We have done several Aggressor liveaboard cruises over the years and we don’t have any complaints. The last Aggressor trip we did was in 2013 on the T&C Aggressor and it was terrific. We did the Cayman Aggressor trip in 2008 and it was a fantastic experience. But 2008 was a long time ago and I know that the Cayman Aggressor has gotten a new Captain since then - so things may have changed.
I realize that the Cayman Aggressor is not the typical liveaboard location because most of the dive sites are accessible to land-based operations. I think that we decided to do that trip because they were offering a very attractive special price, but I’m glad that we did. We had the chance to do a lot of dives (4 to 5 per day) and we were able to dive the best sites off of all 3 of the Cayman Islands. But we spent most of our time diving off of Little Cayman and I recognize that if the weather had been bad, and they were unable to make the trip to the sister islands, it might not have been such a great trip.
The reason that I bring all this up is because we recently stayed and dived with a land-based operation on Little Cayman, it was a great trip but we heard a lot of negative comments about the Aggressor from the divemasters on our boat. I mostly dismissed the comments but they have been nagging at me ever since, in case we would like to repeat the CA liveaboard trip or recommend it to someone else. Hopefully someone that has been on the Cayman Aggressor more recently can share their experiences and help to sort the truth from the myth.
Most of the negative divemaster comments were rather minor and spiteful, like referring to the Aggressor as that “Big ugly boat over there!” but when one of the divers on our boat asked about the comments, the divemaster went into a rant against the Cayman Aggressor.
He said that they “always grab the best sites” and that they “sit on one site all day and never move the boat” and that they “never support the local environmental protection efforts on LC like the Lionfish hunt (but they do support efforts on Grand Cayman) even though they spend most of their time off of Little Cayman” and that they “chum for sharks”.
I was surprised by these comments, mostly because I think that it was rather unprofessional to make negative comments about a colleague/competitor to your customers – but I may be old fashioned in this thinking. But another guest at the hotel that was diving on a different boat told us that he had heard similar comments against the Aggressor – so what’s the deal?
Here are my take on the anti-Aggressor comments:
Regarding “always grab the best sites” that’s probably true but that is the reason that you take a liveaboard trip – to get the best sites. The Aggressor is out on the reefs all the time, and doesn’t need to travel back and forth to the hotel and dive shop, so they have first pick on the best sites – but there are a lot of great dive sites in the Caymans so I can’t imagine that it is big problem.
I don’t really believe “sit on a site all day and never move the boat” because the guests would get bored diving the same site over and over. I checked my log book and they moved the boat 2 times most days (and 3 times a few days) when we were on the CA, but it is a big boat and not easy to move. I feel sure that the Captain makes this decision based on weather and itinerary.
As far as “never support the local environmental protection efforts on LC like the Lionfish hunt but they do support them on GC even though they spend most of their time off of LC” that may be true. The Aggressor departs from Georgetown Harbor on Grand Cayman and they probably think of it as their home port. But they should support the environmental initiatives in the sister islands because they spend so much time there. However, I imagine that they pay a lot of money to operate in Caymanian waters and harbor in Georgetown, so maybe they think that is good enough. They should probably reach out to the other dive operators in the sister islands to make friends and join in supporting their environmental initiatives, if that is feasible.
But the “chum for sharks” comment was the one that really bothered me. I would not think kindly about such activities. But I checked the Aggressor web site and found this notice:
“Please note: All shark interactions are natural, passive and observational in style. The Aggressor Fleet does not actively feed sharks nor chum the waters.”
So obviously they do not “chum for sharks” but what is the basis of this rumor? Did they do it in the past and now they have stopped? We didn’t see any chumming going on when we were recently on the T&C Aggressor but there would be no need – there were sharks all over the place!
So I would love to hear from someone that has been on the Cayman Aggressor recently. What was your experience and how would you respond to these negative comments? Is it really the great trip that I fondly remember or have things changed in recent years? Thanks!
