Save campaign plans to show CIG level of opposition

| 12/10/2015 | 89 Comments
Cayman News Service

Silversides in George Town Harbour (Photo by Courtney Platt)

(CNS): Save Cayman campaigners and other groups opposing the dredging of the George Town Harbour and battling to persuade government not to destroy its unique marine environment with cruise ship piers are organising a peaceful protest at the weekend to show the strength of feeling in the community. The public already demonstrated its opposition to the current plans, at three to one against, during the post EIA consultation period, as did both the membership of the Chamber of Commerce and Cayman Islands Tourism Association (CITA).

But with government choosing to ignore public opinion, the campaigners want to show the authorities that the people are still determined to save the ancient reefs and historic wrecks in the harbour.

With permission from the RCIPS, the demonstration on the George Town harbour front will start at 3pm on Saturday 17 October to show the strong opposition to the government’s decision to move forward with the current cruise pier plans.

“This plan requires the destruction of a significant area of pristine coral reefs,” Jessica Lopez, a young Caymanian and one of the organisers, told CNS. “We support improvement to cruise facilities, however we oppose this method which involves unnecessary coral reef destruction. There are a number of other feasible options which will not require significant reef destruction and we support the government exploring and moving forward with one of these better options.”

She said that those involved in the campaign do not object to increased prosperity for the islands but believe that without the preservation the marine life, the economic future of the island is bleak.

“We are against a plan which will destroy the coral,” she explained. “We are gathering to show the government how widespread and strong the opposition to the destruction of GT harbour’s marine environment is amongst Caymanians. The majority of Caymanians are very concerned about the government’s announcement to move forward with this plan.”

Lopez said the peaceful protest was an opportunity for those who want to see the marine environment protected to come out and stand together and plead with our government to listen to the people.

“We have had a tremendous response from the community. Already almost 500 people have confirmed their attendance,” she said.

As numerous questions remain about support and justification for the project, not to mention the costs, politicians have been surprisingly quiet. Ezzard Miller, the independent member for North Side, who stands firmly against the project, and Opposition Leader McKeeva Bush, who opposes this particular plan, though not the idea of piers, have both publicly expressed their positions, but most of Cayman’s legislators have remain relatively quiet.

In a Facebook posting George Town MLA Winston Connolly appears to offer support in principle to the idea of an enhanced port, but despite being a member of government, appears to have not seen the documentation which the premier said had paved the way to move the process to the next step. Connolly wrote that there was “no agreed facility, there is no approved plan and options are being considered”, raising the question about what decision has been made.

Premier Alden McLaughlin told a Chamber of Commerce audience last week that the Outline Business Case by consultants PricewaterhouseCoopers was “favourable” and as a result the government was proceeding to the next stage to talk to the UK and the cruise lines. But Connolly said the end decision “must take into consideration whether it is beneficial to all concerned … and the long term effect on our people’s socio-economic future and our environment”, which implies that he, too, has not seen this critical document.

“I am prepared to make a decision once presented with all the options,” he stated. “Right now it’s very premature to say anything because no decision has been made, nor could it be as all the options have not been presented in their totality.”

As the decision regarding the development of cruise peers polarizes the community, the Save Cayman is hoping to see lots of people on the streets on Saturday to deliver a clear message to Cabinet that this costly and destructive project does not have the support of the community.

International press coverage has been negative for Cayman, as both the tourism and environmental media as well as the main stream news houses have written about the proposed reef destruction, which given the precarious situation for reef systems around the world has shocked many commentators.

So far an international petition asking the CIG not to dredge the harbour has drawn some 25,000 signatures (see here).

Anyone wishing to join the peaceful protest is asked to meet by 3pm opposite Breezes by the Bay on Saturday 17 October.

For more information visit the Save Cayman Facebook page.

Tags: , ,

Category: Marine Environment, Science & Nature

Comments (89)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    I have been following this so called petition and I have seen a ton of comments from international people signing and saying things along the lines of “I have never been there but I don’t think you should touch the reef”

    And we are supposed to base our own Caymanian decisions of the opinions of those that not only have not stepped foot on our shores but have no skin in the game nor have any idea about the project.

    • Anonymous says:

      You are so right! Especially when we have quantifiable, scientific data to measure public support for the dock, such as the 6,000 “likes” on Facebook. We know those are 6,000 real Caymanian Facebook users. And don’t forget all the reports by overseas consultants that support the dock. They know more about Cayman waters than anyone local.

    • Anonymous says:

      First of all these people from overseas are being hoodwink into thinking cayman is going to destroy the reef and we won’t have any habitat left for our sea life, this is far from the truth, people behind these lies are desperate and will say anything to have there way. GT harbour possess no reef. The definition of a reef; a ridge of jagged rock,coral, or sand just above or below the surface of the sea, often dangerous to ships.
      Shoal,bar, sandbar, sandbank.
      It goes on to say, waves crash over the reef.
      Where in GT harbour dors this description exist? A reef is a hazardous obstruction.

      • SSM345 says:

        Nor’Westers when they hit our shores show exactly where the reefs are, there are lots of them in GT, it might have to get rough first, but they ARE there. Need an example? Cheeseburger Reef.

    • SSM345 says:

      11:16, do you know what a Tourist is? It’s someone who visits a country on holiday. We survive on Tourists both past, present and future. If people all over the world are telling us they don’t support this, then you can take that as a loss for our Tourism Product because they probably won’t visit. The success of this monstrosity depends solely on people visiting our Islands. If I were you, I would give a sh*t about what other people think, whether they have been here or not. There is an entire world outside of this speck of a rock, and they can determine our fate you idiot.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Seeing as the cruise lines are starting to line up to make commitments to the project it looks like all systems are a go.

    • Anonymous says:

      Line up? Where? So far only Carnival have expressed any interest and that’s a heck of a long way from a committment to the project. Right now this all still hangs on the dubious belief that ‘if we build it they will come’.

  3. Anonymous says:

    People keep missing on a couple of things.
    1) The design is not final so the message should not be “No Dock” (unless you are a Briggs) it should be improve the design.
    2) If there is any hope for revitalizing George Town it has to be a plan for berthing and the land side of town combined. Either on their own is pointless. We, our people, our capital and our country need both.

    • Just Sayin' says:

      I don’t dive and I don’t own any tender boats. The dock is a ridiculous waste of time and money and will see no added benefit to Cayman. You bend over the barrel planted by the school yard bully cruise lines and their idle threats to pull out if you want. History tells us otherwise.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Be afraid, Cayman.Be very afraid.

  5. Anonymous says:

    We are still beating a dead horse. Anyone can see by all the likes on FB . It has now reached over 6400 likes. It shows that people have been resarching for themselves and found out the truth. What is the truth ? We are in trouble of losing an entire industry and all that is tied to it. Because we are in denial, we have believed that there is no one else that has: 1) a pretty beach 2) friendly people 3) that we don’t need a cruise ship facility 4) That there is only stay over tourist who have any value for money.
    No , I can tell you everyone who went to that meeting in Cozumel, Mexico can tell you that they are not sitting back poor and homeless. Cozumel by itself with 84 sq. miles is doing 3.5 million tourists from cruise lines and has built not one but 3 cruise ship facility while we are going down in tourists. The FCCA meeting is where one can talk to high level representatives from all cruise lines. When I mentioned to all the representatives that “Cayman is going to build a pier” they were overjoyed and basically said it would be a big help for the future of Caymans’ cruise industry. One large cruise line said it would be the only way to stay in the Cruise ship business. Mexicans are not hanging around anywhere, they are working. Their population is 70,000 people they average $1000 with tips per month. But their cost of living is cheaper then Cayman. So they have a good life. We need to stop worrying about Balboa . If a dive company wants it then move it. Otherwise then it really has no value.If it does then move it somewhere else . It should not be at the publics’ expense.Neither should the coral be at the publics’ expense at the Balboa. The port is the entrance for the cargo. . It is not the top dive sites on the island which can be verified in any advert that the dive community pays for. Why should we move it? They constantly said it can’t be moved. We should just conclude it is collateral damage.
    When the pilot made a mistake and dropped that anchor on that reef in front of Don Fosters’ dive co. VOLUNTEERS came to the rescue. Then if they would be given a time by gov’t that doesn’t interfere with the project they can move it.
    It is time for GT to come back and be renewed. I hope our new town center will have Apts. over coffee shops and bars and close the streets off so young and old can enjoy.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Once again we see a complete lack of editorial balance and credibility from CNS. The statements made in this article promote a view that there are credible, cost effective and environmentally advantageous alternatives without any actual detail to support that view. Comments like this; “There are a number of other feasible options which will not require significant reef destruction and we support the government exploring and moving forward with one of these better options.” show that CNS is happy to promote the fairyland view that the current proposal is evil and everything else is good. This is nonsense and supports an emotional response from people rather than a rational one.
    The reality is that the proposal on the table will cause less environmental impact than any other serious proposal considered previously and yet this is being ignored.
    Without any credible counter proposals made by SaveCayman the only logical conclusion is that they are against any dock development at all. This either makes them against cruise tourism or part of an effort by vested interests to stop any dock development. Which is it?
    Before people start protesting they should ask themselves who is behind all of this and whether the information they are getting is real or adjusted to help others rather than a perceived threat.

    • Kirk Bot Terminator 345 says:

      Please read this Economic Impact of Cruise Tourism http://www.f-cca.com/downloads/2012-Cruise-Analysis-vol-1.pdf.

      WITHOUT a cruise berthing facility, the Cayman Islands achieved the following:

      * U.S. News & World Report Seven Mile Beach ‘#1′ in the world
      * Visitors rank Grand Cayman #3 in Caribbean
      * Ranked #2 in 10 Best Island in the Caribbean – 2015 Travelers’ Choice Awards

      FACT: Cayman would have to change its gambling law if ships stay in port beyond 6PM.
      FACT: We currently have NO, cruise industry development strategy.

      Another recommended read is http://newsok.com/article/5439244 – what is to stop the same from happening to Cayman after the port is built?

      Why can’t we market the lack of cruise berthing facility as “preserving” the tradition of how the Pirates or seaman first came ashore these islands? Why do we want to be like every other Caribbean island?

      • Anonymous says:

        Terminator ,preserving Cayman traditions is not a priority,and in fact is frowned upon by the group who are opposing it ,made up mostly of expats among us.(Note the mocking at the mention of God or church and our Sunday trading law).So if we decided to go with the “preserving tradition” slant ,these same individuals who are behind Save Cayman,will still be protesting.

      • Anonymous says:

        To: KBT345 or should I call you briggs clone1? Interesting you point to the FCCA report that clearly states that the on island spend per head is at least 35% lower than other leading destinations! Why? Because it takes an hour in the morning to get off the ship and another hour to get back on when it gets busy in the afternoons. Limited hours on island = lower spending.

        To mirror your format:
        FACT: It’s not about the ships staying past 6pm. it’s about cruise guests making the most of their time on island. Ships are less likely about staying after 6pm because they still need to get to their next itinerary and faster = more fuel = expensive.
        FACT: You are right. It’s difficult to have a cruise tourism strategy when we are the only major port in the Caribbean without a dock! Cayman spends no marketing dollars to attract cruise tourists and currently the overall infrastructure dedicated to cruise tourism is minimal. The cruise lines are focused on having a high guest experience and Cayman does need to improve this area.

        An interesting article you have provided. The port mentioned has had major problems with fog delaying cruise ships creating significant customer service problems. I believe this is the biggest issue and the reduction in cruise calls is related to this rather than any other reason.

        It’s not a question about being like every other island but providing a relevant service to visitors. Some people look at the tenders as quaint. Not sure what is quaint about waiting in line for an hour to get on or off the ship!

  7. Just Askin' says:

    Can we leave the myth of Caymanian unemployment out of this debate? There is no such thing, the unemployable and entitled will still be just that, dock or no dock.

    • Anonymous says:

      8:14 Certainly we can and at the same time,let us drop the myth that there is no xenophobia displayed by some expats here towards Caymanians and Caymanian traditions.(See your comment and that of the poster @13/10/2015 at 9:21 am).

  8. T.N.T. says:

    Ya’ll need to remember that Bayshore Mall was built where it is as a result of previous PPM promises of the cruise piers being built to the south of where they are now, the Atlantic Star debacle I believe. The owners are already compromising by accepting the more northerly location so maybe we should all comprise a little as well and let them blow up our crystal clear and unique harbour.

    • Anonymous says:

      Actually the piers in Atlantic star plan were still further north. Bayshore was built long before Chuckie made a mess of things from my memory. I also remember Adrien popping champagne when PPM got voted out because he knew atllantic star was then scrapped.

  9. Anonymous says:

    This march will be supported by a few expats and paper Caymanians, (under 500 ) so where are the majority of the 55,000 cayman residents

    • Anonymous says:

      This Tibbetts will be there!

    • Batabanoooooo says:

      Caymanians only march in parades promoting debauchery and other islands’ cultures.

      Maybe if they proposed a procession of cars and SUVs with ACs on full………

      • Anonymous says:

        Batabanoooooo,,your comment is hateful and should be condemned and pulled by the moderators .It is nothing but hate speech,and so is the comment by anonymous at 13/10/2015 at 9:21 am.

      • Anonymous says:

        @ 9:10 am .You are a bigoted and xenophobic idiot.

    • Anonymous says:

      Eatin’ turtle probably

    • Anonymous says:

      Wow, a fortune teller…go forecast your own demise and stop trying to influence people with your wishwash

    • One345girl says:

      Leave it to someone to focus on segregation as always – expats this… Caymanians that… please let’s just focus on the issue at hand and stop pointing fingers at who does what. I am a Caymanian – I was born and I grew up here and so were my parents and grandparents, etc….this is just as important to me as it is for a “paper” Caymanians. Stop focusing on the negative and lets all unite and take a stand for once! It affects all of us.

    • Anonymous says:

      This “paper Caymanian” nonsense has to stop. We all came from somewhere else. It is simply idiotic to pretend you are more important because of where your parents happen to be born. Get over it! Love, a Tibbetts

    • Generation X says:

      What generation do I need to be in order to count?

  10. Anonymous says:

    Those who are not well informed technically on the alternatives proposed can consider the following facts. Alternative sites around the island have farrrrrrrr greater environmental impacts than the dock being in GT as proposed. The floating dock proposal had many advantages however the sheer cost of that development proposal blew it out of the water and the engineering had not been developed. The cable car proposal was presented with a proposal not having done their home work at all for the piers can not be located offshore without dredging due to the fact that the continental shelf is small and cannot accommodate the pier lengths. As far as cantilevered concrete piers over the wall/drop off without support absolutely shows a lack of knowledge on the matter of realistic and practical engineering. The existing proposal is the most practical and least expensive alternative with the lowest environmental impact of all the alternatives.

    • B. Hurlstone says:

      Quote: “The existing proposal is the most practical and least expensive alternative with the lowest environmental impact of all the alternatives.”

      WRONG! The most practical and certainly least expensive is NO DOCK.
      Think about it.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Every other cruise dock I see or read about ends up promoting coral growth and marine life in and around it not the opposite as those who are against the dock say. Some are even highly popular dive sites when ships are not in. The more I read the more I realize there has to be some serious money behind the push against the dock. Seeing the per person tender rate confirmed in a release last week gives a much clearer picture of where that comes from.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Jumping the gun as usual. Government have not committed to any design at this stage, so this is not a protest to dredging, but against a dock. Briggs is doing a good job of masking his financial interest of tenders under the guise of “protecting the environment.” His save Cayman minions will not support any dock no matter how environmentally friendly they build it.

    • Anonymous says:

      It’s obvious you not only do not know what you are talking about, but you also do not know Adrien Briggs.

    • Anonymous says:

      There is no way to environmentally contain the tonnage of hardpan dredging required or the “reef and sponge suffocating” suspended particulate it will produce and transport with current and wave action. There are few dredge operations of this scale in existence, none in a bluewater scenario, and certainly none ever contemplated in a marine park at one of the world’s best scuba diving locations.

  13. Anonymous says:

    At some point people need to get together and understand that cruise berthing and cargo need upgrades. We cannot continue as is and expect things to improve or even remain the same. The world moves on, possibly without us.
    Do we want to be completely left behind? Some people say yes but for the majority that is not an option. Few alternatives and even fewer real alternatives have been presented in comparison to the current governments plans.

    • Anonymous says:

      Fine Kirkbot, why you in such a hurry to get that dock done? We waited 30 years, another few months to study all options and impact won’t hurt. Oh, might hurt your interests of course.

    • Anonymous says:

      At some point you mindless Kirkbots need to realise that THERE ARE OTHER SOLUTIONS which do not require the destruction of our reefs and marine habitat if you put half as much effort into finding an alternative there would be one- why the hell does it have to be one that causes damage?!?!

  14. Anonymous says:

    Fact Checklist:

    The new study show 6 acres total and says it can be moved.
    Balboa can be moved.
    No flooding risk
    No increased wave risk
    Increase customers spending on shore
    More time for passengers and crew on shore
    Secure a cargo dock without having to dredge out and build a second dock
    Create jobs for Caymanians
    Secure business for George Town and help in its revitalization.
    Encourage GT land owners to re-invest instead of closing stores.
    Prevent increased unemployment
    Prevent crime increase
    This is an important revenue stream for government and local businesses alike.

    • Anonymous says:

      Another instant expert!!! This place is crawling with oceanology experts all of a sudden!! Where are they on the dump leaching into north sound?? Nowhere to be found. So, dear Caymanians, these “fact” producers have no verified facts, and only their own interests at heart, not those of Cayman. Believe them at your peril.

    • Anonymous says:

      the dock will also:
      cure all diseases in Cayman
      rid us of all greedy expats
      show tourists that Cayman is a unique destination, not like those other ports with no dock
      destroy all mosquitos on the island
      Make all Caymanians millionaires

      It seems the dock maybe the “Second coming”, at least for the Kirk family

  15. Anonymous says:

    I said “Where was the voices of SaveCayman, the tender company, the overseas experts, the famous actresses, and The National Trust when uncle DART was going to build the dock?”???

    All i can hear in answer are crickets!

    Each of you against this dock proposal, which is the least destructive of the last few dock proposals (according to the Baird report), please remind me of your public statements and anti-destruction protests when Dart was going to build it.

    Thanks.

    • Anonymous says:

      The opposition was there but it was shot down so quickly we didn’t need to panic. Now that we have a government in place with is corrupt and has financial local backing its a real danger

      • Anonymous says:

        Your response is pretty weak to say the least. So, what you would have us infer from your response is:

        1) Dart and/or the UDP Administration (who were in power at the time of Dart’s proposal) are NOT corrupt; and

        2) Dart did not or could not obtain the necessary financing to build the dock?

        You are talking about the same Dart from Camana Bay and Kimpton developments right that could not get the financing??

        Anyway, what is the dock proposal from SaveCayman? How do you guys suggest we build it? Or what do you suggest we build to allow the bigger ships to dock up/berth? Since you say you are not against building a dock.

    • Anonymous says:

      If Dart was building this facility ,we would see the same names that are calling themselves Save Cayman signing a different petition this one would be called ‘Save our Future, build the piers’.

  16. Anonymous says:

    I keep hearing people talk about this project providing jobs for Caymanians….. I think NOT!! Majority of the work force will be imported. Reason being is that there are not any Caymanians with the skill set to head a team to build this dock. If Caymanians do get a job on this project, and I mean laborer, they will be the minority, out numbered by work permit holding constructions workers. Just take a look at most of the on land construction projects going on now and I guarantee that you can count the Caymanians on one hand. Imagine a marine construction project…. even less Caymanians on the job.

  17. Anonymous says:

    “I am prepared to make a decision once presented with all the options,” he stated.

    Sounds like another Blair or Obama in the making. Don’t we have a democracy? Then engage your bloody voters, don’t ride roughshod over them!

  18. Anonymous says:

    Between cayman news service and save cayman it is getting a bit ridiculous where they try to make it sound like the kirks are the only ones that depend on cruising. Something that I think gets missed or intentionally misstated is the statement that this port project is only for George Town merchants.Yes they are the most obvious since they are located right in front of the docks but these visitors end up all over the island on tours and there is a tax per person around $16 I think that goes straight to government. Even if we were to single out the business directly in george town, don’t they hire hundreds of people? These people make salaries, buy groceries, pay rent, eat out, go to the liquor store, take their kids for an ice cream cone, pay school fees, dry clean their laundry …I think you get my point. If cruises start to drop like I her people saying they hope, there are only a few large investors out there with the kind of cash available and needed to snatch up the land in town. The sad point is that this is the direction I see george town heading if something isn’t done to help bring business back to george town. So many businesses have closed over the last 5 or 6 years. This to me is really the only evidence you need to know something needs to be done.

  19. Walkers Road.... says:

    Recently I went to Dolphin Discovery in West Bay which is across the street from the Turtle Farm.. Why cant we use that location? Or even somewhere close to that area? The water seems to be deep enough and that’s just based on the dark blue color of the ocean in that area.. I am not saying that it is a perfect spot cause truthfully I have never swam out there.. However, did we even consider that area? Was any test done in that area to see if something could be done? I am not from West Bay but its easy to see that West Bay is very tourist friendly.. By the Dolphin Discovery alone is three attractions plus restaurants.. Hell is around the corner as well.. Its not far from 7 Mile Beach and also isn’t the Kittiwake a short boat ride from that area? Not to mention access to the Sound is not far either.. It will be easier for tourist to visit Stingray City, Rum Point etc. from West Bay.. We should give these ships an option.. Hey do you want to dock in West Bay or would you prefer to been tendered in town? The Turtle Farm and the Kittiwake are investments made by the government.. Maybe they should look in to bringing direct traffic to those locations rather than pumping more money in the private businesses on the water front..

    • Anonymous says:

      Unfortunately anywhere past NW point is too open to the weather for much of the year, especially in the winter when there are more cruise ship calls. Georgetown is situated where it is because of the natural harbour and time and again many different experts have stated this is the best place for a cruise ship berthing facility. The current proposal is better because it is building on areas used by cruise and cargo ships as anchorages for many years which means that there is far less active reef than other areas and that claimed by save cayman.

    • Anonymous says:

      Because the Kirks bought all the land in GT

    • Anonymous says:

      Mac paid over $800,000 for a piece of land up there, now valued $70,000, so maybe the country also can at last benefit from that parcel in West Bay.

  20. Anonymous says:

    The floating dock and ski lift ideas are a bigger waste of money than the concrete dock. Please can we just stop talking about these nonsense alternatives.

  21. Anonymous says:

    This campaign needs to focus and really think about what they are trying to save.
    My view is that they are not trying to Save Cayman Jobs.

    • Anonymous says:

      So. Maybe, just maybe there are things more important than your claim of Cayman Jobs

    • Anonymous says:

      Really? Lets just say that the skylift is implemented, how will that not have the same positive effect on jobs as the pier? And be cheaper, and do less damage? So what’s your problem? Skylift could create even more jobs, needs people to run it.

  22. Anonymous says:

    Waiting for Dalek kirkbots to champion their nonsense…everyone against the selection of this most damaging and expensive option needs to show up. I commend Ms Lopez for taking a very sensible initiative, a voice of reason against the money grabbing shop owners, who would sell their own Grandmothers in their greed for the filthy lucre…their tactics on this very website are nothing short of a disgrace and shows exactly what kind of people they are. A less damaging alternate (skybridge) would be just as good for them, but they poo poo it because clearly they have no interest in the company who would install it. I think they may have done themselves less favours than they think they have…they have created more opposition- and I for one am really pleased about that.

    • Anonymous says:

      You don’t sound very educated, your opinion doesn’t affect my life. Hope you continue to be jealous for the rest of your life, sucka.

      • Anonymous says:

        Name calling your best shot 3.02? Really? Nothing else to offer? Like enligthenment as to why 1.30 is wrong? Thought not. To much strain on your one brain cell

        • Anonymous says:

          That one must’ve got under your skin, huh? You sound a little guilty there. One mention of jealousy and you start stuttering!

    • Anonymous says:

      Sounds like you care more about trying to bring down a few families than thinking about what is best for the island. Typical jealous behaviour. You’re probably not very successful.

      • Anonymous says:

        In the top 2% of earners punk. Jealousy no, reality yes, port lies no. Current port dock is only best for the island in terms of being best for you and your interests. For others it does nothing-jobs may even go, and the environment, once destroyed will never come back. You want to risk that? For your short term gain?

        Ah, Cayman kind…

    • Anonymous says:

      I for one am not a shop owner and have nothing to gain personally from the dock being built. However I think it is the right thing to do. The alternatives are far worse either now or over the next 5 to 10 years. My objection to a skybridge is that no one is thinking it through properly and can actually state how they will deal with equipment failure which will happen at some point. Everything mechanical breaks at some point and especially in a marine environment. So what is the back up plan when thousands of cruise visitors are trapped on the wrong side of a broken skybridge trying to get back to their ships? This central point is either ignored or treated as hostile by those who are trying to stop the current dock plan.

      • Anonymous says:

        All you pro porters, when all your irrelevant arguements come home to haunt you, I will be laughing my head off!

      • Anonymous says:

        A preventative maintenance schedule. Thousands of these things run in corrosive environments during the hardest winters conditions on earth, and few of them break down like you suggest. Plus there are two of them, and there will still be tendering.

  23. Anonymous says:

    Reading from Facebook Ms. Lopez says there are 3 alternatives
    Deep Water Berthing
    Skybridge
    Floating Dock

    My comments are that I agree to a certain point that we should see how much deeper the piers can be made because every foot deeper means you take some dredging out.

    Sky Bridge still has some proving to do but with those guys their main push is to get the piers deeper to reduce or eliminate dredging.

    Floating Dock is a fairy tale that doesn’t make sense.

    End of story is let us get together and push CIG to place the piers as deep as possible.

    Even in its current state half of the dredge area is only going to increase the water depth by about 5 feet. The more of the 10ft area right by the dock we can eliminate the better for all the surrounding reefs.

    • Gonzales says:

      We don’t need no stinkin’ dock!

    • Anonymous says:

      Skybridge cannot be used. It is not used in any country of the world to take people from a Cruise ship to land. Yes , they have broken down where helicopters are the only way to get people stuck back to ground level. Yes, they have looked at placing the piers as far away from shore as possible . They plan to use pilings everywhere they can so as not to hurt the environment like Cozumel Mexico. Yes , Balboa will have to go. Eden rock and Sotos’ reef should be ok. They are not considered by any company in Cayman as the best dive sites in Cayman . If they are, show adverts telling people to dive there in magazines. Yes you’re right Floating Docks are a fairy tale. Yes, Turtle Farm area could hold a smaller ship not the big ones we need. Yes, you could build a larger cruise pier if you destroy a larger area of reef to block the current but that would destroy 7 mile beach. Yes, you could have built it in East End. You could also have built it in the North sound but more destruction of reefs. Also in Red Bay which would have been wonderful for taxis and busses. But more destruction of barrier reefs and more removal of turtle grass and some coral heads inside of reef.
      DOE forbids moving 1-2 coral heads from Red Bay channel. So when you see dive boats going out of red bay channel stop and watch how they approach the channel. They will make a huge curve from the dock to the left and stay left and close to the left side going out of the reef because of those small coral heads. Insanity! Anywhere else in the world would have removed the coral heads. It is only a small amount of time before someone who doesn’t know and wrecks their boat.

      • Eejit says:

        You do know there will still be tenders right, for all the other ships, either way?

      • Anonymous says:

        You need to reconcile the current depth of those waters with the depth required to clear propulsion pods on an Oasis/Genesis Class ship. It is hard for people to understand how much deeper we will actually need to go, the scale of soft powdery material that needs to be removed and what that process will do to regional waters for miles. The scale of the initial dredge has few global precedents, none in a blue water port, and there has not been any discussion of the maintenance dredging that will be the responsibility and guarantee of the CIG/Port – another budget that doesn’t yet exist and hasn’t been factored.

        • Anonymous says:

          That is the most ridiculous comment I’ve heard on here. So many much larger and deeper dredging projects all over the Caribbean without considering the world. You are talking more made up garbage than save cayman

        • Anonymous says:

          At a maximum the dredging is 10 ft in GT. For more than half of the project the dredging is less than 5 ft.

Please include your email address in the form below if you are using your real name. You can use a pseudonym, with or without leaving an email address, or just leave the form blank to be "Anonymous". All comments will be moderated before they are published. Please read the CNS Comment Policy at the top of this page.

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

SIGN UP FOR THE CNS NEWS LETTER, SENT EVERY WEEKDAY STRAIGHT TO  YOUR INBOX