Your 1st non-safari vacation after Africa?
Aug 9th, 2006, 09:15 AM
#21
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
linjudy: I have been wondering this myself! We went to Tanzania in Aug. 2005 (first time) and are planning our first vacation since then for Mexico in Nov. 2006. I am happy about the trip but not excited in the same way--it doesn't seem like it could be as interesting if no one tells me how dangerous it is ;-)
Also, when planning I kept suggesting destinations to hubby that could be safari-like (e.g. Canada polar bears) and we are therefore going to (fingers crossed) try and catch the monarch migration while in Mexico.
But hey, with as cheap as this trip will be we'll be able to save towards our second trip to Africa, right?!
Also, when planning I kept suggesting destinations to hubby that could be safari-like (e.g. Canada polar bears) and we are therefore going to (fingers crossed) try and catch the monarch migration while in Mexico.
But hey, with as cheap as this trip will be we'll be able to save towards our second trip to Africa, right?!
Aug 9th, 2006, 09:20 AM
#22
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"And, while Africa was great, I can't say that it topped Antarctica."
Really? So there's hope?
My main concern about whether or not we'd enjoy Antarctica isn't the destination itself but the regimented aspect of trip (I know there's no way around it). We both dislike organized group trips and given the time and financial commitment a trip to Antarctica involves, I'm still a little wary.
bat,
Did you ever decide where you're going next June?
Really? So there's hope?
My main concern about whether or not we'd enjoy Antarctica isn't the destination itself but the regimented aspect of trip (I know there's no way around it). We both dislike organized group trips and given the time and financial commitment a trip to Antarctica involves, I'm still a little wary.bat,
Did you ever decide where you're going next June?
Aug 9th, 2006, 09:58 AM
#23
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
schlegal1, what are your plans to see the monarch butterflies? I visited Michoacan in November 2004 (at the end of the month). I think I posted a very brief trip report on the Latin America branch.
Michael
Michael
Aug 9th, 2006, 12:30 PM
#25
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thit_cho--Actually, your help on this matter was an aspect of my planning =-)(esp. in planning to go as late as possible in Nov.). You responded to an inquiry from me with very helpful info (which I added to a thread in the Mexico forum)!
Aug 9th, 2006, 12:42 PM
#26
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
schlegal1, the visit to the monarch reserves is great, but its much different than a safari (not worse, just different). If you can, see if you can visit a reserve in addition to, or instead of, El Rosario (its the easiest to visit, hence the most popular). When I was at El Rosario, there were dozens of other visitors, but when I visited another reserve (I don't know the name), I was the only visitor (but I had to rent a horse to travel an hour or so up the mountain, whereas we walked up the mountain at El Rosario).
Aug 9th, 2006, 02:49 PM
#27
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Antarctic trip wasn't all that regimented. Our itinerary would change from day to day depending on weather conditions, ice conditions, and the itineraries of other ships in the area. The Antarctic peninsula has gotten very busy, and the expedition leaders work very hard to keep out of each other's way. The ships can't land at the same spots, and the expedition leaders don't like being in sight of other ships. Without a formal means of allocating landing sites to ships, the expedition leaders would be on the radio every night coordinating with each other. So, while we had an idea of what islands we wanted to visit, the itinerary was by no means set more than a day or two in advance.
Once we did arrive at a landing site, we were left to explore on our own. After landing in the zodiacs, the expedition staff would give us the ground rules for the landing site (e.g. stay out of the penguin creches, don't get too close to the glacier, etc..), and then turn us loose to simply wander about. You could explore the penguin colonies, hike towards a glacier, go over the hill and check out the sea lions, or simply sit on shore and watch the icebergs go by. The expedition staff had different specialities, so you could hang out with the hydrologist or the ornithologist or whomever and ask questions.
For zodiac rides, it's not much different than cruising around in your landcruiser on safari. Sometimes you're cruising in ice-choked bays, looking for sea lions, swimming penguins, or leopard seals. Sometimes you're out whale watching. The zodiacs are in radio contact and communicate any sightings to the others. Granted, you don't get your own private zodiac, but the drivers are very accommodating in terms of exploring where you like and looking for interesting wildlife. There is a time constraint factor as your itinerary may be tight that day, but I've had zodiac drivers who had "difficulty with their radio", didn't hear the recall message, and thus we were quite late. And, I've had situations where we were supposed to go directly back to the ship after a landing site, but was able to convince the zodiac driver to "take the long way back."
The expedition leaders can be quite flexible. We were cruising along in the ship one evening, and we spotted a large pod of humpback whales. The majority of the passengers were hanging out on the decks or on the bridge watching them. Eventually, the hotel manager came to the expedition leader and complained that nobody was coming to dinner, and that everything was getting cold. The expediton leader thought about it, told him to serve a cold dinner, and ordered the zodiacs out. We stopped the ship, jumped into the zodiacs and cruised after the whales.
So, I didn't find it any more regimented than a safari. I wouldn't have picked any different landing sites, and really, for my safari, I picked the standard Northern Safari circuit - so I wasn't breaking any new ground. We did have to stick to a schedule and itinerary, but I also remember driving like hell for the Naabi Hill Gate to make our departure time from the Serengeti. The only difference I think we had was that the zodiac rides are closer to what one would experience in a group safari rather than a private safari - people in the boat had different priorities on occasion. And, of course, our lodge traveled with us in the form of the ship.
I think the difference for me was that I picked an expedition-style ship rather than one of the big cruise ships. The accommodations were quite comfortable, but basic - essentially what a soviet union-era research scientist would get. The food was excellent. But, instead of musicals, floor shows, and casinos, we got nature documentaries and lectures by the expedition staff every night. Our main form of entertainment was hanging out on deck or on the bridge watching Antarctica go by. I can see how a larger cruise ship might be more regimented - kind of like a floating bus tour, but my trip wasn't like that.
I lucked out in a departure with very few people on it. The ship had a capacity for 48 passengers, and we sailed with only 36. And, I really enjoyed my fellow passengers - it was a very good group. My departure was out of the ordinary in that the majority of passengers were fairly young - mid to late 30s. We didn't have very many people who had mobility problems, so we were quite active in terms of our excursions. Lemme tell you, they'll run you ragged once you're in Antarctic waters - 2-3 excurions per day, early mornings, late evenings, and with so much sunlight, you never want to sleep. You could certainly opt out of excursions, but very few did. We were all so excited to be there that we didn't want to miss anything.
I'll never forget my first zodiac cruise - we left at 10 p.m. and flew across the water under the light of a full moon. The air was biting cold as we whipped around icebergs and chased after whales. We found a pod of humpback whales, and they would dive under our zodiacs, leaving us to wonder where they would come up. Afterwards, I remember watching our group of zodiacs speed towards the ship with the bows riding high as if we could take off in flight at any moment. I also remember cruising an ice-choked bay and looking into the cold, dead eyes of a leopard seal. And, watching penguin stampedes, and sitting on a beach only to have a penguin chick come up and hop into my lap. It's hard to top.
Once we did arrive at a landing site, we were left to explore on our own. After landing in the zodiacs, the expedition staff would give us the ground rules for the landing site (e.g. stay out of the penguin creches, don't get too close to the glacier, etc..), and then turn us loose to simply wander about. You could explore the penguin colonies, hike towards a glacier, go over the hill and check out the sea lions, or simply sit on shore and watch the icebergs go by. The expedition staff had different specialities, so you could hang out with the hydrologist or the ornithologist or whomever and ask questions.
For zodiac rides, it's not much different than cruising around in your landcruiser on safari. Sometimes you're cruising in ice-choked bays, looking for sea lions, swimming penguins, or leopard seals. Sometimes you're out whale watching. The zodiacs are in radio contact and communicate any sightings to the others. Granted, you don't get your own private zodiac, but the drivers are very accommodating in terms of exploring where you like and looking for interesting wildlife. There is a time constraint factor as your itinerary may be tight that day, but I've had zodiac drivers who had "difficulty with their radio", didn't hear the recall message, and thus we were quite late.
And, I've had situations where we were supposed to go directly back to the ship after a landing site, but was able to convince the zodiac driver to "take the long way back."The expedition leaders can be quite flexible. We were cruising along in the ship one evening, and we spotted a large pod of humpback whales. The majority of the passengers were hanging out on the decks or on the bridge watching them. Eventually, the hotel manager came to the expedition leader and complained that nobody was coming to dinner, and that everything was getting cold. The expediton leader thought about it, told him to serve a cold dinner, and ordered the zodiacs out. We stopped the ship, jumped into the zodiacs and cruised after the whales.
So, I didn't find it any more regimented than a safari. I wouldn't have picked any different landing sites, and really, for my safari, I picked the standard Northern Safari circuit - so I wasn't breaking any new ground. We did have to stick to a schedule and itinerary, but I also remember driving like hell for the Naabi Hill Gate to make our departure time from the Serengeti. The only difference I think we had was that the zodiac rides are closer to what one would experience in a group safari rather than a private safari - people in the boat had different priorities on occasion. And, of course, our lodge traveled with us in the form of the ship.
I think the difference for me was that I picked an expedition-style ship rather than one of the big cruise ships. The accommodations were quite comfortable, but basic - essentially what a soviet union-era research scientist would get. The food was excellent. But, instead of musicals, floor shows, and casinos, we got nature documentaries and lectures by the expedition staff every night. Our main form of entertainment was hanging out on deck or on the bridge watching Antarctica go by. I can see how a larger cruise ship might be more regimented - kind of like a floating bus tour, but my trip wasn't like that.
I lucked out in a departure with very few people on it. The ship had a capacity for 48 passengers, and we sailed with only 36. And, I really enjoyed my fellow passengers - it was a very good group. My departure was out of the ordinary in that the majority of passengers were fairly young - mid to late 30s. We didn't have very many people who had mobility problems, so we were quite active in terms of our excursions. Lemme tell you, they'll run you ragged once you're in Antarctic waters - 2-3 excurions per day, early mornings, late evenings, and with so much sunlight, you never want to sleep. You could certainly opt out of excursions, but very few did. We were all so excited to be there that we didn't want to miss anything.
I'll never forget my first zodiac cruise - we left at 10 p.m. and flew across the water under the light of a full moon. The air was biting cold as we whipped around icebergs and chased after whales. We found a pod of humpback whales, and they would dive under our zodiacs, leaving us to wonder where they would come up. Afterwards, I remember watching our group of zodiacs speed towards the ship with the bows riding high as if we could take off in flight at any moment. I also remember cruising an ice-choked bay and looking into the cold, dead eyes of a leopard seal. And, watching penguin stampedes, and sitting on a beach only to have a penguin chick come up and hop into my lap. It's hard to top.
Aug 9th, 2006, 03:38 PM
#30
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Penguin chick on your lap? I'm there!
My first trip after Africa was Holland and I while I'll never be unhappy on a vacation yes, I felt some of that letdown for your first vacation after Africa. Then we did an Alaskan cruise and some of the helicopter and plane rides were great. But the nature trip in Denali park 6 hours on a bus (because that's the only way to get in) and 6 hours back - and only seeing wildlife every hour or so from a distance... I really thought oh, if only these people could see Africa. Later, New Zealand was fabulous and some helicopter rides were incredible. We did some wonderful wildlife viewing of yellow-eyed penquins coming in from the beach, crossing the sand hoping not to be eaten by the sea lions. And of course, what did I think of? Oh, now this is like Africa.
My first trip after Africa was Holland and I while I'll never be unhappy on a vacation yes, I felt some of that letdown for your first vacation after Africa. Then we did an Alaskan cruise and some of the helicopter and plane rides were great. But the nature trip in Denali park 6 hours on a bus (because that's the only way to get in) and 6 hours back - and only seeing wildlife every hour or so from a distance... I really thought oh, if only these people could see Africa. Later, New Zealand was fabulous and some helicopter rides were incredible. We did some wonderful wildlife viewing of yellow-eyed penquins coming in from the beach, crossing the sand hoping not to be eaten by the sea lions. And of course, what did I think of? Oh, now this is like Africa.
Aug 9th, 2006, 04:17 PM
#31
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went on a Quark Expeditions ship - the Akademik Shokalskiy. It's a smaller ship that only holds 48 passengers. Other ships owned by Quark hold around 100. Landings are limited to no more than 100 people at a time, so you don't want a ship any bigger than that. I don't think Quark takes direct bookings, so I booked through an agent that specializes in this sort of trip, Expeditiontrips.com. Bear in mind that the smaller ship, the more motion you'll experience on the trip over.
Actually, it's quite a lot like African safaris. You have a bunch of ships that operate in the Antarctic waters during November to March, and a bunch of agents in the U.S. and abroad that resell trips on those ships. So, you have local operators and agents, only you can't really negotiate directly with the operators. You'll find different agencies selling the same trip on the same ship a lot of times. A lot of the differentiation will come in duration of the trip, destinations (Antarctic Peninsula, South Georgia, or Falkland Islands - in various combinations), amenities (some offer diving, sea kayaking, etc...), and specialized guides.
Some companies or organizations will buy out an entire departure - like National Geographic or a Photo Tour company (Joseph Van Os does this) and they sell spots on the ship. Others will contract out a certain number of berths on a ship for their group. I think A&K does this, but they may also get the whole ship. Some companies actually own their own ships, like Lindblad.
In general, there'll be a division of labor - you'll have the captain, crew, and hotel staff who take care of running the ship, keeping things clean, and feeding people. Then, you have the expedition staff composed of an expedition leader, specialists - like ornithologists and glaciologists, and zodiac drivers. For specialized trips bought out by some company, they'll sometimes include professional photographers or noted lecturers, authors, or whomever. On my trip to the Galapagos, I talked to the professional photographers on the trip, and they told me tons of stories about their trips to Antarctica as photo guides.
Most of the ships are small, converted, former Russian research vessels that are ice strengthened or are actual ice breakers. All but a handful of ships depart out of Ushuaia, Argentina with the rest departing from New Zealand. I think there may be a few that actually depart from South Africa. (Hey, how's that for a combo?)
I did an 11-day trip to the Antarctic Peninsula. Be aware that you spend 2 nights there and 2 nights back crossing the Drake Passage - a rather rough patch of ocean. Nothing really happens during those 4 nights, so that time is a bit wasted. Though, I did need the time on the way back to catch up on my sleep. I had an early booking discount, and got my trip for $3800 plus international airfare - not much more expensive than my African safari. This was for a triple-share cabin, but I only shared with one other person. In retrospect, since I liked the trip so much, I should have gone for a longer trip that included South Georgia Island, but it just gives me a reason to return. I also combined this trip with a visit to Torres del Paine in Chile.
Top of the line outfiters for Antarctica are Lindblad and Cheeseman's Ecology Safaris. Lindblad does its trips in conjunction with National Geographic, I believe. Lindblad has an excellent ship, great crews, and excellent guides. Their ships tend to be more comfortable than others. They're also rather expensive and attract an older crowd, but usually a crowd of dedicated wildlife observers. Cheeseman's is for the hard core wildlife observer - they go out for really long trips and really care about their wildlife observations and photography.
The rest are middle ground outfitters - Quark, Peregrine, Clipper, etc... There's also major cruise ships, like the Marco Polo, that go to Antarctica - so you have an option if you want formal dinners and floor shows. The only budget trips to Antarctica that I know of are run by GAP Adventures (they bought one of Lindblad's old ships - sort of a hand-me-down), and they're not that cheap, plus the trips tend to be short. Oh, wait, there is another budget operator - there's an Argentinian ship that makes the trip, but the reports are very bad. I can't recall the name of the ship.
In general, there's not a lot of differentiation between the operators. The ships all have different amenities at various levels of comfort. The real differentiator will be in the expedition staff.
Pictures here:
http://www.pbase.com/escog/antarctica
Check out Aitcho Island for penguin chicks on laps.
Actually, it's quite a lot like African safaris. You have a bunch of ships that operate in the Antarctic waters during November to March, and a bunch of agents in the U.S. and abroad that resell trips on those ships. So, you have local operators and agents, only you can't really negotiate directly with the operators. You'll find different agencies selling the same trip on the same ship a lot of times. A lot of the differentiation will come in duration of the trip, destinations (Antarctic Peninsula, South Georgia, or Falkland Islands - in various combinations), amenities (some offer diving, sea kayaking, etc...), and specialized guides.
Some companies or organizations will buy out an entire departure - like National Geographic or a Photo Tour company (Joseph Van Os does this) and they sell spots on the ship. Others will contract out a certain number of berths on a ship for their group. I think A&K does this, but they may also get the whole ship. Some companies actually own their own ships, like Lindblad.
In general, there'll be a division of labor - you'll have the captain, crew, and hotel staff who take care of running the ship, keeping things clean, and feeding people. Then, you have the expedition staff composed of an expedition leader, specialists - like ornithologists and glaciologists, and zodiac drivers. For specialized trips bought out by some company, they'll sometimes include professional photographers or noted lecturers, authors, or whomever. On my trip to the Galapagos, I talked to the professional photographers on the trip, and they told me tons of stories about their trips to Antarctica as photo guides.
Most of the ships are small, converted, former Russian research vessels that are ice strengthened or are actual ice breakers. All but a handful of ships depart out of Ushuaia, Argentina with the rest departing from New Zealand. I think there may be a few that actually depart from South Africa. (Hey, how's that for a combo?)
I did an 11-day trip to the Antarctic Peninsula. Be aware that you spend 2 nights there and 2 nights back crossing the Drake Passage - a rather rough patch of ocean. Nothing really happens during those 4 nights, so that time is a bit wasted. Though, I did need the time on the way back to catch up on my sleep. I had an early booking discount, and got my trip for $3800 plus international airfare - not much more expensive than my African safari. This was for a triple-share cabin, but I only shared with one other person. In retrospect, since I liked the trip so much, I should have gone for a longer trip that included South Georgia Island, but it just gives me a reason to return. I also combined this trip with a visit to Torres del Paine in Chile.
Top of the line outfiters for Antarctica are Lindblad and Cheeseman's Ecology Safaris. Lindblad does its trips in conjunction with National Geographic, I believe. Lindblad has an excellent ship, great crews, and excellent guides. Their ships tend to be more comfortable than others. They're also rather expensive and attract an older crowd, but usually a crowd of dedicated wildlife observers. Cheeseman's is for the hard core wildlife observer - they go out for really long trips and really care about their wildlife observations and photography.
The rest are middle ground outfitters - Quark, Peregrine, Clipper, etc... There's also major cruise ships, like the Marco Polo, that go to Antarctica - so you have an option if you want formal dinners and floor shows. The only budget trips to Antarctica that I know of are run by GAP Adventures (they bought one of Lindblad's old ships - sort of a hand-me-down), and they're not that cheap, plus the trips tend to be short. Oh, wait, there is another budget operator - there's an Argentinian ship that makes the trip, but the reports are very bad. I can't recall the name of the ship.
In general, there's not a lot of differentiation between the operators. The ships all have different amenities at various levels of comfort. The real differentiator will be in the expedition staff.
Pictures here:
http://www.pbase.com/escog/antarctica
Check out Aitcho Island for penguin chicks on laps.
Aug 9th, 2006, 06:03 PM
#32
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, thanks for the detailed reply, lifelist! How did your Antarctic cruise compare in terms of flexibility to your Galapagos cruise? We chose a 16 pax vessel for our Galapagos cruise and still felt that it was somewhat regimented. Don't get me wrong, I had a great time but if there's one negative for us it was the fact that we had very little opportunity to do anything on our own. I also incorrectly assumed that by choosing a smaller vessel, the landings would be just our group, but in many cases there were multiple groups from different vessels at each landing site. It was more crowded than I'd expected but this was probably due to lack of research on my part.
Aug 9th, 2006, 06:44 PM
#34
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first trip after Africa '03 was a return trip to Australia which we thoroughly enjoyed. The first time there was about 7 yrs. ago and we covered the western half of the country by car. You definitely get a good feel for a country when you can experience it this way. We started in Sydney ( beautiful location ) and headed across to just north of Adelaide and then up through Coober Pedy ( opal country ) and on to Uluru ( Ayers Rock ) which was a very worthwhile destination for us. From there we again headed north to Tennant Creek, then eastward toward the coast and Brisbane and back down to Sydney along the Gold Coast. Stopped in many little towns and enjoyed the locals ( Aussies are very hospitable folks )
On the 2nd trip we started again in Sydney and instead of flying across to Perth we decided to take the Indian Pacific train for 3 nights. Although I had definite trepidations about spending this amount of time in a confined space it turned out to be great fun with fellow passengers. In Perth we picked up our rental car and headed north along the eastern coast up to Broome ( known for it's beaches ) and then eastward through the Kimberleys to see Kakadu Nat. Park. Not as thrilled with the park as expected and actually preferred a much smaller place called Litchfield. From Kakadu it was north to Darwin which was very tropical. From there it was a plane ride down to Melbourne and another rental car to drive the Great Ocean Road back to Sydney.
The entire trip took us about 5 weeks which about the same time spent on the first trip there. The only places we have left to see are Tasmania and the Great Barrier Reef and we plan to return in the future as our experiences have been so positive in all respects.
The next year we headed to Europe and spent time driving through Germany as I hadn't been there since the wall came down in '90. Lots of changes. From there we flew to Greece for a visit before heading home. Were away for 4 weeks for that trip.
This year though it was our return trip to Africa in June. This is such a special destination and we had such an amazing trip the first time that we definitely wanted to return. The first visit involved a few days in the desert of Namibia and then on to Botswana for the bulk of our trip and finishing in Cape Town.
This time out we spent the entire time in Namibia which included 2 1/2 weeks of driving as well as a week flying to the Skeleton Coast Camp for 3 nights and on to Serra Cafema for 3 nights before heading back to Windhoek.
During the driving portion we traveled from Windhoek ( Heinitzburg Hotel ) north to Etosha ( Onguma Camp ) and across the park to Ongava Private Reserve ( Ongava Lodge ) The scenery was wonderful and we enjoyed the wildlife we were able to view. From Etosha it was through Damaraland ( Mowani Mtn. Camp ). Here the terrain was completely different and quite spectacular with wonderful rock formations. Then we headed toward the coast to Cape Cross ( Lodge ) and visited the seal colony before heading down to Swakopmud ( Hansa Hotel ) Then it was back inland and on to Sossusvlei ( Sossusvlei Mtn. Lodge ) where we again experieced such spectacular scenery and different from the other places we had seen so far. Because Namibia experienced record rains during the month of May the terrain was beautifully covered with wonderful grasses and colorful vegetation that normally is not seen.
From there it was back to Windhoek for an overnight before our private charter flights up north. Our pilot was with us for the entire time and this worked very well. Again such different terrain and stunning scenery especially at Serra Cafema. Also enjoyed visiting the Himba people there.
All in all it was a fabulous time in such a diverse and beautiful country.
Now we are thinking of our next location which might be a trip to Chile to the Atacama Desert and onto Bolivia to see various sites and possibly ending with a cruise of the Galapagos Islands. This would be our 2nd time in Chile as we have previously been there to spend time in the south and Torres De Paine National Park where we thoroughly enjoyed our visit and also experienced beautiful scenery.
There are just so many wonderful places to visit that one can never get tired or bored with travel.
Aug 9th, 2006, 07:22 PM
#35
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I think the Galapagos were more regimented than Antarctica. The zodiac cruises were similar - you basically arrive at a certain area and you cruise around looking for interesting wildlife. The scope of your travels is quite a bit larger, though, given how much room you have in Antarctica.
The landings were much more freeform in Antarctica. In the Galapagos, you have to stay on trails and aren't allowed to wander. Also, the guides are required to stay with you at all times. In Antarctica, we were allowed to wander at will - as long as we stayed in the guidelines for visiting the site (e.g. don't approach wildlife closer than a certain distance, no flash photography) and didn't do anything stupid (e.g. don't pet the leopard seal). The guides were available if we wanted to talk to them, otherwise we were left alone. The guides were positioned to keep watch on everybody at the landing sites, but were fairly unobtrusive. I think we had maybe 2-3 organized hikes, but one was to the top of a hill through a snow field with hidden crevasses and the others were simply familiarization hikes - i.e. here's the sea lion colony, there's the such-and-such bird colony, etc... Afterwards, we were left to do our own thing. After we did the hike to the top of the hill, we were free to throw ourselves off the cliff and slide down the snow slope if we wanted. It was very hands-off. I did get "reminded" to avoid the penguin chick creches one time as I wandered about without paying attention, but that was it.
Of course, this attitude could be attributable to our particular expedition leader. Other trips may be a bit more regimented, but I think it unlikely that they're as regimented as the Galapagos. The Galapagos have certain rules that enforce a lot of oversight. Nobody has sovereignty over Antarctica (despite what Chile and Argentina may claim), so the regulations were agreed upon by an association of the tour operators and their compliance is voluntary, though they all seem to take it very seriously.
My Galapagos trip was even more regimented than most - I did a photo-oriented tour with Lindblad, so I was following around the photo guides most of the trip - hitting specific locations at certain times. However, that was by choice.
The landings were much more freeform in Antarctica. In the Galapagos, you have to stay on trails and aren't allowed to wander. Also, the guides are required to stay with you at all times. In Antarctica, we were allowed to wander at will - as long as we stayed in the guidelines for visiting the site (e.g. don't approach wildlife closer than a certain distance, no flash photography) and didn't do anything stupid (e.g. don't pet the leopard seal). The guides were available if we wanted to talk to them, otherwise we were left alone. The guides were positioned to keep watch on everybody at the landing sites, but were fairly unobtrusive. I think we had maybe 2-3 organized hikes, but one was to the top of a hill through a snow field with hidden crevasses and the others were simply familiarization hikes - i.e. here's the sea lion colony, there's the such-and-such bird colony, etc... Afterwards, we were left to do our own thing. After we did the hike to the top of the hill, we were free to throw ourselves off the cliff and slide down the snow slope if we wanted. It was very hands-off. I did get "reminded" to avoid the penguin chick creches one time as I wandered about without paying attention, but that was it.
Of course, this attitude could be attributable to our particular expedition leader. Other trips may be a bit more regimented, but I think it unlikely that they're as regimented as the Galapagos. The Galapagos have certain rules that enforce a lot of oversight. Nobody has sovereignty over Antarctica (despite what Chile and Argentina may claim), so the regulations were agreed upon by an association of the tour operators and their compliance is voluntary, though they all seem to take it very seriously.
My Galapagos trip was even more regimented than most - I did a photo-oriented tour with Lindblad, so I was following around the photo guides most of the trip - hitting specific locations at certain times. However, that was by choice.
Aug 9th, 2006, 09:47 PM
#36
Guest
Posts: n/a
My first safari was 2001. Going on my 7th safari next week...
Non-safari since 2001. USA(Several trips combining business and pleasure), London, Paris, Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia (work trip),Dubai....none of those are as interesting enough.
Going to the Cricket world Cup in the Caribbean next year.
Hari
Non-safari since 2001. USA(Several trips combining business and pleasure), London, Paris, Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia (work trip),Dubai....none of those are as interesting enough.
Going to the Cricket world Cup in the Caribbean next year.
Hari
Aug 10th, 2006, 05:36 AM
#37
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lifelist - thanks for the info on how things work with Quark in real life - always good to get first-hand reports. We're leaving December 31 for a 20-day cruise on Quark's Prof Molchanov - 49 pax ship similar to yours. Our itinerary includes the Falklands and South Georgia.
I had found your pictures on pbase a while back - I enjoyed revisiting them today ... but now I should get back to work -- after all, the final payment for our expedition is just around the corner
I had found your pictures on pbase a while back - I enjoyed revisiting them today ... but now I should get back to work -- after all, the final payment for our expedition is just around the corner
Aug 10th, 2006, 05:46 PM
#39
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, lifelist, thanks for the great description of Anarctica. Certainly sounds fabulous. We have some friends who went and loved it. They talk about their trip the way we talk about our safari. Funny, for some reason they have no desire to go to Africa.
My problem with Anarctica is having to be on a boat. I heard that the seas can be very rough, and the zodiac even more so. Our friends are definitely "adventure" types, but even they seemed to have problems. And I am MUCH wimpier than they are when it comes to "roughing it".
How did you do with sea sickness?
Judy
My problem with Anarctica is having to be on a boat. I heard that the seas can be very rough, and the zodiac even more so. Our friends are definitely "adventure" types, but even they seemed to have problems. And I am MUCH wimpier than they are when it comes to "roughing it".
How did you do with sea sickness?
Judy
Aug 10th, 2006, 06:08 PM
#40
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did fine with the sea sickness. I used dramamine, and was fine during the Drake Passage. About 1/2 to 2/3rds of the passengers kept to their cabins during the passage and never made it to meal times, though a few staggered out for soup and crackers on occasion. It was funny to meet people for the first time after being at sea for 3 days. One guy was using 3 different sea sickness cures at the same time.
The waters within the peninsula are fairly calm, and nobody had problems there. The passage back was quite a bit worse - lots of rough seas and a raging storm. Meal times were an adventure. Just navigating the hallways to the dining room was difficult with the ship movement. Once you got to your table, you had to brace yourself. The tables weren't set with tableware - they would hand you things as you needed them. Anything placed on the table would go flying. Eventually, they just served sandwiches.
I'm sure it was hell for the people who were seasick, but I found it adventurous. Even the people with the worse seasickness said it was worth it. Also, I was in a smaller ship, so we had more movement than a larger ship would.
The waters within the peninsula are fairly calm, and nobody had problems there. The passage back was quite a bit worse - lots of rough seas and a raging storm. Meal times were an adventure. Just navigating the hallways to the dining room was difficult with the ship movement. Once you got to your table, you had to brace yourself. The tables weren't set with tableware - they would hand you things as you needed them. Anything placed on the table would go flying. Eventually, they just served sandwiches.
I'm sure it was hell for the people who were seasick, but I found it adventurous. Even the people with the worse seasickness said it was worth it. Also, I was in a smaller ship, so we had more movement than a larger ship would.
