NCC: Cruise piers will damage harbour forever

| 11/09/2015 | 126 Comments
Cayman News Service

The Cali Shipwreck and reef is located in 10 to 30 feet of water immediately adjacent to the base of the cruise ship landing and will be completely smothered by silt during dredging operations if the cruise berth goes ahead as planned. (Photo by Courtney Platt)

(CNS): Members of the National Conservation Council have said they are “ deeply concerned” about the economic costs and environmental damage of the cruise berthing project if it goes ahead and that the damage could “forever downgrade the integrity of our attractive and historic harbour”. In the NCC’s submission on the project after reviewing the environmental impact assessment the Environmental Advisory Board Review, the council said the economic benefit estimates of the project were both speculative and uncertain while the environmental costs were clear.

“We concur with the EAB’s advice that all mitigation measures that the Cayman Islands’ Government would intend to implement should be identified, fully costed and reflected in any future full cost-benefit analysis, including the associated National Roads Authority road improvements, along with all the projected revenue losses to tourism-related and other businesses that will result from loss of water clarity and reef health in the George Town Harbour and adjacent areas (GTH),” the council said in a commentary released on Thursday.

In another condemnation of the proposal that many now believe is far too a high price to pay with no evidence of real benefit to the wider community, the NCC also warned that any environmental mitigation would have a limited effect, with significant “irreversible” environmental damage.

“We emphasize that short and long-term environmental degradation in this area will cause both direct and indirect economic damage that should not be ignored or underestimated,” the NCC warned in the statement.

Urging Cabinet to exercise extreme caution, they said an objective and realistic cost-benefit analysis could only be possible with a full accounting of all the economic costs resulting from the expected environmental damage, and the costs of the associated mitigation efforts.

Auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers are currently in the process of reviewing their original business case and factoring in the findings of the EIA, plus the significant additional costs of mitigation to reduce environmental damage and the cost to the economy of losing some 35 acres of reef during and after the project, as well as the damage to the wrecks and overall destruction of the harbour as a unique and significant tourist attraction.

“The Council recognizes that for cruise tourism to continue to be a successful part of our overall tourism product, a substantial investment is also needed in George Town itself,” the members said. “The priority should be to strike a fair and reasonable balance between improving the unique experience of the Cayman cruise customer and sustaining the ecosystem services that create that unique experience.”

The NCC said that the only acceptable solution to cruise tourism development was one that preserves the reefs and water quality and provides an improved dockside experience.

Although welcoming the efforts government made to undertake the EIA, the NCC said it was limited, with studies occurring in the low season and the needs and perceptions of passengers versus cruise lines were not assessed in either the Outline Business Case or the EIA.

The NCC said this was “a serious deficiency in the data”, adding that many of the mitigation measures suggested had “no costs attached to them”.

Without a clear policy on mitigation and realistic cost estimates, a real cost-benefit analysis of this proposed is not possible, the NCC warned.

They also raised concerns that any mitigation could only reduce the magnitude of the impact of this project but would not stop the permanent and devastating damage. Warning that coral relocation is challenging at best and associated costs substantial, the environmental experts pointed to the significant doubts and concerns regarding the relocation project at Falmouth in Jamaica.

“This relocation project, claimed to be one of the largest ever undertaken (138,000 hard corals and 10,000 soft corals and sponges) took eight months and involved 93 persons. The monitoring alone was calculated to have cost US$12 million … Very few large coral heads were moved and survival rates were low … It is clear that this relocation exercise cannot inform any proposed relocation of entire sections of spur and groove formation in Cayman waters.”

Estimated to cost as much as US$73 million to try and relocate the coral, the NCC pointed out that there appears to no suitable site to move the corals to.

The NCC listed the catalogue of problems associated with the development of the cruise port in Falmouth and highlighted the well-publicised problems for the town of Falmouth and its people, who “have not realised the benefits, either socially or economically, promised at the outset.”

National Conservation Council commentary on proposed cruise berthing facility, 26 August 2015

Tags: , ,

Category: Local News

Comments (126)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    The Proposed Cruise Berthing Facility is the first proposal to include much needed upgrades to the Cargo Dock.
    • The current proposal allows three cargo ships to operate at the same time
    • Larger cargo ships will be able to service Cayman
    • This saves Cayman from having to spend government funds to build a cargo dock in a completely new location.
    • It also takes away the environmental impact of dredging a new location in the future for cargo
    The Cruise Berthing Facility is not a threat to 7 Mile Beach (EIA Non-Technical Summary Page 19 and Response to Public Comments Page 15)
    • The EIA states that the current Cruise Berthing proposal will not pose a significant threat to 7 Mile Beach. The consultants further repeat this in their response to public comments which can be found on the DOE website.
    • A study commissioned by the DOE can be found here that explains how 7 Mile Beach is formed. (Link to Richard Seymour Report)
    The Cruise Berthing Facility will not increase wave action or Flooding in George Town (EIA Non Technical Summary Page 18)
    • The EIA report shows that no increase in flooding and no increase in wave action in George Town will occur
    • The land reclamation area includes a flood/wave wall to reduce the impact during storms.
    The piers in the Cruise Berthing Facility are built on Piles and allow water to flow freely underneath.
    The effects on nearby coral reefs during operation has been reduced
    • The consultants have acknowledged that their models during the operation of the port were incorrect and have reduced the use of bow thrusters from 15 minutes to 1 minute, showing a 1500% reduction in the bow thruster plume.
    • “Turbidity plumes in these simulations are significantly less sever than those presented in the ES and shown at the public meeting, due to the reduction in the duration of applied power in the model from 15 minutes to 1 minute”
    • Ships can be made to dock bow in only to keep the powerful main engines in deep water and prevent them from disturbing the sea bed.
    The effects on nearby coral reefs can be reduced during the dredging by employing the following:
    • Use of Silt screens and double silt screens if needed
    • Use of air curtains as a secondary or tertiary barrier to silt
    • Use of bucket covers on the dredge to prevent spillage
    • Following the Environmental Management Plan to monitor the nearby reefs and to set tolerances and thresholds
    • Altering the productivity of the dredge to reduce siltation/turbidity
    Building the proposed Cruise Berthing Facility will not take funds away from other important infrastructure projects.
    George Town is the best location for the Cruise Berthing Facility, the consultants clarified:
    • Natural environment (in GT) already compromised by years of shipping and port activities
    • Significantly greater dredging (at least 20 times) and environmental impacts at other sites (Red Bay and North Sound)
    • Capital cost of facility will be significantly lower in GT
    • Proximity to George Town business district

    1
    2
  2. Pablo Cruise says:

    To all the dock builders on here please try get some sense in your little heads!! Improve the existing Cargo dock leave the Coral and environment alone please.

  3. Anonymous says:

    It is important to identify who are the members of the NCC in order to identify their experience and qualifications to be able to draw these conclusions and make these assumptions and comments in their statement expanding on the EIA document and the EAB response to the EIA. Who are they? Identify yourselves.

    CNS: National Conservation Council – a simple Google search.

  4. Anonymous says:

    This dock needs to happen. George Town has been a ghost town ever since the new Oasis sip came out and won’t stop in Cayman. There is another same ship coming out next year and we are going to keep losing ships and better passengers to other islands until we get a dock.

    We can either build it the right way now or let some other government come and do it their way in a couple years.

    This is the best plan with least environmental damage ever proposed.

    Eden Rock and Sunset will be just fine.

    1
    2
  5. Anonymous says:

    The solution is simple you just have to think out of the box. And I saw something of that nature on the discovery channel so I know it can be done. Don’t do the docks or the cable carts and that nonsense. Let’s built an artificial floating island and use a rope to tie it to Grand Cayman, then move everything and everyone to the floating island. Then all the coral can be saved, no dredging, no silt, no people, no plastics bags on Cayman. Just three nice uninhabited island so the divers can go take some pictures. And at the same time, the cruise ships can dock on the floating island, and we can use the same boat tenders for those who wish to visit the uninhabited Cayman islands. Everyone’s happy.

    • Kenny says:

      Yes it will change the harbour …..but building a dock will change any where we build it. Please go ahead and built the dock. Caymanians needs work

      • Anonymous says:

        Kenny, the reason your thoughts are ridiculous is because this dock will not give you more work. Unless you work on construction the dock. Then, when it is complete, you’ll still need more work. So then you can go tearing down some more stuff….
        Time to diversify your vocation Kenny. Try the dive industry. It’s beautiful and fun!

      • El Tiempo says:

        Poor you Kenny just don’t get it! All about your short term needs eh??

  6. Anonymous says:

    Yes, it will “forever downgrade the Historic Harbour” of cargo ships, boat tenders, dirty rusty cranes and the sound of black black diesel smoke cloud semi-trucks coming in and out of the primary tourist area…

  7. Rp says:

    Sure, let’s build the concrete piers and hopefully we will have 20,000 people come off the ships daily to crowd GT, the 5 mile beach, and sting ray city until all those stingrays fuxx off.

    The GT-WB corridor cannot handle these numbers. Stingray city and our beaches cannot handle these numbers (if they even materialize).

    Cater to high end tourists CIG! Let’s be exclusive not just another port of call on the way to roatan and Cozumel.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Everybody’s a conservationist till it effects their pocket.

    • Dick Shawn Arie says:

      Please save up and buy yourself one of those big books that defines words……

    • WaYaSay says:

      You really need to look up the meaning of the word “effect”. You and your 12 thumbs up friends.

      With people like you and your 12 friends advising Alden and Moses on this new mega CBF, I give up…………..we are truly doomed and $200million more in long term debt is surely in my future!

      Limiting the additional debt to $200million is only possible if we forget about the unfinished schools, the new roads, the airport, civil servants pensions, unpaid medical liability, the new courthouse, the CAL subsidy, the Turtle Farm subsidy, the Dump…………..

      Then again $1billion in public debt does have a good ring to it………..if you are the PPM.

      I know, I know, you don’t need to remind me, the 2 million cruise passengers @ $5.00 per head will pay off $1billion of debt on NO TIME! ($1,000,000,000.00:-$10,000,000.00= 100 years………no problem man)
      Too bad we already gave away 50% of the stay over tourism tax so that West Bayers can get to work on time………… (Can you spell divestment and income tax?)

      • New And Improved WYS says:

        You normally do a decent job stating a point but you are just blabbing on with “nunsense” now. You want to talk about placing the entire national debt past, present and future in terms of a tender fee? Come on man!
        You want to call fowl, call it somewhere else. Now you are the worst kind of troll.
        Definitely not a good bean counter.

        Who Jah Bless No Man Curse.

      • Tenderer #2 says:

        In a 100 years the tenders could make 1 billion!?!?!?!?!?
        Forget these docks I changed my mind, I want to buy some boats!

      • Anonymous says:

        Your spouting off a load of rubbish. You and your 12 friends advising moses. It was a one line comment made on here which phone spell check changed one letter, lol but anyway glad to see it seemed to get a reaction

        • WaYaSay says:

          If you are going to make excuses, and blame your phone for your previous grammatical errors, you should at least take the time to read your corrective post, before hitting send.

          I have counted at least 4 errors in your excuse………….starting with the first word.

      • Garfield says:

        We are certainly on the way to personal income tax and property tax as taking on huge amounts of new public debt will be the only way this new debt can be paid down in the next 10 years. Capital project opportunties for Public / Private Participation such as the Canadian proposal for the new airport should have been taken up but were rejected. There are ways of doing projects without taking on new public debt but innovative financing methods have been rejected. WaYaSay is correct, we are doomed financially and unfortunately we will end up with property tax and income tax in the next decade.

  9. Anonymous says:

    If the port is actually built all it will show is how gullible and easily bought the people of this blessed isle are.

  10. Anonymous says:

    All the cruise dock will accomplish is “more people more trash” and a destroyed reef as Grand Cayman is a wonderful dive destination and will work fine with out a cruise dock.. Until the garbage dump issues are resolve why create a bigger issue, Seriously a trash burning system that creates electric power should be put in such as what Palm beach Fl has done and with the improved infrastructure Grand Cayman can move fwd on additional tourism

    • Anonymous says:

      Cayman is more than a dive destination, and a growing population needs an improved port to survive.

      • Anonymous says:

        In these days when coral reefs including Cayman’s are rapidly in decline, unlike the unique marine environment that Cayman is internationally renowned for marine ports are common and can be replaced.

        Aside from that, the reefs provide protection to the island, the port and surrounding areas, including business in and around the port from storm surge. What we know now on the harbour front will only get worse.

        These days everyone seems hellbent on destroying all of our natural resources, regardless of the consequences for convenience and greed. Besides, are you really putting the needs of the all-inclusive budget cruise visitors over those of the substantial amount of stayover tourists generated by the reefs and marine environment, many who return year after year, and often invest in holiday homes here?

        • Anonymous says:

          Last time I checked town got less flooding when Royal Watler was built not more. The reef in town are not barrier reefs and do no stop waves. Go Sell crazy some where else, Save Cayman is all stocked up here.

          • Anonymous says:

            Thanks 9;11 for that, His statement proves he is all emotional about this development , nothing to do with practical knowledge and intellect,
            If he had used his brain and also open his eyes when our last hurricane came through, no barrier reef were able to stop those 60 feet waves. Further more there are no barrier reef in GT Harbour, we have crops of corals most at the dept of 40 to 80 feet under the water surface, how will these corals protect our Harbour?

      • Anonymous says:

        No it doesn’t. If population were to hypothetically double on some new mysterious industrial success unique to Cayman, we would need to increase port capacity within 20 years. Our pop is def not growing at that pace. We have surplus capacity now, and family relatives of the minister run the port. Total conflict of interest.

  11. Patricia Bryan says:

    Aaaaaaannnddd. ..this finding is NEWS??!!

  12. qwerty says:

    No to dock but yes to cable car system!

  13. Dee P. Pilings says:

    I fear the proponents of this project are effectively proposing a violation of Her Majesty’s Bottom. Have they considered that she might not be overly pleased at the prospect?

  14. Neil says:

    I took my visitors on quite an expensive trip around the harbour in the semi-submersible. All we saw on the bottom was mud. Some scuba divers swam alongside with fish food to attract fish to the porthole/windows . It seemed a rip off. So where were the natural reefs and reef fish that’ll be deprived of a habitat? Another occasion I met someone off a tender. He was elderly. In a moderate chop the tender was surging up to 5′. Struck me as an enormous potential liability as the visitor struggled to get on board and into a shaky seat. How old are those tenders?

    • Anonymous says:

      You are such a troll.

    • Anonymous says:

      i had friends come in a cruise and all they could say about George Town was it was almost identical to every other stop, same old duty free jewelry shops and cheap souvenirs all made in China. The only good experience they had in GT was snorkeling the wreck of the Balboa and Eden Rock.

      When I mentioned the plans of the Jewelry shops they could not believe it, they asked why is Cayman destroying everything making it Cayman?

    • Anonymous says:

      You don’t even have to go under water to see all the coral and fish if you have eyes and look carefully, there are many varieties to be seen from various vantage points from land or in boats on top of the water. You are so full of excrement.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Be interesting to see how many of the people who want this dock actually dive themselves or just don’t give a crap about the caymans underwater environment. The politicians who get to make this decision should all be required to take a discover scuba while the silversides are in eden rock.

    • Anonymous says:

      To 6:50 should the politicians want to dive they have 55 miles of reef around Cayman to do just that. Also 365 dive sites within this 55 miles Of coral reef…not short of reef!

      • Anonymous says:

        The 365 sites refers to dive moorings. Pick any spot (except off the GT dock) around any of our 3 islands and you have an amazing dive site. The area off GT has long ago been degraded due to anchor damage. As far as Eden Rock and the reefs along that shore go, they’re covered in silt ever time we have a Nor’Wester and they recover in a matter of hours.

        • Anonymous says:

          3:38 you speak with experience and not your emotions. You are correct about the foreign materials at Eden Rock, and after a few days or weeks they disappear.
          This happens all around our islands, I used to see stones a pebbles lodged against coral heads after a storm, sand banks created, within weeks you can’t find those stones or sand banks. Another smaller storm take them away, it’s the way the geology of our Ocean is made up, it cleanse itself. No foreign material will stay on our ocean floor, you dump a truck load of stone or sand In our harbour it will not remain there for long the natural current will remove it. No loose or foreign materials will remain long enough to cause any type of damages. People who have been using our Ocean over the years should have noticed these phenomenons and come forward to stop the scaremongering.

    • Anonymous says:

      All politicians should be made to declare any conflict of interest that may exist.

  16. Anonymous says:

    There are a lot of stay over divers who have been coming for years and feel connected to cayman. Many of them shore dive and love eden rock. They have expressed their concern over losing eden rock. Many saying they will go dive elsewhere . So the cruise operators will benefit and the dive businesses that have been catering for these divers for many years will suffer a loss. Is that right? Looks like its inevitable. Certain people have already decided its going to happen.

  17. Anonymous says:

    The uniform “bulk votes” campaign in support of the CBF’s is hard at work yet again on this thread.
    (Just thought I should point it out in case any newcomers are reviewing the comments or reflecting on these posts in the future.)

    It truly is something to behold and quite frankly causes far more harm to their struggling little cause.
    Entertaining to watch tho.

    (Hmmm … let’s see how they handle this comment. Will they bulk down vote as well? If they were smart they would leave well alone. Can’t wait … )

    – Who

  18. Anonymous says:

    I live and work day to day in the cruise tourism industry and I’m not some big fancy store.
    I have to taxi people up and down and let me tell you the conditions of our port are ridiculous. In the summer I have to park my car half the week and look for part time jobs. it never used to be this way.

    • Driftwood says:

      You’re right. It never used to be this way. Now we have too many people at one time, and it can only get worse if larger ships dump bigger loads of tourists. Also I don’t know why you need a part time job with the ridiculous fares you charge. Maybe you should re-think all this.

    • Anonymous says:

      Yeah and before all the banks and prosperity came to Cayman and brought jobs, I could park anywhere I wanted.

  19. Anonymous says:

    The point that people don’t seem to get thru their heads ,is not that the tenders can’t take people off the ship. It’s the TOTAL amount of TIME it takes to get 6200 people plus staff off. If you fill this tender to 350 people and divide it into 8000 people you get 22 trips (22.8) . If you are using 2 gangways thats 11 trips. It will take 25-30 mins. then 10 mins around trip to dock. It will take 6.41 hours to offload the ship and thats not considering people who are scared , physically challenged, wheel chairs or any other medical problem. Then 6.41 hours to load? Do you see the problem? People are missing the island. They are spending a ridiculous amount of time just getting on and off

    • Anonymous says:

      If they want to include Cayman as a destination, there are plenty of smaller ships that stop here and are serviced just fine. The drive behind this is greed for the few merchants looking to line their pockets without regard for the social and environmental aspects of a dock and so many people in one place at one time. Take your math and consider that tenders naturally control flow of passengers into town now and still on a heavy day locals and tourists alike complain about the number of people crowding town. Now imagine 6000 more offloading much quicker and tell me how much more enjoyable the Cayman port experience will be…

      • Anonymous says:

        So the solution in your view is to continue creating a bottle neck with the tenders? Keep taking the extra two to three hours tourist could be visiting somewhere so they can plan to get back in line for the tenders?

    • Anonymous says:

      So why can’t we minimise the damage and cost and have floating docks instead?

      http://www.cruisecritic.com/blog/index.php/2012/08/14/the-incredible-floating-cruise-dock-photos/

  20. Anonymous says:

    Just imagine how many other projects could have been completed with the revenue from the cruise port if our Govts had invested in building a new port when we could afford to do so ourselves many years ago??? We would have had mental facilities, we would have had money to build our schools, we would have had money to sort out mount trashmore and the list goes on and on. Vision into the future is what we lack most of all.

    • Anonymous says:

      Solution is simple, put in permanent moorings to cease the continuous damage and silt from anchors and chains, and allow cruise ships to keep Casinos open because that’s the only reason the ships leave Cayman so early. Other ports the ships stay about 11 hours, Cayman only 5 ! With more time the congestion to tender passengers will be greatly reduced and businesses will make more money. Build a dock and the ships will still leave early. It’s a no brainier, lift cruise ship gambling restrictions. Christian van der Bol.

    • Anonymous says:

      A cruise port of this scale and unique complexity does not create any revenue, it creates the opposite: a massive multi-generational debt. Any landing fees will have to go to whoever pays to build it so they can recover their infrastructure investment via a multi-decade amortization schedule. We don’t even have the assurance that the current ships will come, let alone newer or larger ones. The idea that money will be created is absolutely misguided.

      • Anonymous says:

        Yes its such a bad investment that….. Dart wanted to fully fund it 100%, maintain it for 50 years, while we obstructed and protested the project because he was going to “get more too rich” from the dock, (and of course, we can’t stomach others profiting in this country) until he dropped it probably he felt it wasn’t worth dealing with the hassle. That’s how bad of an investment it is..

  21. Anonymous says:

    I’m glad someone has said it!! EVERYTHING IN THE HARBOUR WILL BE DAMAGED (DEAD) FOREVER. The idea of transplanting the coral heads is hogwash. ALSO, we could lost SEVEN MILE BEACH FOREVER.

    FOREVER means for all time, never to return. I don’t understand why this is even being discussed.

    • Anonymous says:

      Did you just discover the capslock function on your keyboard?

    • Anonymous says:

      Are you sure that’s the meaning of forever? I guess you learn something new everyday, who knew that’s what it meant!

    • Anonymous says:

      Scaremongering again, dredging harbour in GT which is approximatly 2 miles from the beach will have no effect on 7 mile beach. GT harbour is already a deep port , no current or tides flows towards the beach from the port, there will be no break water or bulkheads built to change the direction of currents.
      There are living EIA studies carried out on 90 years of dredging for aggregate around the coast of England in similar dept water. The results; no erosions to their beaches, no change of tide direction, no change of tide movement, no change in wave heights. These are real EIA studies that continued for almost 100 years, should any adverse effect to their inviornment appears on the chart, no more dredging for aggregate would be allowed, the British are very intelligent, they depend on practical experiences and not speculations or emotions when carrying out any projects.

    • Anonymous says:

      The earth is ENDING due to global warming, climate change, mini-ice ages, acid rain, solar flare, meteorites, volcanoes, plagues and plastic bags… and the seas will RISE and submerge the ENTIRE Cayman Islands under 200 feet of water. And very likely KILL all of us. So what you worried about? Build the freaking dock.

  22. Anonymous says:

    Most of the EAB board are on the NCC! I wonder why they agree with each other LOL

  23. B. Hurlstone says:

    Everyone should read the last paragraph of the above article again. It says a lot!!!

  24. Anonymous says:

    Adopt the “cable car system” for the cruise berthing facility – which will have minimal damage the environment and it will be a “win win” for all concerned.

    • Anonymous says:

      Man that cable thing was the most ridiculous idea I have ever seen.
      I mean kudos for thinking outside the box, but I don’t see how that thing could make the situation any better. They still have to walk out onto a dock (where they couldve just walked on shore from there) and then have to wait in line just like waiting for tenders and they have to do the same thing on the way back. I meant I would enjoy taking the air ride when ships arent there and maybe they have something underwater out on the platform, seems more like an attraction and something they might be able to do separately from the cruise dock? If they can get a big sponsor like James said maybe this could be done on another part of town?

    • Anonymous says:

      I have an even crazier idea, ballon rides to shore, but you have to swim back!

    • Anonymous says:

      Ah boy, too many “Freeportians” thumbing down on here. I wish we had an emperor and gladiators representing both sides. I’d give my last $ to see some blood and bet against the “Freeportians”. Now come on, let’s see how many of you there are.

  25. Anonymous says:

    This project is beyond disturbing- it says EVERYTHING about the corrupt and greedy reality of this government and these Islands. I will be ashamed to be Caymanian if this goes ahead!

  26. Anonymous says:

    If as much effort went in to the dump as is going into protecting these reefs, imagine where we would be? I am not saying stop protecting the reefs, but what I am saying is that I really hope these people who are fighting for the reefs are also recycling and reducing their waste footprint. It does not make sense to fight for the reef and at the same pollute, litter and not recycle. It all ends up in the dump and then drains into the sound.

    • Anonymous says:

      If the government took the 300+ million and finally implemented a waste management facility this would be a solution would it not? And save the nonsense about the terminal making money- it will NEVER make back the 300+million (plus the cost of lost income from destruction of the reef).

      • Anonymous says:

        They need investors dummy. They don’t have the 300M. There is no money being taken from any other project. Quite the contrary, this will bring in massive amounts of head taxes that will fund a lot of other future government projects. This is for the long term good of the island and it’s residents.

      • Anonymous says:

        All the cruise dock will accomplish is “more people more trash” and a destroyed reef as Grand Cayman is a wonderful dive destination and will work fine with out a cruise dock.. Until the garbage dump issues are resolve why create a bigger issue, Seriously a trash burning system that creates electric power should be put in such as what Palm beach Fl has done and with the improved infrastructure Grand Cayman can move fwd on additional tourism

    • Anonymous says:

      Fighting for the dump doesn’t bring in $5 a person x 2m people.

  27. Anonymous says:

    No Cayman govt will be crazy enough to take on a $200,000,000-500,000,000 project. And it cannot pass the FFR.

    We cannot hold the wider economy to ransom for the benefit of a handful of jewellery and cake sellers.

    • Anonymous says:

      EXACTLY!!!! So my kids can pay income taxes for the Kirks to sell some jewellery. Why doesn’t the government just hand them 200m?!? SAME DAMN THING!

      • Anonymous says:

        Ignorant comment. I am a taxi driver and my livelihood depends on this project,

        • Anonymous says:

          Oh you hear that tiny sound….it’s the worlds smallest violin playing just for you! Charge a decent, fair rate for a ride and you will pick up more business instead of fleecing anyone you can, especially tourists who don’t know any better. Drop your rate and we will use you more.

          • Anonymous says:

            Considering Uber is in 60 countries, including Central America, it won’t be long now before they come to Cayman and we can get decent fares.

        • Forelock says:

          Are you saying that you can pick up more fares in a day than you do now because of a dock. How so?

          I would have thought it more likely that the dock will cause shorter periods of higher demand for taxis.

          As each load of passengers will still take the same average amount of time to take to their destination so if we are not to keep the customers waiting, then more taxis will be required to deal with the peaks, which is more competition and so longer periods between fares for you.

          No Sir, I think its a good thing for taxi drivers when the passenger landing rate is lower for longer, as it is with the tenders.

          • Anonymous says:

            This is the most un informed response on here. Passengers have much more time in port when ships are berthed. Hours are wasted just getting people on and off the ships I’m Cayman now. If they have more time they will go more places, use more taxi and tours and the crew who spend almost as much as the passengers will actually be able to disembark.

        • Chris Ebanks says:

          Your livelyhood? Well then let’s just go right ahead and destroy our natural environment so that you can continue to set your own prices and rip people off, you greedy bastard! You should be ashamed of yourself for putting monetary value on something that can never be replaced.

        • Anonymous says:

          Here’s a tip- make your rates REASONABLE so people who live here would use a taxi when they go out at night! Last time I took a taxi down SMB they wanted $25 – greedy and entitled much?

        • Anonymous says:

          Reduce your ridiculous fares and get more rides. Taxis are a last resort for me. I would rather walk or risk a bus.

  28. Anonymous says:

    Who paid for the propaganda insert in todays Compass? Do they happen to own a retail store down town? They’re really going all out to brain wash people.

    It’s a shame that when they realize what a massive mistake the dock was it will be to late to do anything about it. The damage will be permanent. I don’t know how they sleep at night.

  29. Rp says:

    We don’t need this. We don’t need to compete with Jamaica, Cuba, Mexico and Honduras. We will never win, as those destinations provide higher profit margins to cruise ships.

    There is no exclusive destination around us! We would have no competition if we catered to the stayover tourists, families and the wealthy. People who will spend money while visiting and may invest in our island.

    We need to market to the middle age professionals with significant disposable income not to “all inclusive” budget people.

    We have everything we need (except for airport) to cater to the affluent vacationers. Top restaurants, check! Top hotels, check! Top diving, check! Sting ray city, check! Golfing, fishing, water sports, spas, gorgeous beach, weather check check check!

    Forget the piers and invest in the airport and then advertise!

  30. Anonymous says:

    It’s looking more like an expensive nightmare waiting to happen for the Caymans

  31. Anonymous says:

    If PPM go forward with this proposal knowing it will destroy the environment it is the final proof that they all have been bought and paid for by the duty free merchant class!

    • Anonymous says:

      If PPM don’t go forward with this proposal knowing how many people will lose jobs it is final proof they have been bought and paid for by the tender company owners who make millions upon millions off their monopoly.

      • Forelock says:

        Interesting. Aren’t some of the tender company owners also owners of the charter boats to the Sand Bar and diving spots that would do well if and when more people came ashore faster?

      • Anonymous says:

        if your main reason for such expense and destruction is due to the monopoly on the tenders, a far simpler solution would be to open the tender service up for competition.

        Occam’s razor at its best

      • Anonymous says:

        I am not convinced this is the solution. It’s way too costly both in terms of cost to the public purse and the delicate and unique marine environment. I want a solution but think we should shop around more, see what other options might be available.

  32. Anonymous says:

    What I need to hear for those supporting this project is the following;

    1. Where are all these extra thousands of people going to go when they come ashore? They are not all going to buy watches and rum cakes. There is no space on SMB or the Sandbar for them, and these are where the majority go currently.
    2.With an increase in numbers, it will mean 100’s more taxi’s and buses. Again, where will they be taking these people? What will happen to our roads with all these extra maniacs diving on them?
    3. Are you expecting to revitalize GT with more of the same crap they currently sell in the shops?
    4. Who is going to pay for the piers, the added infrastructure island wide in terms of roads etc?
    5. Destroying our environment is the worst idea I have ever heard, its why the majority of people visit Cayman. They do not come to buy rum cake. In fact, are the majority of Tortuga’s sales not export anyway? If this backfires, and our beach goes along with famous dive sites, what do you have as a backup plan?
    6. What kind of compensation will be given to the businesses that will be put out of business with this development? What will happen to all their employees?

    • Anonymous says:

      1 We need to revitalise and pedestrianize GT.
      2 There are many place to go, and I hear Camana is desperate during the week so plenty places to go
      3 No we need to build and offer more options but only stores can survive in the current climate (barely)
      4 The cruise ships and the money once paid to tender ships ($5 plus per person) can easily pay for the dock. infrastructure and improving Cayman should be helped by private sector but they obviously need an incentive and not a dying town to do so.
      5 Don’t buy into the total world end garbage you’ve been fed
      6 If you mean the tender operators I agree, CIG will need to help with either exit strategy or create some incentive to keep tenders needed for more than 4 ship days to make it viable. should be easy

    • Anonymous says:

      Only one company would be out of business. The tender company owners. Not many jobs lost there, when over a thousand permanent jobs will be created.

    • Anonymous says:

      You’re right! We need to restrict the overall revenue because the infrastructure can’t handle it. So instead of finding way to accommodate this new growth and revenue, maybe we should also cutback businesses like restaurants, hotels, clothing stores as well… that way we can meet our lower revenue expectations and make sure all the remaining companies can make some money! I love this economical model!

      • Anonymous says:

        You sound like you must be part of the masterminds behind the failed C4C group. Any chance you work for a hedge fund or faux financial leader?

  33. Anonymous says:

    No money for this. No guaranteed passenger arrivals, or other demonstrable committed benefit. No assurance that any large cruise ships will be built or put on this route. Certain marine park destruction and perpetual dredging and repairs. Liners will still have to tender. Port will still be closed over >30 days of the year due to bad weather. No improvement in embark/disembark times. Building something will not increase the appeal of the imported t-shirts, watches, and other tacky trinket merchandise that are flogged in GT.

    Unfortunately, the international shaming of this government might be the only way to avert this terrible idea founded on heavily flawed economic assumptions, vanity, and misplaced greed.

    Residents and stakeholders that care should be campaigning directly to the conservation directors at Carnival, Royal Caribbean, Norwegian, and global NGOs like: Coral Reef Alliance, Global Coral Reef Alliance, Reef Check, PADI, NAUI, AWARE, Cousteau Society, Endangered Seas Campaign (WWF), Center for Marine Conservation, ACOPS, Friends of the Earth International, Greenpeace – Oceans Campaign, International Institute for Sustainable Development, Institute of Nautical Archeology, International Ocean Institute, International Seakeepers Society, Ocean Futures Society, Reefs at Risk, Save our Seas, Scientific Committee on Ocean Research, Turtle Trax, and of course, IUCN.

    It’s just so dumb. Enough is enough.

    • Anonymous says:

      The only real “support” against this dock has come from international dive societies. All the locals I speak to are for it and understand the real impact to Cayman. Go foreign all you want but the dock will be built for Cayman and Caymanians.

      • Anonymous says:

        Greedy clusters of drop-out cab drivers that daydream of an assumed glut of port arrivals that might sanction a theoretical ritual ripoff load of 10 rather than 5 per roll. We would bankrupt the nation for generations and prostitute our environment for these dozens of idiots.

      • Anonymous says:

        You need to get out more.

      • Anonymous says:

        Actually the dock will be built by Jamaicans for the gain of a couple of already rich Caymanians, at the expenditure of everyone on this island and their children and their children’s children.

        In 20 years when the cruise industry has moved on, we will still paying for an unused, deteriorating dock and the Jewelry store owners would have either moved elsewhere or be hiding nicely behind their mansioned gates.

      • The Deacon says:

        Anonymous 6:07, You are either mistaken or lying. Take your pick.

    • Anonymous says:

      Don’t forget Al Gore.

    • Anonymous says:

      12;04 you missed the most important entity, the people of these Islands. The people that also needs to enjoy and play a part in the sustainable developments of these Islands, they need to be able to pay their bills feed and school their children, build a nice house, take vacations.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Meanwhile the hawks over at Faux News have now stated their wholehearted endorsement. Big surprise there.

  35. Anonymous says:

    Good. Now maybe can Moses can send the plan to where it belongs and start all over again with something much more reasonable and less costly.

You can comment anonymously. See CNS Comment Policy at the top of this page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Please support independent journalism in the Cayman Islands