It was with some gloom I read the nearly 500 pages of the Proposed Cruise Berthing Facility – EIA Consultation June 2015 Report executed by The CIG appointed consultancy team – W.F. Baird & Associates Coastal Engineers Ltd., Smith Warner International & TEM Network Ltd. It wasn’t as heavy going as I had first thought after downloading the documents (but I didn’t read it all at one sitting). It certainly was comprehensive and it never once tried to soften the ramifications of trying to build a cruise berthing facility in George Town Harbour. My only concern I have with the report is some of their costings (something I am qualified to write about) as they appear to be ‘conservative’. I cannot believe their figure of $13M to relocate a reef! I don’t believe it could even be executed with even a small amount of success but I am no expert there. The report does warn of that.

The project is estimated to take about 3 years and there is a lot of unknowns in that when one has to rely on the weather.

The report lays out the pros and cons and after reading it there are far more cons than pros.

We are risking a whole marine park and 87 acres of coral. The Report warns 40% of reefs will be directly destroyed. Can we afford to risk that amount? And it is actually worse than that as there have been no guestimates (only warnings) on the indirect impacts the dredging, etc. will occur. And there will be some – a lot! With three years (more I bet) of construction and all that dredging the coral that is left is in great danger of dying. The report suggests the 7 acres of fill reclaimed could be dumped into the ocean.

If trying to remove and replant the coral somewhere else isn’t bad enough our famous and heavily dived Bilboa shipwreck will have to be relocated otherwise it will be destroyed by the construction work. It is in the way.

The experts, however, are optimistic there will be little or no impact on the Seven Mile Beach. Of course local dive experts will disagree.

Then there is all that noise and disruption. It is going to be extreme!!

At the public meeting last Tuesday that was well attended the main questions being asked or just stated was the reason for the port staying where it was is to keep as many people as possible in George Town. It is a ghost town at night. With the destruction or removal of its key diving attractions it could easily become a ghost town during the day. Persons don’t just want to shop and eat. They can do that on the ships. So what is the point? Others said if it is easier to get off it is easier to get back on, meaning people would not stay very long in the capital.

The tour buses and taxi operators are the big beneficiaries of this and not the shop owners in George Town. That is another big risk.

I am staggered though that, according to the report actually 90% of passengers on board the ships actually disembark.

But with the bigger cruise ships being built we do have to look to the future.

Even though figures show the cruise ships in Grand Cayman without berthing is consistently in the top four destinations in terms of numbers, these large ships will not come here because of the wait time in disembarking and then bringing them back. The length of time the passengers have to spend time on the island is limited and this negates the argument put forward – ‘if it is easier to get off it is easier to get back on’.

The decision is not an easy one and I do believe more study should be given to the plausibility of the floating dock. There would appear to be as many pluses as minuses without the coral and dive sites having to be moved.

With the latter scenario we would have the disruption but not the destruction nor dat noise.

See related iNews Cayman story published June 10 2015 “Cayman Islands ES on cruise berthing facility – dive sites to be moved” at: http://www.ieyenews.com/wordpress/cayman-islands-es-on-cruise-berthing-facility-dive-sites-to-be-moved/