Quark Expeditions

The published itinerary promised 4 days on Baffin Island and none were delivered and consequently we feel very shortchanged and disappointed that the trip we purchased was not provided as described in the advertising materials. The expedition staff and hotel services were excellent. However, this experience was tempered by the catastrophic collapse of the ceiling structure in the main lounge. It was simply blind luck that avoided serious injuries and perhaps even fatalities.

Disappointed with the change in the vessel. EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED that after we saw one polar bear, we stopped looking and stayed in the same area for the rest of the day without moving! We were told we would look on the southern ice as we headed south, but made no attempt to go that far. There was no impulse in this "expedition" - yes, plan changed but within a VERY narrow range. I would have guessed with being a POLAR BEAR SAFARI we would have spend the bulk of time at sea on the ice rather than just two days and 1/2 of one of those days not moving. Misleading if not false advertising.

Dear Sirs, We were among the guests on the above trip with Quark. We have been encouraged by members of your staff and other guests to provide you with feedback of our experiences. We have travelled extensively for more than 20 years, much of which involved expeditions by ship. We have attempted to be as honest and realistic as possible in providing this feedback, and trust that you do not just categorise us as 'complainers'. Overall we were disappointed in the experience. It was not a complete failure, just well below what we expected. I summarise our experiences as follows: 1. The ship was clearly not ready for the planned trip. There were numerous minor electrical, plumbing, and heating/cooling issues. Throughout the trip there was almost constant construction work being conducted by onboard workman, drilling, screwing, banging, tiling, grinding, painting etc. It is a pity that something as simple as washing the windows was not attended to - they were dirty both inside and outside. We understand the navigation system was being either installed or upgraded. We were told that the Ocean Adventurer was scheduled to be in dry dock until September but was released early to accommodate our booked trip. 2. One of the primary purposes of the expedition should have been to find and observe wildlife, and in particular polar bears. During our 9 days we found 2 bears, but were only able to observe one. Although the ship is purportedly classified as ice class 1B, the Captain appeared reluctant to put the ship into even relatively light ice. The first bear we found was on the ice about 2 miles from the ship, but no attempt was made to breach the ice to get closer. We were given spurious explanations, such as not wanting to disturb the bear, or that it was against polar protocol. We were told this despite the fact that other nearby ships were in the ice, and we personally have had numerous experiences on other ships where they traversed the ice shelf. We were told that there are an estimated 26,000 polar bears in the Arctic - it is a pity that only 2 were discovered. By chance when leaving Longyearbyen we met an acquaintance who had sailed on a different ship, but at the same time as us. That ship found bears on 9 different occasions, and did so when travelling slowly through the ice. 3. We found the booking process slow and complicated. Of particular annoyance was that emails sent to Paul Schuster, your booking representative with whom we were supposed to be dealing were regularly not replied to. Paul gave the impression that he was not particularly interested in our booking, and there was certainly no personalised service. 4. On a more positive note, we found the meals, although not gourmet, very adequate. There was good variety and quantity with many healthy choices on offer. The service staff improved with time, and overall did a good job, although would benefit with further training. The housekeeping staff were friendly, courteous, and also pretty efficient, except for the windows. The expedition team did a reasonably good job considering they were working on a different ship than that planned. They were enthusiastic although there were communication issues on occasions. The cold weather gear and boots provided were appropriate, and the zodiacs worked well, and the operators were competent. 5. Our cabin was perfectly adequate, particularly when the plumbing and heating/cooling issues were addressed. A working hairdryer would be good, and clean windows should be a priority - they were far to dirty for photography. As the ship is purportedly designed for polar travel during 24 hours of daylight, blinds that effectively block out light would be a positive. 6. The whole expedition was very 'rules based' designed to make control of guests easy for the staff, rather than ensuring a good guest experience. On occasions we felt that we were treated and spoken to like children. The onshore walks were painfully slow, and obviously designed to just use up time without actually achieving anything. Lengthy periods of time (sometimes 15-20 minutes) were spent looking at something as mundane as a stain on a rock, or a small flower, yet we were not allowed to leave the group to return to the landing site or wander at our own pace within a designated area, but often told to walk in a single file. You will rely on the defence of 'safety', but other operators simply provide a safety perimeter allowing guests to move more freely and at their own pace - we were always restricted to the slowest, least mobile, or latest guest. We have previously hiked in the Arctic regions of Spitsbergen, northern Russia, Greenland, Iceland, and northern Canada, and have never been restricted or limited in the way we were on this trip. Apart from the failure to enter the ice, this was probably the most disappointing part of the trip. I feel the ultimate responsibility for our disappointment rest with senior management at Quark. It seems management only discovered that Sea Adventurer was not even remotely ready a few days before the start of our trip. Anyone with dry dock experience, which I presume you have, would know that overruns during dry dock are almost the norm. Why you were not monitoring the status of the ship more closely is for you to answer. In all honestly we could not recommend your company to others (in fact will do quite the opposite) and do not anticipate approaching you again. Having spoken with a number of your repeat guests, some indicated they would also not be using Quark again.

This trip was my first cruise and it was fantastic. The trip’s leaders were very safety conscious and they took steps to protect the resource we were visiting. The guides were very knowledgeable, young at heart, and tried to offer an enjoyable experience to all. Although passage through the Drake Channel took time, there were always natural history lectures to attend. As an environmental scientist myself, I can say confidently that these speakers knew what they were talking about. The food was exceptional and I was surprised by the dignity and dress of the waiter staff. The 125-passenger vessel was in top shape and just the right size for such a voyage. The rooms were small but cozy and cleaned each day. The ship was obviously set up based on long experience: kitchen tables and chairs chained to the floor, a library with every book imaginable about the Antarctic, hoists to lower the zodiacs, electrical transformers were provided, and so forth. The ship had all the essentials for such a voyage: oceanic life rafts, electronics, and the zodiacs all had new outboard motors. The personal equipment was tops: parka, boots, life-vests, kayaks, dry suits, and on. Quark has obviously done this before. Most everything (except where you land due to unpredictable weather conditions) was planned out so you had no time to get bored. Each day’s itinerary was posted and there was an opportunity to be in a smaller group for awhile by going kayaking. The people on the trip were folks you were happy to have as traveling companions. After all, only the hardy and adventurous choose to vacation in Antarctica! A few people got a little sea-sick. I consumed something I should not have. But this all goes with the territory. I loved the trip. No complaints from me and thank you.

Toooooo stressful. Besides not ever making it to Antarctica, the stress of hotel assignments, the food arrangements were just terrible.