National Trust urges voters to reject call for cruise pier
(CNS): A costly permanent cruise berthing facility has the potential to cause enormous environmental damage when there are other options to help Caymanians who are still dependent on the cruise sector to transition and adapt, the National Trust for the Cayman Islands (NTCI) has said. The local non-profit organisation has formally declared its opposition to the inadequate question posed by the government and is urging people to ‘Vote No’ next week.
The Trust has deep concerns about a cruise dock in George Town and the threat mass cruise tourism poses to the economic, socio-cultural and environmental sustainability of Cayman.
“We want to make clear our position that the National Trust remains opposed to developing cruise berthing infrastructure because it is not in the best interest of the Cayman Islands,” the NPO stated
in a release about the referendum question that voters will be asked next Wednesday.
The members of Cayman’s oldest non-profit, which focuses on protecting the Cayman Islands’ culture, heritage and natural resources, noted the lack of substance in the referendum question and the lack of economic benefit to the wider community. The trust members believe that the islands do not have the carrying capacity for mass cruise tourism.
Instead, Cayman should focus on new attractions and tours, reducing overcrowding and abuse of the limited marine sites, meeting demands from visitors for more cultural experiences, and creating new jobs and business opportunities for Caymanians, the Trust has said.
“There is no evidence that building piers will bring economic benefits to the country or to those who depend on tourism for their livelihood,” the statement read. “The National Trust is advocating for a more sustainable approach than mass cruise tourism if we are to preserve places of historic, natural and maritime heritage for present and future generations – as our mandate directs.
“A permanent cruise berthing facility would cost the country several hundred million dollars, whether it is paid for directly with government borrowing or through lost revenue if a cruise line or other private companies pay for the build. The vast financial cost to the country is not justified by the proportionately low level of revenue generated and number of jobs in the cruise sector.”
Statistics released by the Economics and Statistics Office for 2023 revealed the passenger tax income from cruise visitors was $12.8 million (1.2% of government revenue), considerably less than the $74 million (7%) from stayover visitors through accommodation and airport taxes. That year, cruisers spent an estimated CI$95 per head, about CI$133 million in total, compared to the CI$600 million that overnight guests spent.
“If we continue to open the floodgates to mass cruise tourism, we risk damaging our long-stay sector and jeopardising this far higher income,” the Trust warned, but said the country is in a position to change the approach.
“In positioning ourselves as an environmentally conscious Caribbean destination that is not desperate for mass cruise tourism, we could boost our more valuable long stay sector and attract more of those high spending visitors,” the Trust said.
The UPM government and those supporting a cruise pier have been focused on the drop in business for harbourfront retailers and watersports operators. But the reality is that the government has never revealed the exact number of Caymanians who are totally dependent on cruise income and could not make up the shortfall in other ways.
ESO data shows that around 1,500 people were in cruise-related jobs in 2024, but it is estimated that more than half of them are on work permits. Any locals whose livelihoods depend on cruise tourism could easily be helped in other ways.
“If the number of jobs available in cruise were to fall further, there is a growing long-stay job market with three new hotels currently being built,” the Trust said.
The Cayman Islands Government should ensure that Caymanians are given fair opportunities to become employed in this growing stayover job market, as natural attrition over the coming years will make even fewer families dependent on cruise for their income, the NPO noted.
Building a pier is not the solution to the problems plaguing Cayman’s tourism sector, both cruise and stayover, and the Trust has joined the chorus of voices calling for a new approach and the rejection of a costly, permanent cruise berthing facility that would cause enormous environmental destruction and invite mass tourism well beyond the capacity of these islands.
“The National Trust believes that allowing our cruise tourism to settle naturally at around the current level would be the ideal solution for Cayman both environmentally and economically, as it would lessen the impact on our overcrowded natural attractions, which are already overwhelmed on busy cruise days, and would give the small number of cruise related job holders time to migrate to other occupations.
“Instead of building piers, we urge the Government to upgrade the shore-side cruise services into a state-of-the-art facility so that cruise visitors enjoy a far higher quality experience onshore. The revitalisation of George Town should be revisited to showcase our history and our culture, including tree-lined squares, cafés, restaurants and shops selling good local and regional products — all at a fraction of the cost of a berthing facility,” the release stated.
“The Cayman Islands should aim to regain and retain our position [as] a unique destination which stands out from the crowd rather than go for the numbers like our competitors. A more thoughtfully managed tourism industry would be gentler on the environment and better suited to Cayman’s limited and very valuable resources, and would benefit Caymanians, residents and our children in the long term.”
The NPO urged everyone to consider these points and decide whether to vote ‘yes’ for cruise berthing infrastructure and mass cruise tourism or ‘no’ for a small but high-quality cruise product more suited to the size of Grand Cayman.
The Trust also raised concerns about how the next government would respond to a ‘yes’ vote, given the vagueness of the question. The CIG is asking voters to answer the question “Should the Cayman Islands develop cruise berthing infrastructure?” without providing any information on its design, location, business model, feasibility or long-term economic, social and environmental effects.
“As the referendum is non-binding, the next administration can either choose to ignore the wish of the people or can claim it gives them carte blanche to proceed with whatever cruise berthing proposal they wish,” the Trust chief warned.
See the full statement below:
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: 2025 General Elections, Elections, Marine Environment, Politics, Science & Nature
I voted against the pier. We are quickly destroying our natural resources which are the very things that make Cayman unique and attracts our repeat visitors.
I will be voting yes on the Pier.
The country needs the tax revenue and jobs.
The country does not have the money, it does not have room on its streets, or beaches, or stingray city , or housing for a thousand imported low wage workers, or room for another 200 buses for the extra thousands coming ashore, or enough toilets for those we DO have, and so on.
Not willing to destroy what’s left for us so that Foreign “ Caymanians “ can sell more T-shirts.
If just 60% of the 10,000 passengers off two mega ships get off that’s 6000 people.
At 20 persons a bus , that’s 300 busses. Each bus will need 50feet or so x 300, that’s almost 3miles , of just busses, a solid line from GT to the ritz.
Add normal traffic and taxis, that is logjam standstill..!!
Even if we magically can afford the piers, we simply don’t have room on the Island to meet the commercial interests of the foreign business owners screaming more more more.
Dont be duped, have them or visit yourself the story of the Falmouth cruise berthing in Jamaica.
“Listen, folks, the Cayman Islands are already a beautiful place — everybody knows that. But they’re missing one thing — a *big, beautiful port. And not just any port, believe me, this has to be the biggest, the most luxurious port you’ve ever seen. We’re talking about a port that’s going to make a ton of money. Lots and lots of money — I mean, huge profits, folks.
We’re going to build a port so fantastic, so tremendous, that ships will be lining up to come in from all over the world. It’s going to be efficient, it’s going to be modern, and it’s going to be so gorgeous — people will be in awe. And let me tell you, when that port is busy, making money, it’s going to be a money machine. We’re talking billions of dollars, folks. Billions!
This isn’t just about building something nice — this is about making a fortune. The Cayman Islands will become a massive hub of trade, commerce, and wealth. And I know how to make it happen. Nobody builds ports better than me. Nobody knows how to turn a project into a goldmine like I do.
So let’s do it. Let’s build the biggest, most beautiful, most profitable port you’ve ever seen. We’re going to make the Cayman Islands rich — so rich, it’ll be legendary. Believe me, folks, we’re going to make a lot of money — lots of money — with this port. It’s gonna be yuge, it’s gonna be beautiful, and it’s gonna bring in the cash. And we’re gonna do it big, we’re gonna do it right, and we’re gonna make the Cayman Islands great — and wealthy — again.”
was that from Donald trumpf
Don’t want cruise piers…? It’s simple.
Then don’t vote ANY PPM..
WRONG
CIG must stop spending. With 2.9 per cent unemployed is that a lot statistic ?
The country will be spending the tax revenue , and more, repaying the $450Million debt . Then they’ll come and ask you for more by way of increased fees and duties, in turn putting up the cost of Everything….think before you blab.
I strongly support the National Trust’s call to vote “No” on the cruise berthing facility. The environmental and economic risks far outweigh the limited benefits.
George Town already suffers from severe cruise ship pollution. According to the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT), it receives 41.8 million tonnes of scrubber washwater annually—14.1% of global port discharges—all from cruise ships. This is the highest, GLOBALLY. This toxic mix of heavy metals and acidic water threatens our coral reefs and marine life, regardless of how they park here.
Further, cruise ships are among the most carbon-intensive travel options. They emit more significantly more CO₂ per passenger-kilometer than flights, even when accounting for hotel stays. This undermines our sustainability goals and contributes to climate change, contradicting the ACT ads that “cruise is clean”. Oxymoronic and misleading.
Economically, the cruise sector employs about 1,500 people, many of whom are on work permits, in a workforce of 60,000 . We will be committing generations of Caymanians to invest hundreds of millions into a pier which benefits a small fraction of the population while exposing the entire community to environmental and financial risks. Let us not disregard in a few decades, in order to protect the planet, shipping could be restricted to only necessary reasons like trade, not leisure on megaships. Nor should we disregard these companies buy private islands and are currently terraforming them into their own destinations, reducing need on us.
Instead, we should focus on sustainable tourism that preserves our natural beauty and cultural heritage. Enhancing shore-side facilities and promoting long-stay tourism can provide broader economic benefits without compromising our environment or already strained tourism product. We shouldn’t be advocating for dumping even more walmart-tier tourists onto public beach to rent chairs for a few hours then piss off, inhibiting access to both you, I and other guests.
Let’s protect our islands for future generations. Vote “NO” to the cruise berthing facility.
Don’t let the few, rich people who own diamond shops and taxi fleets make you vote for an open ended question that could leave our people in generational debt.
sources:
https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Global-scrubber-discharges-fs-caribbean-EN-apr2021.pdf
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article250980394.html
Per day one cruise ship emits as much particulate matter as a million cars.
So 30 cruise ships pollute as much as all the cars in the United Kingdom.
But remember to vote yes for cruise, and don’t forget your re-usable plastic bag when you shop at Foster’s! LMAO! Simply cannot make this type of backwardsness up.
Only in Cayman, the logic of “tenders burn diesel so we need the port” is seen as making sense by ACT taxi drivers, who, guess what, also burn diesel to “tender” tourists to public beach from a grid-locked, dead capital.
We can’t even build a do k. How PATHETIC
you can’t even spell “dock” …
i believe in and support cruise tourism. i want cayman to have a first class docking facility if it can be done without destroying the environment.
but with the general level of cig incompetence, lack of detail available and with no overall national development plan….i can only vote no for now.
Why build a first class dock for 3rd class passengers?
Arrogant much?
They didn’t lie.
Did anyone really expect the NT to support a Pier?
All of the naysayers to the pier are not even real Caymanians…never had a hard day in their lives…or they are benefitting from “no pier” (you know who you are)!
I will be voting YES!
Arrogance, bigotry and lies all in one short comment. I am a Caymanian and I have worked f’ing hard all my life. I will be voting no and I am not alone. There’s plenty of us “real Caymanians” who don’t want to put the country in a disastrous financial situation and destroy the environment.
You’re welcome to have your own opinion, but dismissing our opinion because in your world view we must not be “real” or must be rich and idle is disgusting.
The irony to say those against this are not real Caymanians when the people who stand to benefit the most from it are Rich foreigners who will own the debt and the low wage foreigners who operate 99% of the tourism jobs. When was the last time you heard the Caymanian accent at the helm of a redsail catamaran? or hocking tours at the terminal? or higgling beach chairs on seven mile?
Irony it’s real Caymanians that are anti pier as they don’t want Cayman to be ruled by the Jamaican new Caymanians , bringing in hordes of cheap tourists and thousands of their own countrymen to service the needs of the masses.
It’s real Caymanians who care for today and the future.
Yep, F Cayman, I’m down to my last $20Million and need to sell more more more imported tat and cakes.
The whole ACT pro-yes campaign is so disingenuous that it’s not even funny. Asking voters to vote “Yes” on a ridiculously open-ended question, then saying that a “Yes” vote will “merely further the discussions”. Yeah right, what an outright crock of BS. Banners with “Save our cruise tourism” hanging all over Town. Save it from what exactly? Cruise ships will still come here whether piers are built or not, so what exactly are we going to “Save” that we don’t already have? And Elio Solomon on the radio every evening now, fearing mongering and saying that a “Yes” vote will “only further the discussion” while a “No” vote will totally kill cruise tourism. Please explain how “Yes” means we will discuss ways to improve our cruise tourism product, while “No” cruise tourism will come to a complete and total END? Make it make sense! ACT’s entire attempt at winning voters over to the “Yes” side is disingenuous at best, outright lying at worst!
Foolio gonna fool. If he wasn’t coming off as such an angry racist, the nonsense coming from his mouth might actually be funny.
I’m against the development of cruise berthing facilities, even more so when you consider it may help get rid of beach higglers.
The tourist product here is pretty much ruined. Let’s try to preserve what’s left!!
The pro pier screamers are not in the least bit concerned about all the negative impacts…traffic, overcrowding, higgglers, massive debt to Cayman and knock on effects. They just want to sell more of their imported tat.
We have cruise business, it’s enough so get on with it.
Tortuga proudly flying these Yes banners.
Yardies gonna yard
#eatislandtaste
At least I know Island Taste know and care about what goes in their Patties.
Perhaps it will also get rid of the shouting foolio…let’s hope.
Vote no to the cruise piers in the referendum and no to anything PPM in the election.
where are the people using Eden rock from the cruise ship? They are not going there. There is no facility anymore. People are walking to smith cove no even make up 20 people a day. Why don’t you come to the Marriott and get an education how another island is doing and how their environment is doing. Friday 25,2025 . 6:00 pm grand cayman Marriott . refreshments included.
LOL!! I’m crying from laughter right now! Anonymous at 23/04/2025 at 10:15 pm…, you’re telling people to come to the Marriott today to get an education on the environment?? Yes!! Just walk out to the DISASTER that the Marriott “beach” has become to see how well the environment does when people don’t listen!! You’ve just made the “No” voter’s and for CPR’s point and you weren’t even trying!! I mean, you can’t make this stuff up!!! LOL!
24 @ 8:27am – Do you even know of something called sarcasm and cynicism??
23@10:15pm was obviously presenting a cynical view of Marriott’s beach disaster.
LOL! I’m crying right now to know how stupid some people are!! You, perhaps?
Wait. What? My brain just exploded. 🙂
This pier and years of disaster during its construction will ruin the last bits of Cayman that sells it to tourists. It took almost 2 years to do that road in GT and, killed businesses, dirt and traffic delays were unbearable, yet one still has to hop over dirt and pot holes next to the post office during rain. When a next cat5 comes here and throws this pier over the GT, then what?
I hope people think beyond a next sold water sports tour and a next watch. Besides, the Orange criminal is successfully destroying what is left of the States, who will come on the ships anyway?
National Trust lost any credibility they may have once had a few years back.
Sure thing, Foolio.
can you explain how for all us dumb ones in the back of the room