Our Vision
Explore.Engage.Conserve.
Three words that are easy to print and hard to earn. Here is what each one actually costs us, and what it buys.
Explore.
Twelve people, or it doesn't work.
Our Svalbard voyages carry twelve guests because the Kinfish has twelve berths, and because a group any larger changes what a place is willing to show you. Patagonia runs at five. In Congo the group is small enough to sit down to a meal cooked by the village hosting us.
Small numbers are not a luxury feature. They are the reason we can change a plan when the ice moves, follow a puma on foot, or stay another hour because something is happening.
Engage.
The people who live there are not local colour.
In the Republic of Congo you travel with Guillaume de Remacle and Prince Koulandissa. You carve a mask alongside the artists at the Cercle Africain, buy fish at the morning market in Manguengue, and are received by Queen Ngalifourou of the Teke in Ngabe. In Nepal you sit with monks at Thupten Choling. These are not staged encounters bolted onto an itinerary. They are the itinerary.
Money follows the same principle. We book locally owned lodges, local guides, and local services, so what you spend stays in the region rather than routing back to a head office.
Conserve.
Numbers, not adjectives.
At Ziwa Rhino Sanctuary in Uganda, a founding population of six southern white rhinos has grown to forty-two. Uganda had none left in the wild by 1983. In the Republic of Congo we join the morning feed at the Jane Goodall Institute's Tchimpounga sanctuary, and travel to Lesio-Louna, where gorillas are prepared for return to the wild.
In Chilean Patagonia the story is economic. Pumas were shot for decades as livestock killers. Photographic tourism made them worth more alive than dead, and the estancias around Torres del Paine now function as some of the most important private conservation land in the country. Your visit is part of that arithmetic.
The loudest thing we do about the climate is show it to you.
A spreadsheet has never changed anyone's mind about the Arctic. Standing on sea ice that is thinner than it should be does. So our climate work leads with witness: we put you in front of the change, introduce you to the people working against it, and send you home carrying the story.
The other part happens quietly. Every departure funds verified carbon removal and the conservation projects you travel through, built into the trip price, not a tickbox at checkout. We don't lead with those numbers and we won't print a badge about them. We publish them instead, in full, for anyone who wants to look.
Our climate accounting, published
Per-guest footprints for every trip, calculated with current government emissions factors, radiative forcing and well-to-tank included.
| Expedition | Tonnes CO2e | Share from flights |
|---|---|---|
| Svalbard (from London) | 3.82 | 44% |
| Svalbard (from New York) | 5.14 | 44% |
| Republic of Congo | 3.11 | 93% |
| Patagonia | 3.18 | 93% |
| Uganda | 4.16 | 93% |
| Nepal | 4.43 | 93% |
On our land-based expeditions, roughly ninety-three per cent of the footprint is the flight that brings you to the start. We fund more carbon removal than our own operations emit, and we do not treat that as erasing the footprint of your trip, which stays significant, and which is mostly your flights.
One figure particular to the Arctic: ships burning fuel at high latitudes give off black carbon, fine soot that settles on snow and ice, where it absorbs a little more sunlight than clean snow would. A Svalbard voyage produces in the region of 2.6 kg. We report it separately, in kilograms.
Updated each season. If you'd like to walk through it line by line, ask us on a call, we're happy to.
Dive in.
Twelve guests, places that take effort to reach, and a straight answer to any question you want to ask us. Including the awkward ones.
Start a conversation