isn't me.

[enchantmentdivi]

Legally, anyone who is teaching there (operating a business) is required to have a permit (which is included for businesses hanging their license in the City of Seattle).

Really? Wow, we sure have a lot of shops violating that with the amount of OW classes down there on any given weekend. I would bet that most, if not all, of them do not have a permit. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[gcbryan]

I have nothing against the DIR community. If you read my post carefully, you will see that I am referring to the slippery slope of banning certain parts of our community from public access.

I very easily could have said: Let's not let divers with yellow hoses dive at Cove 2.

It does seem to me, and I will admit that I have less than 10 dives at Cove 2 - I just don't find it an interesting site and often feel like an intruder when I am there, that those who seem to have claimed the site as their own seem to all belong to the DIR community.

I know and respect some DIR divers and would not ever lump an entire group under one umbrella. That just isn't me.

I think whether one picks Cove 2 or Redondo for frequent night dives has more to do with where one lives and therefore which is more convenient.

If you dive at either site frequently you will see a lot but at first glance both sites are boring. Regarding one group owning the place...I think that since at certain times of the year the parking lot at Cove 2 gets quite crowded whatever group is the "other" group whether it's the fishermen or other divers it can seem that they are trying to take over. Redondo just happens to have a larger parking area.

If I'm at Cove 2 and any other group shows up whether they are arrogant, unfriendly, stupid, (insert adjective) then I just don't interact with them and it's no problem. There is no group there in my experience that actively bothers anyone else. So far at least I haven't heard of cars being broken into which was the case at least for a while at Redondo

[airsix]

I can understand the desire for a serious discussion, but I also try to remember that we are suppose to be a group of friends here. This isn't the British House of Commons (my custom wig comment in the wrist-seal thread not-withstanding), and I think we ought to tolerate (and welcome) a little levity. Within reason, of course.

With regard to "groups taking control" of a resource... well it's the natural order of things. If something valuable is left out in the open, interested parties will always step forward to claim it or attempt to exercise control of it. Doesn't matter if it's oil, timber, water, bison, school-yard shade-tree, or Cove2. It is a fundamentally flawed view of the world to assume that a valuable resource can be both unmanaged and without conflict. Rather than pine for such idealism, I'd much prefer that whomever exercises control or influence does so as a "good steward" with the community's interests in mind (rather than just their own). We can't always rely on a municipality to do this, or rather we can't always rely on a municipality to do this without our help (i.e. someone has to educate and inform them).

-Ben

[Grateful Diver]

It does seem to me, and I will admit that I have less than 10 dives at Cove 2 - I just don't find it an interesting site and often feel like an intruder when I am there, that those who seem to have claimed the site as their own seem to all belong to the DIR community.

That is pure, unadulterated horse-pucky.

I've got over 500 dives in that cove ... maybe a lot over that. I've been involved in tons of group activities there ... and the vast majority were completely unrelated to DIR.

The closest I've ever seen anyone come to "laying claim" to Cove 2 was the Marker Buoys Dive Club ... primarily due to their heavy involvement in keeping it open to the community back when there was an attempt by the City to close it to diving, and partly because the guy running the club at the time had a pretty emotional attachment to seeing the club get credit for all their hard work. Rightfully so, to my concern.

The DIR people who use Cove 2 are a tiny minority of the divers who use it on a regular basis. Most of the major dive clubs ... and many of the local dive shops ... have been doing weekly dives there for years. And most of them have no involvement in DIR whatsoever.

By all means, stay away from the place if you find it boring. I find it a fascinating place to dive. I've taken hundreds of pictures there ... including several that have won awards at local photo contests.

I know and respect some DIR divers and would not ever lump an entire group under one umbrella. That just isn't me.

With all due respect, you just did.

FWIW - these are completely different issues.

The APLP line is, for the most part, at depths and in places that recreational divers simply don't go. It's a project being conducted by, and for, people who are doing it strictly for recreational purposes. There's no money or commercial value in it whatsoever.

On the other hand, DIT is a commercial enterprise ... conducting this training for a profit. Unlike the dive instructors who use the park regularly, they are required to have a permit ... which they didn't get. Unlike the OW classes ... which admittedly silt up the place ... the DIT divers are dragging heavy lines and gear across structure, damaging habitat and killing marine life that will take a long time to grow back. Unlike the classes, they were conducting their business in a zone which is clearly marked off-limits to divers. Furthermore, they damaged the line that was placed down there ... WITH PERMISSION AND ASSISTANCE FROM THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPT ... to demark that off-limits zone, creating a potential hazard for recreational diving activity.

DIT's activities may have the adverse effect of providing fuel for those who want the cove closed to all diving activities.

The APLP, on the other hand, is completely invisible to those people ... and to about 95% of all the divers who use the cove. There is no basis for even bringing them into this discussion ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Sounder]

Legally, anyone who is teaching there (operating a business) is required to have a permit (which is included for businesses hanging their license in the City of Seattle).

Really? Wow, we sure have a lot of shops violating that with the amount of OW classes down there on any given weekend. I would bet that most, if not all, of them do not have a permit. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Yup. You got it. Any instructor holding a formal class is technically required to have a permit to do so there. Trouble is, enforcement would cost more money than it'd be worth. What happened here is that someone (me) called and complained about a personal concern with the hazard they created and the destruction they were doing. Squeaky wheel got the grease on this one.

Peo - I had something written here, but decided to PM you with it. Let's not turn this into a 5thD or DIR pro/against thread. You're right. If you'd like to hear good or bad things about 5thD, SCRET, and DIR impressions, a PM is the proper place for that.

[Huskychemist]

I've taken hundreds of pictures there ... including several that have won awards at local photo contests.

The APLP, on the other hand, is completely invisible to those people ... and to about 95% of all the divers who use the cove. There is no basis for even bringing them into this discussion ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

FWIW, Tim didn't bring APLP into the discussion. Others did.

So there you go. Tim brings up a dissenting opinion, the OP responds thoughtfully...and it goes downhill from there.


And I thought size didn't matter...but I guess in this case, it does. (Size of the parking lot, that is...) Interesting point about the parking lot dictating things.

[Grateful Diver]

FWIW, Tim didn't bring APLP into the discussion. Others did.

You're right ... here's what he said ...

It does seem to me, and I will admit that I have less than 10 dives at Cove 2 - I just don't find it an interesting site and often feel like an intruder when I am there, that those who seem to have claimed the site as their own seem to all belong to the DIR community.

And the problem with this statement is that it has no basis in fact. But because Tim has some credibility on other matters, people will accept it as fact and repeat it to others.

If we want to start naming shops, let's start with Underwater Sports. They conduct several classes a month at that site ... usually very large ones. I've been there when between the Seattle, Kirkland, Bellevue and Edmonds stores they'll have four or five classes going on at the same time ... when they've had three or four canopies set up in the grass ... when they literally take up every square foot of the sea wall, and major portions of the sidewalk, to set up gear ... when their instructors tie up their dive buoys to the boundary rope, even though they've been asked several times not to. So if any shop should be blamed for "claiming the site" let's start with the one that uses it the most.

So there you go. Tim brings up a dissenting opinion, the OP responds thoughtfully...and it goes downhill from there.

Dissenting opinions are fine ... for what it's worth, I agree with the premise that we have to be very careful when we start determining who should be included and excluded from a given dive site. But that determination should be based on appropriateness and safety considerations ... not what "group" you belong to.

Had his statement stopped without naming a group that had nothing to do with the incident being discussed, I would not have even bothered responding. So if this discusion went downhill, it's because ... after expressing a legitimate point of view ... Tim decided to push it downhill.

This discussion should not be used as an excuse to start making accusations against a group that had nothing to do with what happened.

This discussion was about DIT ... not DIR.

And I thought size didn't matter...but I guess in this case, it does. (Size of the parking lot, that is...) Interesting point about the parking lot dictating things.

Facts matter ... as for the parking situation, that brings several competing sets of users into the discussion ... all of whom would like to see the others excluded from using the site out of pure self-interest.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Huskychemist]

FWIW, Tim didn't bring APLP into the discussion. Others did.

You're right ... here's what he said ...

It does seem to me, and I will admit that I have less than 10 dives at Cove 2 - I just don't find it an interesting site and often feel like an intruder when I am there, that those who seem to have claimed the site as their own seem to all belong to the DIR community.

And the problem with this statement is that it has no basis in fact. But because Tim has some credibility on other matters, people will accept it as fact and repeat it to others.

Dissenting opinions are fine ... for what it's worth, I agree with the premise that we have to be very careful when we start determining who should be included and excluded from a given dive site. But that determination should be based on appropriateness and safety considerations ... not what "group" you belong to.

But are dissenting opinions fine?

To quote Tim... "It does not SEEM to me..." (Opinion) "...often FEEL like an intruder..." (Opinion) "...those who SEEM to have claimed..." (Opinion)

I see his statement as his OPINION. And in this case, it's opinion based on perceptions gained from a few visits, not the 500+ dives that you have. I made a few visits with him, and recall meeting Gray on one visit and havnig some great conversation about Cove2. My second dive ever there was with a DIR diver that was a great tour guide and mentor. But perceptions are perceptions, and nothing more.

Rest of post edited...

[mattwave]

(i.e. someone has to educate and inform them).

-Ben

most productive comment on this page IMHO.

let's gather together a petition, get everyone to sign it and send it to DIT asking them to train where their impact is less relevent to the local dive community.

on another note, poor DIR's, they always get dragged in to these forum fires.