I am writing to voice my strong opposition to the proposed construction of a new cruise port in the Cayman Islands. There are no clear economic gains, not even in the short term. The only explanation seems to be pressure from the cruise lobby influencing certain politicians to promote the port, without fully considering the devastating economic, social, and environmental impacts this project would have on our country.
Economically, the focus on accommodating more cruise ships overlooks a critical truth: stay-over tourism is far more valuable to our economy.
While it is true that the cruise industry contributes to government revenue through head taxes, this revenue is tied to the sheer volume of passengers – a model that comes at the expense of environmental and social sustainability.
Additionally, any reduction in head tax revenue from fewer cruise passengers can easily be made up, and even surpassed, by focusing on developing our stay-over tourism product. Stay-over visitors spend significantly more money during their time here, staying in hotels, dining at local restaurants, and engaging in a variety of activities that directly benefit local businesses and provide higher-paying, stable jobs for Caymanians.
By prioritizing stay-over tourism, we can strengthen our economy in a way that uplifts our community, creating opportunities for meaningful employment and entrepreneurship.
Cruise passengers, on the other hand, typically spend only a few hours on the island and often book excursions through foreign-owned operators, leaving little impact on local businesses.
Additionally, our current infrastructure is not prepared to handle the mass influx of cruise passengers that the new port would bring. George Town’s sidewalks are too narrow, its roads already congested, and its public spaces ill-equipped for the crowds. Thousands more cruise passengers disembarking daily would create chaos, not opportunity.
The construction phase alone would disrupt local businesses, drive away stay-over tourists seeking tranquility, and erode the charm and appeal that make our island a premier destination.
The environmental damage caused by dredging and reef destruction would be catastrophic. Coral reefs are not only a natural wonder but also an economic lifeline, drawing divers, snorkelers, and nature lovers from around the world. They also protect our coasts from storms and erosion. Once destroyed, these ecosystems cannot be restored, and the long-term costs of this destruction far outweigh any short-term gains from a larger port.
From a moral perspective, we have an obligation to protect our environment for future generations. Biblical teachings remind us to be stewards of the Earth (Genesis 2:15), while the Native American principle of planning for seven generations reminds us to make decisions with the future in mind. If we destroy our natural resources and disrupt our tourism base, what will remain for our children and grandchildren?
Rather than investing in a destructive and unsustainable project, we should focus on improving the quality of our stay-over tourism experience and enhancing infrastructure that supports sustainable economic growth. Investments in eco-tourism, better public infrastructure, and renewable energy initiatives will preserve the Cayman Islands as a premier travel destination while safeguarding our environment and community.
We stand at a crossroads. Do we prioritize the demands of external interests at the expense of our country’s future? Or do we choose a path of sustainability that honors both our natural heritage and our economic potential?
I urge the government and my fellow citizens to reject this cruise port project and to champion an approach that benefits all Caymanians—not just today, but for generations to come.
Sincerely
Janet Walker
Related Videos
Well said, Janet.
I totally agree.
Thank you for having the resolve to write this excellent letter.
I also totally agree and would briefly add that the environmental degradation would go FAR beyond the immediate loss of marine resources and their tourism attraction in the harbor. Sheer force of human incursion brings with it numerous other impacts upon the terrestrial environment as well. And if traffic seems bad now, just move another million people around the island each year. If this thing can be avoided, let’s avoid it! My income is tourism dependent, yet I also vastly prefer stay over visitors to cruise.
Thank you Janet for writing such a sensical, and knowledgable letter.
May your countries decision makers be sensical and take note.
As stay over tourists for 15 years, I can say firsthand we have spent thousands of dollars enjoying and respecting what GC has to offer. Between renting condos for weeks at a time, dining out every day at your exceptional restaurants and local markets, enjoying the flora and fauna, and above all else… the beaches and reefs that support the most amazing marine life I’ve ever seen. It would be tragic to dredge out reefs for a larger port and piers, as not only are the reefs and marine life removed irreplaceable, but the silt will destroy nearby existing reefs as well. With all the information out there on why it is so important to practice sustainability and protection of our natural resources for the health of the planet and people, how can this still be a conversation?
The Dredging for the 30 foot deep Cruise Berthing:
1) The dredging “toxic” debris dust would kill the reefs breeding of marine life for “miles” in both directions of Georgetown. Yes, the debris dust is Toxic. FACT
2) The 7 mile beach erosion problem would become extremely worse. What sand is left from the yearly natural sand shift from east to west would just fall into the 30 foot deep trench.