We get it. We do understand the importance of tourism, and how this sector is a necessary and important revenue stream the world over. That this industry provides employment and entrepreneurial opportunities. But should it be at any cost? Is something rotten in the state of Grand Cayman? Looking from the outside in, there seems to be an almighty struggle going on between the Ministry of Tourism and the locals. What is really going on?
The Government of the Cayman Islands is currently assessing a 'proposed cruise berthing facility' that will boost the islands economy by allowing more and bigger cruise liners to berth at George Town.
"Belize is getting a pier; Haiti, the Dominican Republic. All our competitors in this region are building piers or already have piers the ships can go directly to."
- Minister of Tourism, Hon. Moses Kirkconnel
Firstly, has anyone actually asked the cruise holiday industry the question , "if we build a big pier to accommodate your huge cruise ships, will you use them and come and visit Grand Cayman?"
If the answer is 'yes', on the face of it, this development sounds fairly reasonable, so why is the local community in near panic?
This proposed project will come at a cost. That is to be expected. Therefore again why has DEMA (Diving Equipment Marketing Association) issued an urgent public policy alert? Because the 'cost' is environmental. It will cause substantial damage to many of the reefs and dive sites.
The Environmental Impact Assessment clearly revealed that the dredging operation would directly remove 15 acres of coral reefs, but even more worrisome it would kill or damage approximately 20 additional acres of coral reefs beyond the dredge site. This means that most of the harbour would be permanently damaged. Water clarity in the harbour would never be the same. And up to $20 million annual revenue currently derived from those reefs will be lost. Is this truly the smartest way to keep the cruise passengers visiting the Cayman Islands?
This situation reminds me of a tragic touching joke about Christmas. A very poor husband and wife want to give each other a present. The lady has quite magnificent long hair. She decides to sell her hair to a woman who makes wigs to buy a watch chain for her husband. The husband meanwhile sells his lovely gold watch to buy two beautiful hair combs for the wife. Each person sacrificed their most valuable possession.
It is tragic and mind-boggling that the proposed tourism assets come at the cost of those very same assets the tourists come to see and enjoy - Cayman's amazing marine resource. This resource has been the cornerstone of their marketing and PR for more years than I care to think about out. I find it ironic that the Department of Tourism wishes to destroy the very thing they have spent millions of dollars promoting year on year, decade upon decade.
"What I'm seeing is a death sentence for huge areas of reef on the west side of the island."
- Sunset House Owner, Adrien Briggs
What on earth has happened to joined up thinking? This seems to be just another example of our natural resources being nibbled away in the name of progress. If this proposed cruise berthing project goes ahead, who is to say that in another ten years time we don't have the same argument that the current berthing need future development, "but don't worry folks, this will bring X jobs and Y revenue?"
And if you think this argument is unique, something similar is happening in the UK right now over airport expansion.
Speaking of revenue generation, recent data from the Environmental Statement seems to indicate that the average visitor arriving by cruise ship spends far less than visitors arriving by air.
Average visitor spend arriving by cruise ship - $CI 82.14
Average visitor spend arriving by air - $CI 1,103.07
Annual Cruise Visitor Spend - $CI 115,000,000.00
Annual Air Visitor Spend - $CI 381,000,000.00
Back to the Grand Cayman situation. I am not against development, In fact I support progressive development where all factors are taken into account accordingly. Time is short however. If you feel that the Cayman plan needs to be given deeper consideration and an alternative solution looked at, that is away from the proximity of the reefs, (that are essential for the watersports and tourism industry), please email the Cayman Islands Department of the Environment; doe@gov.ky
"Sustainable tourism in Grand Cayman must balance well-managed use with environmental protection, for the loss of its natural resources will mean a loss of tourism and therefore jobs, economic revenue, and the beauty that is the island"
- Sunset House Manager, Keith Sahm
You have until close of play today - Friday 3rd July 2015 - to ask that an alternative solution is investigated. You can also sign this petition too.
"When the last tree is cut down, the last fish eaten, and the last stream poisoned, you will realise that you cannot eat money"
- Cree Indian Prophecy
For further information visit savecayman.org
The Government of the Cayman Islands is currently assessing a 'proposed cruise berthing facility' that will boost the islands economy by allowing more and bigger cruise liners to berth at George Town.
"Belize is getting a pier; Haiti, the Dominican Republic. All our competitors in this region are building piers or already have piers the ships can go directly to."
- Minister of Tourism, Hon. Moses Kirkconnel
Firstly, has anyone actually asked the cruise holiday industry the question , "if we build a big pier to accommodate your huge cruise ships, will you use them and come and visit Grand Cayman?"
If the answer is 'yes', on the face of it, this development sounds fairly reasonable, so why is the local community in near panic?
This proposed project will come at a cost. That is to be expected. Therefore again why has DEMA (Diving Equipment Marketing Association) issued an urgent public policy alert? Because the 'cost' is environmental. It will cause substantial damage to many of the reefs and dive sites.
The Environmental Impact Assessment clearly revealed that the dredging operation would directly remove 15 acres of coral reefs, but even more worrisome it would kill or damage approximately 20 additional acres of coral reefs beyond the dredge site. This means that most of the harbour would be permanently damaged. Water clarity in the harbour would never be the same. And up to $20 million annual revenue currently derived from those reefs will be lost. Is this truly the smartest way to keep the cruise passengers visiting the Cayman Islands?
This situation reminds me of a tragic touching joke about Christmas. A very poor husband and wife want to give each other a present. The lady has quite magnificent long hair. She decides to sell her hair to a woman who makes wigs to buy a watch chain for her husband. The husband meanwhile sells his lovely gold watch to buy two beautiful hair combs for the wife. Each person sacrificed their most valuable possession.
It is tragic and mind-boggling that the proposed tourism assets come at the cost of those very same assets the tourists come to see and enjoy - Cayman's amazing marine resource. This resource has been the cornerstone of their marketing and PR for more years than I care to think about out. I find it ironic that the Department of Tourism wishes to destroy the very thing they have spent millions of dollars promoting year on year, decade upon decade.
"What I'm seeing is a death sentence for huge areas of reef on the west side of the island."
- Sunset House Owner, Adrien Briggs
What on earth has happened to joined up thinking? This seems to be just another example of our natural resources being nibbled away in the name of progress. If this proposed cruise berthing project goes ahead, who is to say that in another ten years time we don't have the same argument that the current berthing need future development, "but don't worry folks, this will bring X jobs and Y revenue?"
And if you think this argument is unique, something similar is happening in the UK right now over airport expansion.
Speaking of revenue generation, recent data from the Environmental Statement seems to indicate that the average visitor arriving by cruise ship spends far less than visitors arriving by air.
Average visitor spend arriving by cruise ship - $CI 82.14
Average visitor spend arriving by air - $CI 1,103.07
Annual Cruise Visitor Spend - $CI 115,000,000.00
Annual Air Visitor Spend - $CI 381,000,000.00
Back to the Grand Cayman situation. I am not against development, In fact I support progressive development where all factors are taken into account accordingly. Time is short however. If you feel that the Cayman plan needs to be given deeper consideration and an alternative solution looked at, that is away from the proximity of the reefs, (that are essential for the watersports and tourism industry), please email the Cayman Islands Department of the Environment; doe@gov.ky
"Sustainable tourism in Grand Cayman must balance well-managed use with environmental protection, for the loss of its natural resources will mean a loss of tourism and therefore jobs, economic revenue, and the beauty that is the island"
- Sunset House Manager, Keith Sahm
You have until close of play today - Friday 3rd July 2015 - to ask that an alternative solution is investigated. You can also sign this petition too.
"When the last tree is cut down, the last fish eaten, and the last stream poisoned, you will realise that you cannot eat money"
- Cree Indian Prophecy
For further information visit savecayman.org
