22 April 2025– The National Trust circulated an online public survey last month which included a question about which news items were of most interest. The majority of respondents chose ‘Cruise Ship Port Referendum’ as their first choice. Accordingly, in light of this public input, 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 National Trust has long held deep concerns over the massive investment and construction of a cruise berthing facility in George Town Harbour, and the threat that mass cruise tourism would pose to the economic, socio-cultural and environmental sustainability of our island. In 2018, the National Trust
membership voted to come out against the project proposed by the then PPM government. Our original
concerns have not changed and are increased by the lack of information supporting the referendum
question. These reasons for concern are:

Lack of substance to referendum question

The referendum expects the public to blindly answer the question “Should the Cayman Islands develop cruise berthing infrastructure” without providing any information on its design, location, business model, feasibility or the 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.

Environmental concerns and carrying capacity

Building any sort of cruise berthing facility would be detrimental to the current condition of George Town
Harbour, which is a globally recognized Mission Blue Hope Spot. Dredging to create the depth needed for mega ships will raise silt which will smother and kill coral in its proximity, and the effect of pouring tons of toxic concrete into the water to create the structure will exacerbate this.

Even with a pier built on pilings, the increased activity of more vessels manoeuvring and mooring closer to shore will continue to negatively impact our crystal-clear waters and coral. Given that Eden Rock and other snorkelling and dive sites around the port are extremely popular with visitors, it seems counterproductive to jeopardise these much-loved natural attractions.

While theoretically more visitors would translate into more business for tour operators and businesses
involved in cruise tourism, it is vital to look at the complete picture. Chasing cruise visitor levels of over 3
million a year would vastly increase the waste, pollution and traffic that the port currently sees and severely overcrowd our most popular natural attractions, such as Stingray City and Public Beach, which are already overwhelmed at our current level of 1 to 2 million visitors a year.

Grand Cayman is a small island, and our valued attractions simply do not have the carrying capacity for such numbers. It would be more prudent and beneficial to Cayman’s overall tourism industry to create new attractions and tours, which would reduce the overcrowding and abuse of the limited marine sites, meet demands from visitors for more cultural experiences, and create new jobs and business opportunities for Caymanians.

Lack of Economic Benefit

In addition to environmental harm and stress on our already overburdened tourist attractions, 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 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.

According to ESO data, in 2023 the tax income from cruise visitors was $12.8 million as compared to $74
million from long stay visitors from accommodation and airport taxes. This represents 1.2% of government revenue from cruise and 7% from long stay. In addition to this, cruise visitor spend of an estimated CI$95 per head and CI$1,229 from long stay gives us total income from each sector of CI$133 million from cruise and CI$600 million from long stay in 2023, for which we have the most recent statistics.

If we continue to open the floodgates to mass cruise tourism, we risk damaging our long stay sector and
jeopardizing this far higher income. However, 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.

ESO data also shows that we employed approximately 1,500 people in cruise related jobs in 2024. In a job market of 57,000, this level of employment – not all Caymanian – also does not justify the costs of the build.

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. It is crucial that Government ensures that Caymanians are given fair opportunities to become employed in this growing long stay job market. In addition, natural attrition over the coming years will make even less families dependent on cruise for their income.

Independent assessment

A recent independent report titled ‘Cruise Tourism in Cayman’ published by the highly regarded Caribbean economist Marla Dukharan looks at the economic background in much further detail. The report concludes:

“I would therefore argue that the development of cruise berthing infrastructure in Cayman is unnecessary at this time…..absent an independent socio economic impact study that demonstrates a compelling net socio- economic benefit of developing cruise berthing infrastructure in the Cayman Islands, I would discourage in the strongest possible terms, the pursuit of any such project, especially if it involves any fiscal concessions or fiscal obligations whatsoever.”

A more sustainable alternative

A costly, permanent cruise berthing facility has the potential to cause enormous environmental destruction and would lead to mass tourism well beyond the carrying capacity of our little island.

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 revitalization 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 the fraction of the cost of a berthing facility.

The Cayman Islands should aim to regain and retain our position of 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.

We urge everyone to consider these points and decide whether they want to vote Yes for Cruise Berthing
Infrastructure and mass cruise tourism or No for a smaller, higher quality cruise product more suited to our small island.