Taking a balanced view on cruise berthing
ACT writes: There is an element of sensationalism creeping into the public debate on the cruise berthing facility. But this initiative is too important to debate on pure emotions. The Association for the Advancement of Cruise Tourism in the Cayman Islands (ACT) believes that there are a number of salient facts that everyone in the community should bear in mind when considering this project given its magnitude and importance to Cayman (regardless of your views on its implications).
One of the first myths that must be disbanded is that cruise berthing facilities are in the interest of solely a few George Town retailers. This could not be further from the truth. Indeed, the duty free retailers being referred to typically have store locations far beyond downtown George Town. Their businesses also operate in Seven Mile Beach, the airport, even Cayman Brac, for example. The group of persons and small businesses to benefit from the proposed improvement to our port infrastructure includes taxi drivers, watersports operators, tours operators, restaurants, land and water-based attractions, and countless small businesses who depend on the weekly influx of cruise passengers to earn their keep or maintain their jobs.
The other myth that has grown considerably in its exposure since the launch of the draft EIA report is the idea that there is 15 acres of live coral being damaged in the process. But many who know our waters well can confidently say this is visibly less than 15 acres of live coral and that a large portion of the area being described by opponents of the project as 15 acres of live coral is what is known as ‘hard pan’. Until a full underwater survey is completed we cannot say with any accuracy how much live coral is within this area.
There is also a misconception among some, though thankfully we don’t believe many, that those who benefit from our cruise industry would wish to see a new port created at the expense of material harm to our environment. This could also not be further from the truth. The ACT recognizes that indeed our natural environment is one of the Cayman Islands strengths and it would be economic suicide to destroy that advantage by causing material damage to our natural environment.
Instead we believe a credible approach is to establish mitigation measures that cause the least harm to our environment while putting in place a berthing facility to enhance our cruise tourism product. It is clear the EIA report did not have a terms of reference to thoroughly examine mitigation measures so naturally it focused primarily on the risks that the project poses. We accept that there may be risks associated with this project. And we believe it is our duty to now thoroughly examine how those risks can be avoided, mitigated and offset so that we can move forward with a plan that benefits our economy while preserving what is important to us all, our natural environment.
The Cayman Islands, while developing from just over 12,000 in population to a workforce that is now more than that at around 30,000, has been striking this very same balance on land for years. In recent years the Government has started to put a more effective formal regime to protect our environment and this is very welcomed.
Finally, it must be noted that enhancing our cruise tourism product does not go hand in hand with damaging our air arrivals tourism business. In fact in many jurisdictions a percentage of air arrival passengers first discovered the destination via a cruise before taking the decision to become air arrival tourist. We certainly have evidence that this is also the case in the Cayman Islands.
Determining the way forward should not be a simple case of rejecting the project because risks were identified. The purpose of identifying the risks is presumably so we can now examine if they can be avoided, mitigated or offset and if so what needs to be done so that we can achieve our economic and environmental objectives. Pitting one against the other we believe is the wrong approach.
Robert Hamaty
Ronnie Anglin
Chris Kirkconnell
For and on behalf of the board of directors of ACT
Category: development, Local News, Viewpoint
Hahahahaha Balanced view…. Hahahahaha
How can things be balanced.
I see the name Moses KIRKCONNEL deputy premier
Gerry Kirkconnel port authority and Chris Kirkconnel ACT I think if there are family interests then the deputy premier can take no part in this major decision
1. I don’t agree Cathy and really ,speaking about cruise people,ships,businesses in general you don’t know what you are talking about.
2. The new dock will create more jobs in Duty free stores as Mr. Kirkconnell says, The taxis, tour Busses, and stingray boats have been increasing since cruise numbers have been going up. But of course how would you or any of your cronies know? Did you ask anybody at the port? Did you go down there and look at the massive amount of Caymanians working? No
3. We are on a mountain. Sand is constantly FALLING off the drop off ( gravity) . Its different in those other islands. As soon as we get a Northwester it stirs the sand up like a huge milkshake then we get crystal clear water like we have done for thousands of years.Therefore no sand or silt. In fact if you ever dove on Balboa and went out to the deep you would know that there is a sand chute as you go deeper. Why don’t you video that and prove me wrong?
4.Can you tell me what is the maximum amount of people for sunset house bar or their dive boats? Ha, I dying to hear that answer. Most people will remember the amount of cars parked out on the street.
5. There are 2 stingray city one for divers and the other for everyone else. How many are too many for the divers side? We can move 3000 people all day long . Every 45 minutes . We got lots of space they’re just standing up. 15 boats every 45 mins and they are all Caymanian.
6. Land and tender facilities have been promised for 30 years. No shade for rain or sun. Just recently some tents. Every time a political group win they party and pass the champagne . then again no dock.
6.This is not our first dredging in Cayman we’ve got lots of projects here in Cayman. Especially in the North Sound ,Kaibo, Rackleys canal,Harbour House marina, Prospect Park, Omega Properties, Red Bay, Patrick’s Island, Grand Harbour, Scott’s GT Barcadere, Snug Harbour, Canal Point, Governor’s Harbour, Yacht Club, Salt Creek, Morgan’s Harbour Plus The Shores. All of these developments were told the same crap you’re going to destroy the environment. Well where is it?
But lets play the DEVIL’S advocate if the sand on west Bay beach had not returned ….wait for it………….hold on Cath…….Would it be okay to dredge it from the sea??????
7.Cathy you don’t have to move your store front …..I got an idea lets get foots to put some statues under the sea right off of Sunset House. They can be some sea dwarfs repairing the reef maybe a little boat close by where they come from. Because there really ain’t that much live coral there now. It would spruce up the place . Small cost and a new interesting dive site. Really think about it.
Maybe one of your Caymanian staff could help. By the way I am not a member of ACT. Would love to join them or sit on a panel. I’m a retired Dive Instructor .I have worked on bulldozers,dump trucks, drag line and DREDGE. I have worked as a Divemaster with Casa Bertmar,Sunset house,RonKipps bob Soto and Peter Milburn and have no hate for anyone. Just want to speak the truth.
David Miller sr.
David,
1.I have not only read the entire EIA, all 380 pages of it, but I have also studied the future of the cruise business. Did you know that of all of the 23 new cruise liners being built between now and through 2017, 21 of them are small ships that are easily tendered? We already get up to seven ships a day now. How many more do you want?
2. Regarding jobs: You are leaving out the lost business when we no longer have a lovely clear harbour to sell to people. You are leaving out the loss of business to all of the merchants who sell a view of the underwater scenery in the harbour area. Can you imagine being in the Atlantis submarine and only being able to see a few yards away? How about the glass bottom boat looking down into a murky water column. How many taxis bring business to me to take them diving at Sunset House? I am also a jobs provider. every single company on the island is a jobs provider. the new big hotel, the huge Caymana bay project, the big hospital. When will this tiny community say that we have enough permit holders now. If taxis are the issue, make sure that ONLY Caymanians drive commercial vehicles.
If the water stays silted up, we will lose too many customers who can go elsewhere for clear water.
3. Although the EIA used sand as a measure for the settling of silt, it is clearly erroneous, as even they admitted. Silt, as I am sure you can imagine, takes much longer to settle. Like milk, it remains in suspension for a very, very long time. Also, as I noticed each time the cruise liners in places like Charlotte Amalia harbour move, their propellors, thrusters and the tug really stir it up. The EIA documents that clearly. Have you read it? I will get you the page number if you want it. It also mentions that the silt will be even worse when they blow out the dredge pits under the boats.
4. I have no idea what the point is in your comment except to agree with me that a LOT of people enjoy the bar and the diving, and their cars pack the streets, but that will end if the Hotel has to close.
5. I believe that there are regulations on how much we can feed the stingrays. I do not remember off hand what the numbers are so I need to check that fact and see how many people a day the site can support.
6. Improving the land side area for the departing tourists should have been done a decade ago, and it should be done now. The tenders can be improved to better accommodate things like wheel chairs, and the secure area can be enlarged to allow faster processing of the cruise tourists back to their boat. Less time in line is more time to shop. And faster on and off encourages them to travel further from their ships. There are indeed many wonderful ways to improve our cruise ship tourism without ripping out the very thing we are selling to them — lovely clean water to look at.
6. We are not fanatics — of course there are times when the advantages of dredging outweigh the disadvantages. But this is not one of them. This time the cost is very high. The site is a prime area that the CI DOT has developed in its decades of expensive branding of our tourism product. Although, it is interesting to note, that when I want to bring my boat into one of only three wobbly wooden docks averrable for dive boats, it is way too shallow for me. We asked long ago if we could hand move some of the rocks, and allow it to be a little deeper, but oh, no, that was turned down. Talk about bias.
7. Now who is talking out of the side of their mouth. The corals in front of Sunset House and sponges on the Nicholson, and the eels, and the turtles, and even a manta ray are all incredible. Do you think we would be full of divers if the diving sucked. Now it is you who are making up things and talking with out knowing the truth. I took several photos for Destination magazine and for Explore Cayman just last month that are among the prettiest I have ever taken. But we did not use those in our arguments because some of the coral may well survive. it is the visibility that is at stake. People do not want to shore dive when they cannot see very far. It is dangerous and divers can easily get lost. It is no fun. Do you dive? If not, that is a shame, as diving is the most amazing experience — you can float among the fish, look at the strangest life forms on earth and come back with a myriad of new experiences from every dive. I have dived off Sunset many hundreds of times and I still find a surprise or something I have never seen before on a regular basis.
Just because this area is out of sight to most Caymanians, does not mean it is worthless. It is a valuable resource that belongs to every next generation and they deserve to be able to enjoy it all.
I hope that that was not too emotional for you. Stick to the facts. Read the EIA, which by the way, concludes that they do not recommend this project. And where are we going to get the 200 million dollars. Think of the jobs you could just create by inventing work with that money and not wreck anything. And if you think the job will come in on budget, just go look at that high school. And that is a much easier project than a weather prone, big machine project. Can you envision 366 pilings 120 feet high, one yard across being pounded into the bottom for several months? How many restaurants can survive the loss of business on the water front? How much trickle down money will be lost. Actually that number is in the EIA. I should look that up, too, but I will leave that for you to research.
Dear Mrs. Church. You are so misinformed and are drinking the Koolaid of narrow minded people with tunnel vision who just do not get it. For instance the EIA is not 380 pages it is actually 2400 pages comprising of two volumes 4″ thick. You have only read 15% of the EIA and have formed an opinion based on a 15% of your misinterpretation of the EIA. You are a photographer who is trying to be a scientist and engineer and who does not understand what you are reading based on all the misconceptions you have determined resulting in the position you have taken on this matter. Open your mind and you may learn so much in this life.
http://www.planning.gov.ky/HTML_BODY/PD/PD_Library/Policy_Drafts/FINAL_NTMP_2009_2013_-_09-04-2009.pdf Chapter 7
I have been visiting Grand Cayman for many years as a stay over guest. My first vacation here was in 1970. My family was trained to dive by Bob Sotto, an amazing man who was likely mortified by the idea of killing vast amounts of live coral to build a dock for cruise ships. This would definitely be a very very sad day for Grand Cayman. We can begin calling the island Nassau Junior. Why can’t someone with a head on their shoulders come up with a better plan for existing tenders? Cayman’s tourism and most importantly, the stay over guests will continue to boost the economy on the island for years to come. I don’t believe for one minute that this dock needs to be built for tourism to grow. But I know for certain, this project will kill coral reef. No argument here. Government support of reef destruction will cause Cayman Islands to be viewed negatively on the world stage and a LESS desirable place to visit. In this age of awareness for environmental protection for our future generations, this concept is down right embarrassing and disgusting. I pray it never happens.
Using the existing tenders is not expensive enough.
To Anonymous at 10:35 ” As the cruise ships go elsewhere, our air arrivals will decline also”. I don’t see how you draw the connection. The former is a captive tourist on a cruise line that tells them when to disembark and when they have to return. Air tourists choose the duration of their stay. For myself, it’s been two weeks, either consecutive or spread over to two trips per year.
The biggest fear is from past experience, dredging can go horribly wrong and the results cannot be reversed. George Town and Grand Cayman are not dying because of declining tourism dollars. We are talking about a future delta improvement and support for monster cruise line ships.This needs to be weight against the lost of air arrivals because of reduced dive sites.
As a piece of driftwood a couple of points.
1 George Town can just about cope with two cruise ships at one time when there are three it is chaos and four the place grinds to a halt. The island has no infrastructure to cope with more cruise ship passengers at one time.
2. The tender companies probably employ more caymanians than most what happens when they lose there jobs.
3. Regenerate GT build a state of the art docking facility and buy 1st class tenders make that part of the Cayman experience and save millions
Completely idiotic idea from tropical oceans like Grand Cayman. This system belongs in rivers, and sounds like in the pictures shown where wave heights are minimal. NOT in oceans with Norwesters and Hurricanes.
I can believe this was actually seriously entertained for GC. This idea is obviously moronic to the even to the brain dead.
Kindly proofread before posting. Thanks
Are you sure about this theory? I just read on the internet that a 2000 passenger is being relocated from the Mediterranean to home port in Havana this winter, which is a first. This ship will run 7 day cruises and its itinerary is Havana, Montego Bay Jamaica, George Town Grand Cayman, Cancun Mexico, Havana Cuba.
It will have 90% European cruisers so perhaps it will be a exposure boom to Cayman for European affluent Tourists, if there is any truth to the claim that cruse visitors return as stay over tourists.
Any cruise visiting a port on the south side or the north side of Cuba, through the Caribbean will have to pass in the vicinity of the Cayman Islands, so stopping here as another country on their itinerary will be a no brainer.
Much of this discussion may become irrelevant not if, but when, the US lifts the restrictions on US travel to Cuba. The big step shortly is the opening of mutual embassies in Washington and Havana. Embassies provide the official means for discussing reciprocal Trade issues, Financial Aid packages, etc. but, very importantly, they are meant to provide assistance and/or protection, in a foreign country, for citizens of the country they represent. America is not going to open a Havana embassy just so that a Spanish speaking diplomat can sit on his fanny in the Caribbean sunshine, smoking Cuban cigars, and tossing down a few mojitos, or Cuba libres. They must be anticipating that sooner rather than later, the embassy will serve a real purpose, and one of those jobs will relate to American tourists. CIG should be looking at the 2015 figures for tourism and foreign investment growth in Cuba – some of the figures are astonishing. If the flood gates open, the impact on Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman, Jamaica in terms of cruise ship and stay over tourists could be dramatic for several years – could we survive such a potential drop. We ignore the likely resurgence of Cuba at our peril.
I thought I read that ACT was defunct and no longer a proper legal entity. Surely you boys are pulling the wool over our eyes with this as well?
I do not understand why anyone would think that a cruise passenger would rather walk ¼ mile on a hot concrete dock, in the hot sun, than take a ¼ mile trip to shore on a first class tender; after all they are already showing their preference for the ocean by taking a cruise. The studies also show that there is NO economy of time for disembarkation from berths versus tendering.
I also agree that we need to upgrade the tendering services provided, however, I cannot fault the tendering providers for being reluctant to invest the millions of dollars to replace their current fleet with purpose built boats, when Government after Government keep threatening to make them obsolete by building a dock.
A first class tendering service should encompass; larger more stable, three hulled platforms, similar to ferries used in the English Channel and in Australia, that are two tiered, built to the specifications of the disembarkation ports which are standard on Cruise ships.
It is a myth that tenders cannot service the new mega ships; their disembarkation is done at the same height as other cruise ships, hence the reason they both would be able to use the same dock, were we to build one. These tenders should be enclosed, air conditioned and have seating similar to an airplane or bus and have wheelchair access onto the tender as well as onto and exit from the tender dock.
Some people have questioned the safety of tendering; having been the only game in town for over 40 years and transporting millions of cruise passengers, I do not remember one single accident involving bodily harm to a cruise ship passenger, nor do I remember a tender floundering while in service. This fact speaks for itself. Tenders operating from the leeward side of a cruise ship are protected from any wave action and the ships themselves, properly ballasted, are usually not affected by the waves.
The system we now employ of anchoring, allows any cruise line that may have had to bypass a destination on their itinerary, to apply to the Cayman Islands Government to add George Town as a makeup destination for their passengers, the only limiting factor would be if George Town anchorage is already subscribed to capacity for that day. Any ship returning to a Florida home port, through the Yucatan Channel, has to pass the vicinity of Grand Cayman, in order to get around Cuba.
Government needs to concentrate its efforts into making the embarkation onto shore consistently pleasant. This includes building proper tender landings, these landings needs to be bulk headed with groins to protect from waves, with a sea entrance and an sea exit. The shoreside structures should be two tiered, with elevators to accommodate wheelchair access and escalators to speed unloading, air conditioned, and covered to the exit onto Harbor Drive.
Government should build three of these purpose designed landing sites, one in George Town, One in West Bay and one in Spotts. The reasons for these are that passengers wishing to shop in George Town could tender to there as they now do, passengers wishing to do the tours of Boatswains Beach, Stingray City, and the Dolphin Discovery as well as restaurants in that area could tender much closer to their destination; the one in Spotts has already proven its viability when the weather is rough and taxies and buses get the extra business. The cruise passengers who are booked to spend in West Bay and the Eastern districts can avoid adding to the congestion in George Town altogether, making the shopping experience for those who choose to shop in George Town much more pleasant. It would also eliminate half of the taxi/tour haggling that goes on along Harbor Drive.
The biggest argument for building tender landing facilities versus building a cruise berth dock is the economics of it. Three such tender landing facilities would easily cost less than $75 million versus $250M to $300M for the dock. But this is by no means the only consideration in its favor. Others benefits include:
NO dredging anywhere, all three areas have adequate depth to accommodate larger more stable tenders.
Moving some of the pedestrian congestion from the hub in George Town and spreading the economic benefit to more of the Caymanian population, in other districts.
No need for additional road infrastructure.
We could cater to all sized ships, no matter what the weather is doing.
The negatives include:
Walk off walk on cruise passengers generally avail themselves to free entertainment, food and drinks, available onboard instead of buying lunch on shore.
The bulk of the investment responsibility lies with the private sector individuals, who already benefit from the lucrative tendering service, in the form of upgrades to their fleet, however, they would have the option of selling the old fleet to stingray city tour operators.
Cruise Ship anchors occasionally damage coral reefs in George Town and this a big concern. However, Government could reduce this to near zero by enacting legislation that is clear, for cruise lines and pilots, requiring them to carry adequate insurance to cover such occurrences. This legislation would have to include fines in the millions of dollars and be clear as to when the ship is under the command of the pilot and when it is the control of the cruise lines. Anchor areas could be defined on GPS, away from the reefs. Everyone would be much more careful not to damage our reefs then.
As there are already more than enough jobs available in Cayman so that all Caymanians who want a job can get one, the 1,000 jobs would only equate to 1,000 more work permits. Good for Government but not good for Cayman society as a whole.
None of these economic and environmental negatives come close to the enviornmental damage that will be done, if we go ahead with planned cruise docks. Besides the silt damage created in building the dock, everyone knows that much of this silt will settle back into the areas dredged and be churned up every time a cruise ship enters of leaves the cruise dock.
Government could also mitigate some of the negative impact to the private sector providers, by assisting to source financing, from the banking sector, for upgrading the tenders, while mandating that this upgrade has to take place in a timely manner or that market be opened up to other bidders who are capable and willing to compete.
I do not work in the tendering industry, the cruise industry, duty free industry nor the dive industry, so I am not conflicted either way, I am just trying to put forward a more common sense solution to the perceived hypothesis that we NEED more cruise ship tourism, for the Cayman Islands.
It’s less about the boat ride more about the waking 2-3 hrs in the sun trying to get back on them.
It’s not about being physically possible to tender the oasis it’s a matter of royal Caribbean deciding it is not a positive guest experience to render 6000 passengers (as evidenced by the fact that the 2 oasis class pass by cayman every week)
Ships will still be allowed to anchor if they want
As far as the economics of tender vs berth it more comes down to if you don’t have a berth the ships are going to stop coming anyway so it’s berthing or just create a cargo dock instead
Walk on walk off- you either have to keep your original argument that tender rate is the same as berthing or this one and admit that berthing is much faster to avoid sounding silly
You put multi million fines for damaging coral and you guarantee ships stop immediately
Go talk to the caymanians that are hurting. Most business owners are getting calls from those in need of money and jobs trust me
There were a couple comments in there that aren’t really worth answering and I’ll go ahead and just accept you certification that you are not conflicted.
Anon 10:31, You do realize that one more cruise ship at anchor each day for the days they now stop will equate to the same increase in numbers that 2 Oasis class ships stopping here once per week, do you not? If you want to get even more cruise visitors than offered by the Mega Oasis ships, lobby Government to promote Cayman as an ideal destination for the size that now stop and we have much more bang for the buck.
My idea also has the added advantage of reducing the strain on our infrastructure by spreading it out over several days and more than one district…………much better than dumping two Mega Oasis Class ships onto Harbor Drive on one day of the week……….or will the nest request for my money be to expand Harbor Drive and installing overpasses straight into the duty free stores across the street?
“If we do not build the Mega dock, cruise ships will stop coming anyway”?……..come on man…………think! Someone’s scare tactics have you seeing gloom and doom.
My post addressed the “waiting in the hot sun for 3-4 hours”, with multiple, air-conditioned tender landings with exit seating. We just need to schedule the return trips after 2:00pm so at least some of them will buy lunch ashore.
Perhaps the professionals who did the study are silly, however they ALL say that a dock is NO faster than tendering……….the bottleneck is caused by the entry and exit security processing on the cruise ship, not the capacity of the dock nor the tenders…………who looks silly now?
If the cruise ships anchor in GPS defined anchor-down spots, mandated by legislation, there will be NO coral damage that cruise lines would be subject to “fines in the $millions” for. Why would the ships stop coming “immediately” again?
Don’t speak so frivolously of the cargo dock now. If you crowd out the cargo dock with this Megs Cruise Dock, how will you import all the goodies that you intend to sell to all those extra visitors?……..think!
A far bigger concern of mine is, we will soon see a decline in cruise visitors, just like we have seen in stay over visitors, because of overcrowding in George Town. There is a saturation point for every tourist destination, I just do not want the country $200m to $300M further in debt when we hit that point.
Perhaps, being retired, after 28+years in hotel and condo management does make me conflicted. I am conflicted in that I want to see a cheaper solution that makes the duty free people and the divers happy! You really do not know it all, you know!
Very well made points. Thank you for sharing this!
@Chris, doing what? On the odd occasion I’ve dropped into your GT and Strand locations the staff all seemed to be ex-pats.
Accounting department, it dept, logistics, customs/clearing, warehouses, Admin, exec team, marketing, buying team, data entry, customer service, after sales (jewelry and watch repair), maintenance, property management, purchasing…..
most of the store managers are Caymanians. We do have a larger % of work permits as sales associates than in the offices but it isn’t because we dont try to hire every caymanian we can. It is hard to compete with bank and finance industry office jobs as our stores are open 6 days a week vs 5, stores are open most public holidays especially in high season, commission while it is lucrative can be a turn off for those who want a steady pay check as you make a lot more in high season than low season. Happy to answer any other questions.
Chris, Thank you for joining the conversation. We need to hear from you on all of this. What type of jobs do you think the cruise facility will offer to Caymanians?
Speaking from my own experience we used to employ over 300 people prior to cruise dipping down to 1.3m arrivals. A large portion of those cuts were Caymanian but included expats as well. We’re over 200 now but would be a lot less if we were only thinking about profits. We have reinvested a lot the last several years to keep stores open and protect jobs. Take a look at other major retailers around town that closed doors and downside drastically and that is proof of the real situation. It is not just about total number but about the quality that everyone keeps talking about. Today’s cruisers with higher spending capacity come on those newer bigger ships. We won’t get those without berthing. I created spending and traffic will create jobs in retail, waters ports, tour and taxi operators etc. Peter Milburn said on the radio the other day to me if you have more people coming then what are you going to to to cope with them hire more people? ”
My answer to that is well yes that’s the point. Create more jobs. I am not a specialist is port operations so maybe a manager in the port would be best to ask about specific jobs created in the actual operation of the port if that’s what’s you are referring to.
Dear Mr. Kirkonnell,
My business took a modest hit when many of my best repeat customers were rolled off island. Each time my foreign customers went home to visit, they took cameras with them. So as my business declined, I added other services. I changed the way I operate. I did not try to make the government change the law of the land to suit my profits. The down town shops have an obligation to make their business survive by changing the way they do business. We need to re-work the idea of just what downtown is. Make it more fun, less congested. There are lots of ways to turn it around — music, dancers, sidewalk artists. Watch what they do on famous boardwalks, or Key West. Make it so that more locals shop there. But to harshly tell your neighbors, “Sorry, we need to ruin YOUR business and destroy the reefs the cruise tourists snorkel on so we can make a bigger profit” just does not sit well with us.
Dear Cathy
This is a really great reply. You are definitely a sound business person.
And to make town more user friendly for tourists (stay-over tourists as well would be ideal) while still allowing traffic to flow is a great idea.
Besides, I have never seen many of Caymanians working in the downtown shops. My teenager is not interested in working there and neither are any of her friends. (All hoping for further education) But they all expressed interest in part time work as street entertainers!! How about that!
:oD
Cathy, I was in Grand Turk when the cruise facility was set up – the only winner has been the cruise line.
If the Cayman Islands wants to cash in the real answer is to let one of the big cruise lines build a resort on the Brac. Right now that island is quietly dying (I’ve never rated the diving there anyway) and might really benefit from the investment. Grand Cayman could then expand the airport then concentrate on stayover tourism and diving. It makes a lot more sense than trying to cram 10,000 cruise shippers into GT.
An outstanding suggestion , but I cant see the ‘Bracers’ going for it. One has to ask what are they going to see in the Brac, that they didn’t see in Cozumel , or other Mexico ports of call? Jamaica has a far bigger choice of land based tours the cruiser’s can do. Cuba will probably show to have a lot to offer in land based tours ( Historic Havana , Malecon, Veradero , just going to stand in the streets and people – old automobile watch could take an entire day,to name a few Havana sights to see ). Grand Cayman has the Stingrays and mediocre duty free stores that you can see anywhere else the cruise ships stop , with a poor choice of restaurants down-down to try to buy something to eat & sit in along with the +9,000 other cruise passengers. But Cathy Church’ suggestion of street performers might work? I’m just visualising street jugglers , men walking on long legged stilts , a magic show on Harbor Drive. Lets include a few Elephants down in George Town for the cruise passengers to gawk at and snap pictures on their phones , then you will truly have a real Circus.
We don’t want elephants but how about a trained chicken and green iguana act?? Yes it is late and I am getting tired.
Not building the port is a kiss of death to our tourism product. As the cruise ships go elsewhere, our air arrivals will decline also. And the $165 million they say will be lost in dive tourism in town, will NOT be lost, simply spend diving at an alternate location.
This island is surrounded by dive sites, there is no where a port could go without losing a few. GT was identified as the least amount of dredging needed, so is the most feasible, both environmentally and geographically.
I hope PPM have the political courage to build the damn thing, unlike their dealings with Mt. Trashmore and cutting the civil service, they need to step up in the face of opposition and do what is right for the country’s future. Build it!!!
BTW, there are a lot of “alterior motives” to those opposing the port as well, don’t kid yourself.
@ Anonymous 3:25: BOLOGNA!
Be careful what you wish for @737 playing the “who hires more Caymanians” game and getting all the divers involved in this isn’t going to be pretty when you see that how many of the anti dock group don’t hire hardly any Caymanians. I think the only cayman diver left is Milburn. Talk about slave wages there ….
http://www.cruisecritic.com/blog/index.php/2012/08/14/the-incredible-floating-cruise-dock-photos/
Brilliant idea and an example of thinking outside the box. Should also work at Spotts for when the weather is bad in George Town.
The Floating Cruise Dock looks like a great idea, with minimum (if any) impact on the environment. Has this idea been considered at all?
That floating dock is in a mill pond at the end if a miles long, deepest fjord in Norway. Hardly a fair comaprison with Spotts even on a good day.
CNS can you find out who is the board of directors of ACT and who the members are?
CNS: I will leave it as a question here and they can answer if they wish.
read the article…. down to the end, just read
2:09 I hope that is not the answer from ACT. Partly because it’s kind of a shitty answer and the second part of the question, which is still unanswered, is who are the members that the letter is on behalf of…
So the real answer is that they did not wish to answer.
Biased propaganda
LOL that went about as well as your new FB page.
I have to put my reaction to this letter in the context of the employment policies of some of the people behind it.
When I can go into any one of their retail premises and not be served by an ex-pat working for what amounts to subsistence wages I’ll accept their right to comment on this. Until that happens they are, in my opinion, nothing more than modern day slavers.
simple math: jobs available in Cayman: 40 000…. caymanians in working age: 20 000 should we close the other half of the positions so you see no expats around?
Anon 2:12, you make a good argument against any consideration of the 1,000 jobs it is claimed the new port will create. 1,000 more jobs only equates to 1,000 more work permits, further skewing the ratio of Caymanians to expats in the workforce.
Good for Government…………not good for the society.
When reading this “balanced view” one quickly realizes that it is anything but balanced. The conclusion that the cruise ship berthing facility is the correct course of action for Cayman is already decided and the argument is created to support this opinion.
It was a shallow bit of position propaganda.
A real concern of mine is what a bad Norwesterner will do to downtown George Town and how the 7 Mile Beach sand will shift into a big dredged out hole.
It was also obvious that little real concern is given to the downside risks to the dive industry which brings most of our stay over guests.
“As a lobbying group funded by those with a profit motive in having the dock built, we are in an ideal position to give you all a balanced view, patricians that we are, and any view against what we say we can label as sensationalism”
It’s going to be an uphill struggle to get a port built, if you can forgive us for being skeptical, it’s assumed that every business on the benefitting end of this is voting with their wallet, everyone currently against it is assuming that those supporting it are doing so just to make money at any cost. I have heard from tourists that they like tenders, it’s a free boat trip for them, also that they hate queing to get tenders and they would like to wander on an off the cruise ships at will. So arguments for and against. There will always be scare stories from the cruise industry that with. or without, this X will happen, or not happen. All Cayman should worry about is does it make sense and do we want it. I haven’t heard a compelling argument either way yet.
How about this argument:
1. The new dock will not create more jobs that will be filled by currently unemployed Caymanians.
2. The damage done will be permanent. Silt plumes still persist in ports like Jamaica every time the ship turns. I just watched that happen a few months ago. Once the coral is dead, silted over and covered with algae, there is no fixing that. It erodes, gets lower, and we lose the protection it afforded us.
3. We are not ready yet for lots more crowds–even stingray city is at maximum.
4. With better land facilities for the cruisers that can offer official security clearances, and more tenders that are decorated and are fun, it will be acceptable to many of the cruise ships and they will NOT stop coming here.
5. The article clearly says that many of these operators have store fronts elsewhere. I cannot move my storefront away from my shore diving. And fosters, and Eden Rock, and Paradise, and Sunset House and the glass bottom boats, and the Submarine and so on are bearing the financial brunt of all of this.
I could go on and on, but many people will not read this far.
I READ THAT FAR, CATHY. Five good arguments! I am with you 100%!
Keep arguing and writing nonsense until the ships stop coming here. At least you can take pictures of those two coral heads jn the harbour but the rest of us may have to eat them.
I do not understand your logic, or lack there of. I run a GT business. I hire only Caymanians. Our staffing is directly proportionate to the number of cruise ships. The more ships, the more staff I need. It is only common sense.
OK, I believe you……you have an all 100% Caymanian staff….the other cruise ship servicers must surely envy you.
The more cruise ships that will come if we build the dock, will mean the more staff you will need, therefore, the more Caymanians you will hire.
Immigration must love you, at least they do not have to listen to YOUR bulls**t about how YOU can’t find suitable Caymanians to work in YOUR establishment.
You should talk to C.K. at Kirk Freeport and show them how to get their staff to 100% Caymanian too. They will love you too if you can teach them how to run their business without having to pay for work permits.
In case you have not noticed…….Cayman already has 18,000 more jobs than they have Caymanians to fill, that is part of the problem….not a part of the solution!
We have 5 staff members. 3 full time, and 2 part time. Many of my employees have gone on to university, gained scholorships, and bettered themselves. I train mostly students, treat them with respect, and pay them fairly. I help them to acheive, that is my responsibility. I do not see any reason to hire expats when there are a great many qualified Caymanians available and eager to work. Why have you no faith in your own people? That fact that you do not believe a business can run with a 100% Caymanian staff is both sad and disheartening. You are either an expat or a low wage paying tyrant, if you even own a business at all, which I highly doubt.
Anon 7:58, I am Caymanian and not too big to apologize when I am proven wrong. My hat is off to you, sincerely!
Your MO is similar to mine over the years, perhaps one of your former workers have benefitted from one of the scholarships I have been fortunate to set up with Government over the years, I hope so, if not I would like to assist in the future.
My comment was biased by all the claims of more jobs put forward in favor of spending hundred of millions of dollars on a new Mega cruise dock………..not a good enough reason to judge you, but the reason none the less. I gave your comments a thumbs up because I agree with you.
Again, I apologize to you, we need more Caymanians just like you! When you’re right, you’re right, Sir.
WaYaSay?
Also, just because I am insulted by your stupidity…here is how you have a 100% Caymanian work force. Don’t hire a**holes like you.
I deserve that!
The last part of you comment makes no sense. “In case you have not noticed…Cayman already has 18,000 more jobs yadayadayada.” So you are suggesting we should not hire qualified Caymanians? Because ? What? Then we would have to hire fewer foriegners. You are just as stupid as a ball of hair.
Actually I made that comment in the context that ANY new jobs created in Cayman, at this point and time, will only equate to additional new work permits being issued, as we are oversubscribed in jobs in Cayman already. At 500 school graduates per year, we are subscribed for the next 10 years.
I stick with my comment in this instance………but, I love your spirit. Don’t ever lose that edge.
How many Caymanians do these companies currently employ? How many small Caymanian retailers and competitors have they driven out of business over the years?
ACT accuses others of misrepresenting facts yet do the same to suit their agenda. They are dismissive of real issues and are prepared to destroy the GT harbor marine ecosystem and SMB for a fist full of dollar$.
It would be nice to have an article that is not one sided.
A cruise port will result in good things for Cayman and bad things. Way too often the article comes out and it gives one side of the story.
I personally think it is a matter that the entire country needs to vote on.
You are a thousand percent correct John. That is why we are pushing for a referendum so that everyone can be involved in this huge decision. There are clear winners and losers. Does a small increase in profits for the winners equal the enormous loss of business to the losers. Would a major waterfront improvement with a secure immigration facility help to move cruisers more comfortably back to their ships? Would more and prettier tenders that can accommodate wheel chairs satisfy the ships? This has yet to be considered, yet is a fabulous option.
The part in the EIA about moving reefs and mitigating silt is just not possible. The acreage being damaged has been adjusted for the actual area of living coral, not counting the area of relatively less populated hard pan. So no one is exaggerating the large loss of healthy coral. The small area is the actual immediate destruction zone. The next zone is the silt zone, the furthest plumes to the north and south are zones for severe damage over a long period of time. Silt will clog the sponges until they die, and burden the coral until it fatigues and dies. There are many marine scientists who are advising the opposition, and I personally am a marine ecologist familiar with these issues.
I would be happy to discuss the pros and cons in any forum you choose.
Thanks for your response Cathy.
Still I would love to get past all the we are going to destroy the reef and look at anything positive in terms of jobs or economic value.
I believe the schools are graduating 500+ students each year. Where are they going to get jobs?
What needs to happen is to have presentations on both and some discussion times and then have a referendum vote.
Great idea John. A panel discussion would be good.
Regarding jobs, if the young graduates would accept entry level jobs the way other places do, they could start as waitresses and move up to be managers. They could start as gardeners and move up own a gardening company. they could start at a lot of jobs, but the entry level jobs are demeaning in this culture so we bring in lots and lots of expats. Plus, our schools let them down terribly. They let the students think they are doing well, but do not teach them job skills like graphic arts, or auto mechanics, or carpentry. We had all of that in our high school and more. so these kids are just left to fend for themselves with virtually no job skills. It is shameful.
Fourteen of you disagree with my comment. Since my comments are purely fact or are questions, I am wondering what your argument is. Do you not think that we should put this to a vote? Do you not wish to consider easier, less expensive options that might be better? Do you not believe the acreage? It is on page 134 of the report: http://www.doe.ky/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CaymanCBF_EnvironmentalStatement_FinalDraft_04Jun15.pdf Study it yourself so that you will know for yourself what is right or wrong.
Anyone tied to Sunset is going to be perceived as biased against a new port, even if it was a zero environmental impact project, staffed by 100% Caymanian unicorns riding organic rainbows.
And anyone aligned with the Tortuga Rum company and Kirkconnell family is not biased against the environment????
I love your creative writing! Who are you?
Cathy, I don’t know Mr. Hamaty personally but I do know some of the Kirkconnell’s. They are certainly not “biased against the environment”. You might mean to say they are biased pro pier and that might be true but being pro pier doesn’t necessitate being anti environment.
I think all parties understand that to destroy the environment would eradicate any benefits of building a pier – i.e. if this results in the environment being destroyed it doesn’t matter how nice the piers are, people aren’t going to visit. I’m sure the downtown business owners are fully cognizent of that. The issue at hand is what overall impact will this have environmentally once all mitigating measures are taken and is that eventual impact ultimately worth it.
Now if the worst case scenario comes to bear with silt plumes reaching as high as the pageant beach then the answer is likely no and even the pro pier folks would concede that.
Ultimately there is going to be some environmental impact, what needs to be fully investigated/explored/concluded is how much impact, at what cost, and for what gain. Once those questions are answered there can be a rational discussion about whether the project should be completed or not.
The tender operators, (who from reading this thread are affiliated with Sunset House, which is why I think some people are giving you thumbs down) are obviously biased against the piers, and understandibly so. As an outside party it does me no good to see the tender owners launching a massive campaign to save their business and then the downtown business owners lauching their own campaign to try to offset the tender owners campaign.
Just like with all man made development (including the airport, eventual dump, pier, cargo pier, hotels, etc.) there is going to be environmental impact, we need to do what is best for the Cayman Islands as a whole, not individual or collective business owners. And that is why we need facts not scaremongering.
I encourage everyone to continue to ask questions, to read the EIA and to have an open mind. This isn’t an easy problem with an easy solution, it needs to be well thought out and properly decided for all of us.
True
Cathy as much as you didn’t want to read the ad, it clearly states they want to know how much live coral, not disputing that there are 15 acres of ocean bottom there. Asking for clarification
Good question. The standard way an EI is designed is to measure the amount of actual coral, not counting the hardpan. The actual number of acres is far greater. From page 21 of the report: “ Total project footprint ~ 32.5 acres (13.2 ha), including: o Dredging footprint ~ 23.0 acres (9.3 ha);
o Land reclamation footprint ~ 7.7 acres (3.1 ha);” (Ha stands for hectares). I wish I could include the photo to show everyone how massive this is. There will be 366 pilings a meter wide, and 120 feet long pounded into the substrate. There will be 333,000 cubic yards of dredge material. (from page 17 of the report.) This is an insane project for our small island. To see the report go to http://www.doe.ky/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CaymanCBF_EnvironmentalStatement_FinalDraft_04Jun15.pdf and then go to page 21. Enlarge it so you can see the full scope of this as an overlay on the coral terrain.
Anon – There’s more than 15 acres of ocean bottom. Within the dredge area 15 acres of coral habitat is going to be destroyed. i.e., a dredge is going to run through it, kill live coral, and ‘no’ coral will grow there again. We can argue about whether its habitat, reef, % alive, etc. all day long. But when its dredged its dead. And its 15 acres out of the 25+ (can’t remember the numbers off-hand) being dredged.
Kathy let me first say that I respect all the work you do but look at your response you are looking at one side of the story only.
While I am interested in the damage to the environment there already has been a lot said about that side of the story. Very little is being said about benefits. And your comments about just a small profit is far off base.
As for the comment below its not even worth mentioning. There are many he come to our shores but have no interest in the local people just what they can get. Heck there are even our locals that do the same.
Very little is being said about the benefits because they are so few. What you are seeing is a panic response to discredit the EIA since it showed how great the costs would be compared to the Outline Business Case (done months ago) that’s showed great expense, low return and, IIRC, ‘only viable if the someone other than CIG pays for it’. (That last part none of the proponents have addressed. They hope Cayman forgets and pays for this white elephant with increased debt.)
But since you want a ‘balanced post with a ‘benefit’, there will be construction jobs for ~ 3 years. During which time The cruise ships and tenders will be jockeying with a dredge and barges, basically bringing tourists through a construction zone destroying the environment they can no longer see because its undiveable from an aesthetic and safety point of view. Then three years alter all of those construction workers will be looking for the next big project. And there still won’t beany of the GT Harbour in-water businesses because of the dredge effects. Bussinesses which the OBC hope will move somewhere else but no one can identify another ‘all weather shore snorkel area’ for them to move to in walking distance of the cruise terminal. Boom-bust-… Whereas the current tourism system can be done sustainably so the person has a job this year, the next three, and the three after that. But that would require training Caymanians rather than giving them an unskilled labourer job.
As for the jobs ‘created’ by the increase in tourism, both the OBC & EIA point out hat (a) the increase will be minimal and (b) will require ‘product improvements other than the dock’ to occur. And remember, the current number of cruise tourists is the most in years. So apparently its not about more tourists since if you’re losing money when the most tourists are here … Well, hopefully the ‘new’ tourists will somehow spend more money. And not walk back on the ships for lunch (less spending locally) and shopping (the new ships have more on-ship duty-free retail).
Uhhhh…It is Cathy with a ‘C’,
Signed a different Cathy who hate ‘K”s Cardashians and hand lotion.
The Balanced View? I believe his article is NOT balanced, but readers can make up their own minds about that. Here are my comments on some of their statements.
They say, “This initiative is too important to debate on pure emotions.” And I say, “It’s too important to let greed be the deciding factor.”
They say, “There are a number of salient facts that everyone in the community should bear in mind when considering this project.” And I say, “One of them is ‘Don’t kill the goose that lays the golden eggs’. Does Cayman have anything above the water that other tourist destinations don’t have? NO!”
ACT makes it sound like the cruise passengers are supporting darn near everyone on the island. They are not! Cruise passengers do not stay over, and their spending per visitor doesn’t compare to our stay over visitors.
They say, “We cannot say with any accuracy how much live coral is within this area.” And I say, “So therein lies the possibility that ACT may be misleading you for their own benefit!”
They say, “The ACT recognizes that indeed our natural environment is one of the Cayman Islands strengths and it would be economic suicide to destroy that advantage by causing material damage to our natural environment.” And I say, “Wow! That says it all!”
They say, “In recent years the Government has started to put a more effective formal regime to protect our environment and this is very welcomed.” And I say, “So now our government wants to abandon this protection?”
Don’t turn Grand into another Nassau!
CNS, please publish a full list of the membership of ACT so that the pubic can clearly understand who [they] are.
Want to make a bet on the list being published?
Very simple, I will no longer be buying any products from kirks, hamity’s businesses. Oh I spend about $150k pa with them…
Here’s a suggestion for the ACT – if this facility is so vital to the future of the cruise business here approach the cruise lines and see if they will help fund it. I’ll bet you get nothing.
As for the link between cruise visitors and future stayover business – show us the stats. I can tell you from my own personal contact with visitors here that it would appear those who convert to stayover are far outnumbered by the stayover tourists who are put off either returning or coming here in the first place by the chaos caused by cruise arrivals.
This is a nice letter but it lacks any real arguments in favour of the dock.
RE: funding the dock. We have no money to build this and we are not allowed to borrow. So the dock will have to be funded by the cruise industry. However, I have not yet seen a statement as to how much income we would then lose. When Carnival docks on its own dock, do we still get paid? Do we still get the full fee per person disembarking? I would assume not but do not know the facts. Further, if the cruise line funds it then do they get to build their own stores and their own tour booking facility on THEIR dock and keep our vendors out? Just asking.
I see the ACT is busy voting thumbs down to all your post Miss Cathy, keep up the good work education is the key.
Ecotourism is on the rise, and it seems Cayman is going against the trend
Eleven people gave my comment a thumbs down. Can any of you reply here with why you feel that my questions are bad? All I did was ASK questions. You all should be asking a lot of questions, so why the thumbs down? Which sentence do you dislike?
Kathy I would suspect that those 11 are the members of ACT trolling for anyone who disagrees with the dock being built.
Thanks for your comment. I have to realize that there are really people who are small thinkers. I guess now we need to get a lot of people to put thumbs up for all of the anti huge dock and thumbs up for all of the other options to make cruise people happy. there are other ways, you know.
Hardly surprising group to step up to the plate on cruise ship docking. But, where is their input on what might be done to mitigate the potential environmental damage – easy to talk the talk, what about walking the walk. Or do they expect everyone else to do the work, while they sit back and whine. They have had it too easy, for too long. What fees do they pay CIG for operating their retail businesses – how much profit do they make ? Any chance they would put up some financing for the development – LOL.
We should set and encourage higher goals for the youth of this country than minimum wage jobs in jewelry and liquor stores. Destroying the environment in the name of big business is not the answer to Cayman’s structural unemployment issues. Open your eyes people, when these types of business owners fly to Little Cayman to enjoy clean beaches and a pristine natural environment it will be the average man left in Grand Cayman with masses of cruise tourists destroying the quality of life, beaches and ruining the sand bar.
I heard them other dudes on the talk show running there mouth….They make it sound like every single dive site in the 3 Cayman Islands are going to be dredged up…OMG so much false foolishness they were talking about…I suggest government take the lil piece of old ship up bring it on shore if they want too walk around it go right ahead as I understand you cant dive by it as its in the shipping path…So sick and tired of these DRIFTWOOD so call Caymanians..That is Caymans Greatest enemy as everyone comes in and want every rule / law / culture change to suit them..If you don’t like it here go back where you came from..Thats my story and i’m sticking too it..LET THE PORT EXPANSION BEGIN!!!!!
Dear Anonymous, Odd that you fear putting your name on your ideas. Have you ever been SCUBA diving? Do you have any idea just how beautiful your underwater reefs truly are? No one said that ALL of the diving will be hurt–only the shallow areas where the cruise ship people visit is where the silt plume will kill the coral. Wherever you are right this minute in Grand Cayman, you are standing over an ancient coral reef. That coral built this island, this country. Don’t hate everyone who loves it just because we are pale skinned and don’t share your family history. Be happy that some of the driftwood value your reefs, value your heritage and want to protect it — not for you but WITH you. Don’t turn against the idea just because you don’t like the messenger. And never doubt that we do not love our environment with all of our being. He hath founded it not just upon the sea, but he hath actually founded it upon the coral reef.
This is not a balanced view.. This is the other view! And… it appears to be the view of the few retailers that have shops not only in George Town but also in the other districts? I suggest that these few individuals are the only ones who do not have a balanced view!
Steady on chaps. Let’s not go off half cocked.
For starters, why don’t these three businesses (KFP, Capt Marvins and Tortuga) publish on this website their respective Business Staffing Plan approved employee lists showing the numbers of Caymanians employed versus work permit holders?
You know, to show the employment opportunities that you provide to the local workforce.
Kirk Freeport 220 employees 73% Caymanian.
What generations?
Maybe Government could pay those 163 employees $100,000.00 each if you cannot afford to employ them without Government paying $163Million for a dock.
It would be a lot cheaper.
Oh this all sounds wonderful. I suggest your members pool their resources and put up the money to pay for the construction, as well as any resulting immediate and long term environmental damage.
No? Didn’t think so.