To the management of Ginnie,
It seems that you have been unwittingly drawn into a situation that you'd prefer not to have. There is new exploration at Ginnie. The horse has bolted, and cannot easily be returned to the stable. This appears to worry you for two major reasons:
1) New damage caused by careless and inexperienced divers going beyond their limits;
2) Added danger (and possible liability) from divers going beyond their limits.
I would argue that there is only one way to solve this. By allowing and - importantly - monitoring divers' actions, and using peer information to determine whether this is being adhered to or not.
I, and people like me, do you the courtesy of letting you know when I do these dives. I have always been forthright and honest with Eric when entering the water, including giving him an expected exit time. If you choose to ban people like me, it will send a message to all others to hide their behaviour. They will sneak cylinders in one at a time... they will try to eke their cylinders out thereby putting themselves at greater danger... they will hide their scooters, thereby damaging whatever area they hide their scooters in. So I ask you, do you want this exploration to be done in a fashion where you are kept in the loop, or not? Because unfortunately, the faster you ban divers, the more mavericks you will attract to go back there.
Do you remember when Double Lines was being trashed by divers on scooters? Tht was cured through peer pressure and by pulling back some lines. I personally turned what used to be a T into a jump into the new passage, and made that jump around a corner, to help remind people that they are starting down a path that requires them to make some big decisions, and to scare off the merely inquisitive or the diver who had not sufficiently planned their dives. I personally pulled out the Marius Room plaque, a dangerous encouragement to inexperienced dives to do a goal-oriented dive for no good reason. I believe that these sorts of techniques will enhance safety. Something similar was sufficient to help prevent further damage in Double Lines.
I believe that ignoring, or even openly condemning, the practice of exploring new passage in Ginnie will be counter productive. I believe that forcing exploration underground will make divers conduct more risky dives. Ulitmately it will not reduce the level of exploration in Ginnie. It will simply make it more risky for the explorers. Whereas encouraging it will enhance diver safety and will help conservation by making the explorers more liable for their actions. it will also allow you the peace of mind of knowing what is happening in the caves.
I will be in Ginnie between 13 and 18 November. I would love to meet with you, and would be particularly happy if a representative from NACD and CDS were each present, so that we could discuss how to move forward in a rational, safe and conservative manner that meets the joint goals of exploration, safety, conservation and the inherent curiosity that is such a vital part of the human condition. I'd like to put forward the case for an intelligent, controlled approach to exploration that encourages honesty and compliance on the part of divers, and allows you to monitor the fashion in which this exploration takes place.
Yours sincerely,
Andrew Ainslie
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by bwyrwitzke
