Antarctica Large Cruise Ship Ban

[topspot]

http://news.travel.aol.com/2010/04/02/antarctica-cruise-ship-ban/

 

Saw this mentioned on the Princess board. I suppose this good news for protecting Antarctica, but bad news for those that wish to criuse there.

[Mary Ellen]

Oddly enough, the accompanying picture of the sinking ship is of the size that will still be allowed to sail to Antarctica. :rolleyes:

[Krazy Kruizers]

There was a little discussion about this some time ago.

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1113276&highlight=antartica

[sail7seas]

Whew........ now DH won't pester me to agree to cruise there.

 

[dfish]

That makes ME very happy that I decided to do this cruise next January. I made it just under the wire!

 

Deb

[Taxguy77]

Trouble with the world..... too many people with the tech. to go places and the wealth to pay for it.

Question: Were the "Good old days" really that good?

[Nancyquilts]

Whew........ now DH won't pester me to agree to cruise there.

 

We found that our cruise to Antarctica was a high point in our (long) lives. It's truly "out of this world".

[Atomica]

Very disappointing news.

 

It's good that the smaller expedition ships can still travel there, but the average cost for such a voyage is out of reach for most people.

[Storylady]

That makes ME very happy that I decided to do this cruise next January. I made it just under the wire!

 

Deb

 

Same here. We are taking the Prinsendam in February. I had a gut feeling that there wasn't going to be anymore scenic cruising of the Antarctica. One of the future cruise consultants did a program a couple of years ago on South America and she recommended that people go now as it might not be a possiblity in the future. How right she was.

[RevNeal]

Well ... darn.

It looks like I will have to cruise on one of the smaller expidition ships when I do Antartica again. The good news is that we'll be going ashore this time. The sad news is that it won't be on HAL.

[Taxguy77]

Not too sad Rev, it will be a new experience!

[crusinbanjo]

I think the larger shipa are to big for many of the ports on this IT. And in any case, cruising on a smaller ship to Antartica, IMHO, is a better experience, given the nature of the location, (pun not intended). Additionally, some of the expedition ships have hardened, or reinforced hulls made for cruising in the conditions found in the polar regions. When we last cruised in the high arctic, we were on a small ship designed to sail in the arctic waters, near iceburgs , etc. I do think that the big ships are not built for sailing under these conditions.

 

Here is a pic I took at our embarkation port, Resolute Island, Canada, in the high arctic. This is what a cruise to the Arctic or Antartica should be, an adventure! As I told my wife, Just hang on tight, and don't fall out of the boat!

[esther e]

Having been on the Marco Polo to Antarctica, an ice breaker, and doing landings and being among the penguins, I can't imagine a drive-by. I would strongly suggest saving pennies if needed and going on a ship that is geared for those waters and being in a Zodiac and experiencing the continent. It was probably the best cruise I've ever had; and if I had done a drive-by, I would have enjoyed it, but not had any idea of what would have been in store for me otherwise. One of these days before I get any older and more frail, I would love to go further into the Arctic on an explorer.:rolleyes:

 

However, even a drive-by beats not seeing that part of the world at all.

[CtheW0rld]

i think this is a good thing. i intend to go there someday, but i would not have even considered a ship where i couldn't go ashore.

[YXU AC*SE]

We found that our cruise to Antarctica was a high point in our (long) lives. It's truly "out of this world".

 

110% agree. Unequalled really. Scott.

[user8]

I'm glad I am booked on the Veendam in January,2011.

[RevNeal]

Not too sad Rev, it will be a new experience!

 

Well, yes and no. I did Antarctica a LONG time ago with my Dad aboard the defunct Orient Line's Marco Polo. On that cruise we got to do some landings aboard Zodiacs, etc. It was a great deal of fun, but it was far different from a comprehensive cruise with other ports, etc ... although the Marco Polo allowed us to do it in Liner-luxury.

 

My point is that it will mean having to (1) NOT do an extensive HAL South American Cruise within which the Antarctica portion was the highlight but not the totality. No Dam ship, no Dam service, etc. That's a disappointment at several levels. It will also mean (2) having to fly all the way to Ushuia, rather than cruising there, stopping at many lovely ports and other exotic, out of the way ports (like the Falklands). Yes, I know, there are some smaller operators -- including expedition operators -- that will include other ports, but most of those expedition operators operate out of Ushuia, with all the cheapest (yet still EXPENSIVE) Antarctica offerings operating that way. (3) There is something to be said for just scenic cruising Antarctica. It's amazingly beautiful and one feels as though one has been there, even if one hasn't set foot on the continent itself.

 

On a totally different note, I find it somewhat hypocritical of the UN to ban the larger ships when it's been the smaller operators that have lost vessels and harmed the environment. The smaller operators are far more risky concerns, actually ... they don't have the large corporate resources that the bigger Lines have and, as such, their vessels are going to have a larger environmental impact, both in case of further accidents and in just general use. HAL ships cruise Antarctica on near-ZERO impact basis, with no discharges and very few emissions. I seriously doubt the Russian-built and run shoe-string expedition operators operate as cleanly.

[Harry1954]

Whew........ now DH won't pester me to agree to cruise there.

lol .. my DW just made the same comment when I told her that this restriction was happening ... you guys are now forcing us to consider even smaller ships that will be quite a ride around the horn ...

harry

[Benita]

We went to Antarctica in 2005 - we wanted to do landings (via zodiacs) on the Peninsula as well as the surrounding islands and knew of the rules (not allowing more than 100 people off the ship at once), so we went with Lindblad. They had been doing it for many years - there is even a cove in Antarctica named after them and their captain has been commissioned to contribute to maps of the area. It was a wonderful choice. Other than the horrible trip across Drakes Passage (seas really rough), it was like a dream. Seas so calm that we kayaked around the icebergs, being able to hike around the penguins, and seeing topography that we will never experience again was amazing. It was by no means a luxury cruise, but a great way to experience the area. It was expensive, but a once in a lifetime experience.

It is too bad the larger ship won't be able to go there to allow a taste of the experience, so I encourage anybody who is interested (and can afford it) to try it on a smaller ship.

[JayS]

Here is a picture of the Explorer in front of a glacier in Chile taken from the Rotterdam.

 

 

Rev you are right on with the Russians.

 

[RuthC]

Here is a picture of the Explorer in front of a glacier in Chile taken from the Rotterdam.

 

:confused: When I clicked on your link, it came through as "invalid". Would you please recheck your code?

Thanks.

[JayS]

:confused: When I clicked on your link, it came through as "invalid". Would you please recheck your code?

Thanks.

My first try at placing a picture in the main body of the message.

 

Lets see if this works.:o

 

[RuthC]

That worked. Thanks.

[topspot]

I think one of the unintended consequences of this ban will be an increase in the cost to cruise on one of those ships/operaators that will still be allowed to cruise there. Law of supply & demand. A significant reduction on the supply side and an possible increase in demand (or at least a level demand).

[MightyQuinn]

Antarctica is a stunning yet fragile destination. We had the trip of a lifetime doing an expedition cruise back in Dec ‘97 on World Discoverer, a 165-pax ship with ice-hardened hull operated by Society Expeditions. They were founding members of the IAATO & some of their principals remain active in Antarctic conservation to this day. Back then, there were only a handful of operators running expedition cruises & no large ships were doing drive-by cruises.

 

We spent 3 weeks exploring the Antarctic Peninsula, South Georgia, South Orkeys & other remote islands by zodiac and kayak. There were very strict protocols in place for our landings. Only 100 pax at a time were allowed to visit sites such as penguin rookeries, sea colonies or research stations. We were always accompanied by …..ologists of some sort on our excursions. And the usual good traveler rule applied – leave nothing but footprints.

 

Large cruise-ships have provided increased access to the waters of Antarctica. A drive-by cruise is certainly a different experience than landing on the continent by expedition ship, but it is still a great opportunity. So for anyone on the fence about visiting Antarctica on HAL, do it now!