Who NOT to book through for Galapagos

[DiveTheGalapagos]

I know if I were to research a destination, I'd probably take sites I found at face value, but when it comes to Galapagos diving, that should not be the case. So I thought it could be helpful to offer up a few really obvious tips about who NOT to deal with online.

First, if you run into a site selling the following boats...go somewhere else:
-The Alta - ran aground over a year ago and was declared a total loss
-The Lammer Law -not operational for years
-The Parranda -burned and sank about 2 years ago
-The Mistral, Reina Sylvia, Nemo, etc -none of which have had permits to dive for years

The only liveaboards in the Galapagos are the Aggressors, the Deep Blue, Galapagos Sky and the Humboldt Explorer. The Estrella del Mar is permitted to dive, but only offers diving June - early Dec this year. The Darwin and Wolf Buddy boats are supposed to begin operations in September 2011. And that's it at this point.

If you run into a site advertising 4 dives a day or land visits from a dive cruise (apart from 1 day in the Highlands of Santa Cruz and/or a Charles Darwin Research Station visit), they're behind the curve and haven't bothered to include the new regulations or worse, aren't aware of them.

I'm amazed at how much dated or bad information there is out there.

 

[Doc]

....I'm amazed at how much dated or bad information there is out there.

Good points made above- And also I am amazed by how much narrow-perspective information there is, as well.

If you compare US/Canadian market dive magazine to European audience magazines, you'll see that we in the US are allowed to believe only that liveaboards are an acceptable way to visit. We are the ones that were affording these exotic trips en-masse starting in the late 1980's.

The European readers get a lot of information of the "land based" dive ops in the Galapagos. Their market is a much younger, less well heeled crowd.

Before running off to the enticing argument of "the only way to access Darwin & Wolf" is by liveaboard, look at some of the reasons for land based.

- It is way cheaper, a 60% reduction in cost is possible
- It is a way to get some local flavor, the retstaurants, people, the locations, the lava tubes
- It is a chance to see and walk in the volcanic pebbles as did Darwin, himself.

The very recent Ecuadorian Government decree that was merely a re-emphasis of past rules dictating that liveaboards are for diving, and only other "cruise" ships may allow passengers to set foot on land. Add to this the Government restriction on a universal maximum of 3 dives per day, and the liveaboards lose even more appeal.

The new Government regulations are an obvious move to make the locals who own and operate land based dive ops to be on equal footing with the liveaboards, which as DiveTheGalapagos above pointed out- can come and go in the night.

In that ScubaBoard is a North American-centric message board, most such threads soon do include the comment about "You have to see Darwin and Wolf, so you have to go liveabaord". I am more than sure that most of those folks have really not tried it both ways- that is- including land based. I have. I loved Darwin and Wolf, but was it worth the 3 days round trip in rough seas to do it?

The Galapagos is an enchanting place, and just as valid of an argument for liveaboards is the one that becomes obvious after you get your two or three dives in during a day and then go exploring the island- something you should not miss, as well.

 

[drbill]

Being a more "mature" but less "well heeled" diver, land-based diving has been an interest of mine. I often check out the European web sites to find travel options more in line with my bank balance.

 

[Mossman]

Since we've already flown to Ecuador, overnighted in Quito or Guayaquil each way, then braved the flights to/from the islands, is it worth it for most divers to go all that way without seeing whale sharks at Darwin? I dunno. Without the whale sharks, Cocos is easier and cheaper to get to. Without Wolf & Darwin, is it worth the cost/hassle of getting to Puerto Ayora? Sure, there's some great diving in the lower islands, endemics, pelagics, sea lions, you betcha, and I like PA and checked out a few places for further reference, but I would only do it tacked onto a liveaboard trip. When I can start flying direct to the islands from a major hub at a lower price, I'd consider land-based only. Otherwise, for the time and cost it takes to get there, I might as well go all the way to Southeast Asia or Micronesia where the diving is truly remarkable.

 

[Doc]

Being a more "mature" but less "well heeled" diver, land-based diving has been an interest of mine. I often check out the European web sites to find travel options more in line with my bank balance.

I also find it fun to be around such generally younger divers and especially those who are from other countries than my own.

.....overnighted in Quito.... is it worth the cost/hassle of getting to Puerto Ayora?..... but I would only do it tacked onto a liveaboard trip..... for the time and cost it takes to get there, might as well go.. to Southeast Asia or Micronesia where the diving is truly remarkable.

You bring up some really interesting thoughts.

We always spend extra days in Quito. Most travelers to the Galloping Pogos wind up in Puerto Ayora at some point, most fly into the islands through Baltra which is the airport for PA. Doing a land visit tacked-on to a liveaboard is a great idea. I have seen any number of liveaboard divers show up days early in PA for the tourism, plus doing a few land-based dives (for warm up and to calm their "jones")

The last point you make is so very true. The Galap's popularity with us North Americans is embedded in our exposure to dive history itself. We have been traveling there as a "holy grail" dive destination long before we had access to other spots in the world, it all started about 10 years after we first invaded the Caribbean in the 60's.

Going back to my European vs North American example above, the Euros are not very interested in the Galap, for the reasons you state- plus it is on the far side of the Moon for them. From their perspective, it would be how we view the Maldives. That is their attainable and reachable holy grail of dive exotica (or the Seychelles). I can not explain the Euro/Brit fascination with the Bahamas, other than that they are heavily marketed and the airfare is enticing.

Jacques Cousteau started this Galloping Pogos ball rolling with his specials, and the National Geographic imagery was burned into our consciousness from the 1950's. When we North American adventure divers began going there in recognizable quantity by the late 1970's. Liveaboards are the building block of any newly "discoverd" dive spot, they beget the land based operations that see opportunity in being a pioneer. It was a very wild proposition, certainly no more so than a trip to Roatan was back then- but then again- think of marketing and public awareness... who ever heard of Roatan? Ahhh... But the Galapagos? Pure exotica (and easier to pronounce).

The Galap was quite available to us with easy access through organized dive tours (LDS) in the 1980's. This pre-dated anyone's similar access to the SoPac region (not just our well travelled North American divers with disposable incomes). The SoPac really blossomed as a dive destination with the flush economic times of the Pacific Rim countries- until that economic boom, only expedition type diving was available.

So, as in all things travel oriented, we went to what we know, what we have heard of, what we can pronounce, and what we have some visible airline access to. Marketing + access = desire.

This is in no way to discourage the SB Reader from going off on a trip to the Galloping Ponies, but it drives home the point even further. The diving is what it is, and that aint all bad , but you can see this stuff elsewhere in the SoPac- plus a wildly colorful reef structures- but not among the black lava "reefs" of the eroded underwater volcanic cones that serve as Galapagos dive sites. With the price structure of the Philippines and the quality of the travel experience, the market is even now~ changing again.

The "not to discourage" part comes in when you consider what else is available on this trip. Rarely, when I write about diving, do I reference anything other than focusing on the diving alone. Much as you wouldn't visit London and not see the Tower of London (most Brits haven't!), to visit this island chain without spending time above ground is a real loss. I'm with you, Greg, spend some time on either end of your trip actually getting to see these historic places.

A weekend in Quito- we went first class and stayed very reasonably at the Hilton Colon hotel and just had a blast at the native market in the park next door. A week in the island of Puerto Ayora or similar destination? We crawled on our bellies through the lava tubes, we went into the Darwin Research Station every evening for a walk on the black volcanic pebbles, we imagined where the anchorage for the Beagle was. We ate at a different restaurant every night, we went to the highlands where the tortoises really live. Watch Russell Crowe's movie "Master and Commander" and you'll be standing in the same spot that they filmed the big turtles.

Much as you wouldn't go to Cayman without seeing the East End blow holes, or get all the way to Tobago without taking time to explore in a Jeep or see the 10' Green Moray Eel at the Manta Lodge, or go to San Salvador and not nail some friend's un-needed bra or necktie to the rafters in the Driftwood Bar... there is more to do and see in Ecuador than just Hammerheads, Mobula Rays, Seals...and if you are lucky... Whale Sharks.

 

[octopuppy]

As Rman says you can see much of the underwater stuff elsewhere in SoPac. I've dove many places and perhaps will do the Galapagos, but not in top-10-yet-2-do list. So MUCH more to see at the galloping pogos land based, and in Ecuador...limitless.