Possible replacement for Canadian ports

[erdoran]

We MUST flatten the curve.  Italy didn’t and their doctors are now being forced to select who gets hospital/respirator treatment and who doesn’t because of the huge number of patients who need critical care NOW has overwhelmed their system.  If we don’t flatten the curve, that WILL happen in the US (source:  Dr. Fauci, presidential advisor on infectious disease among other things).  Do you want to be at the hospital watching a doctor turn your loved one, or you, away and home to die because there are 10 patients for one ventilator, and five of these patients are younger than you and have young children at home?  Sorry for being graphic and fear-inducing but this is what is happening in Italy (numbers made up but scenario isn’t).  All of us must accept how things are, socially distance, think of others, and wait it out.

 

I know having a group of 17 and this is the only time ever is heartbreaking, but how much MORE heartbreaking would it be to have the scenario above play out?

 

 

[Newleno]

19 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

And so, when this happens, and the Alaska Marine Highway, that is currently in fiscal trouble, sues to be allowed to flag their ships in Panama, you are okay with allowing these ships to hire foreign crew, and not meet USCG requirements?  I'm not.

President Donald J Trump has broad powers under a national emergency, your argument is starting to go down a different path than the scope of the situation.  aka Different times call for different measures. Letting cruise ships for a short period of time use usa ports  because Canada wont let the cruise ships in aint harming the alaska highway FERRY system.

Edited March 14, 2020 by Newleno

[Mightyjoey1]

2 hours ago, Newleno said:

You mean like the cruise ships do?  You dont have to repeal every aspect of the Law,  just improve the current law.

I assume by "improving" the law, you mean extending basic workplace violations (by American standards) that have become "standard" practices on virtually all cruise ships (excepting the Pride of America, which somehow manages to stay afloat)...ones that treat workers on these ships like 2nd class citizens.  Look, I am guilty of enjoying the lower fares as much as the next guy, but "improving" that law means gutting it...and possibly impacting cargo ships throughout this country.  I, for one, would be in favor of seeking to improve crew conditions...after all, it is those conditions that led to most of the issues on those Princess ships in the first place.

[npcl]

13 minutes ago, Newleno said:

President Donald J Trump has broad powers under a national emergency, your argument is starting to go down a different path than the scope of the situation.  aka Different times call for different measures. Letting cruise ships for a short period of time use usa ports  because Canada wont let the cruise ships in aint harming the alaska highway FERRY system.

Even if PVSA did not apply do you really think that Alaska would not move to ban cruise ships during the outbreak.  Most of the ports in Alaska have very limited medical facilities to protect their residents in case of an outbreak.  For example Ketchikan has only 25 beds in their medical facility.

[chengkp75]

53 minutes ago, Newleno said:

President Donald J Trump has broad powers under a national emergency, your argument is starting to go down a different path than the scope of the situation.  aka Different times call for different measures. Letting cruise ships for a short period of time use usa ports  because Canada wont let the cruise ships in aint harming the alaska highway FERRY system.

Sure it is.  Because the Alaska Marine Highway could reduce costs greatly by reflagging their vessels to Panama, while Panamanian flag cruise ships are allowed to carry passengers to Alaska.  Under the law, there is no difference between a ferry and a cruise ship.

[elwood_98034]

There isn't going to be a cruise season out of Seattle this year. Maybe the odd ship in late September, but otherwise it is done. Sorry kids.

Edited March 14, 2020 by elwood_98034

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Newleno said:

President Donald J Trump has broad powers under a national emergency, your argument is starting to go down a different path than the scope of the situation

The powers that the President has in a national emergency are spelled out in statutes as emergency powers.  I know of no emergency power clause in either the Jones Act or the PVSA.

[njhorseman]

35 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The powers that the President has in a national emergency are spelled out in statutes as emergency powers.  I know of no emergency power clause in either the Jones Act or the PVSA.

A Jones Act waiver apparently can be done through the president's general emergency powers , although technically it has to be for national defense reasons.

 

After Hurricane Maria President Trump issued an emergency temporary waiver of the Jones Act for Puerto Rico to allow needed supplies to reach the island. The Jones Act had already been waived for hurricanes Harvey and Irma. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/28/us/jones-act-waived.html

Edited March 15, 2020 by njhorseman

[JimVB]

There is some precedent for a cruise from a US port without a foreign port of call.  Back in the 1990's, Premier Cruise Line did three night cruises from Tampa to Key West (https://www.tampabay.com/archive/1994/01/04/tampa-gets-ship-with-family-ties/).  Don't know how they made it work; my vague recollection is that they paused briefly at a small island that was Mexican territory. Perhaps Canada would make an exception for operational stops with no passengers or crew getting on or off.

[njhorseman]

2 minutes ago, JimVB said:

There is some precedent for a cruise from a US port without a foreign port of call.  Back in the 1990's, Premier Cruise Line did three night cruises from Tampa to Key West (https://www.tampabay.com/archive/1994/01/04/tampa-gets-ship-with-family-ties/).  Don't know how they made it work; my vague recollection is that they paused briefly at a small island that was Mexican territory. Perhaps Canada would make an exception for operational stops with no passengers or crew getting on or off.

It was a common practice on cruises departing the West Coast, which would make a "stop" at Ensenada Mexico without actually allowing passengers to disembark there. That was ruled to be illegal some years ago. Ships are now required to make a legitimate port call at a foreign port.  "Sail bys" such as what you're describing are now forbidden.

 

Even if Canada were to allow it, the US wouldn't.

[njhorseman]

56 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The powers that the President has in a national emergency are spelled out in statutes as emergency powers.  I know of no emergency power clause in either the Jones Act or the PVSA.

 

26 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

A Jones Act waiver apparently can be done through the president's general emergency powers , although technically it has to be for national defense reasons.

 

After Hurricane Maria President Trump issued an emergency temporary waiver of the Jones Act for Puerto Rico to allow needed supplies to reach the island. The Jones Act had already been waived for hurricanes Harvey and Irma. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/28/us/jones-act-waived.html

I've now also found documentation of the possibility of a waiver under the PVSA . As with the Jones Act, the waiver has to be for national defense reasons. I'd be hard-pressed to find a national defense reason that could be cited for the situation we're currently facing. Cruising is a leisure activity, not a necessity.

 

The waiver information can be found on page 20 of CBP's informed compliance document for the PVSA:

 

https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019-Sep/PVSA-ICP.pdf

[krittykat]

9 hours ago, beachseasand said:

   I hope that I am not taking the COVID-19 situation lightly, but could we be out of the woods by June 1st? We are/were sailing on the Jewel June 8th out of Vancouver. And I know it sounds selfish, but NCL could switch to Seattle and run buses for those who could not change flights from Vancouver to Seattle. It seems the port is empty on those days, and the company could mitigate their losses. I guess it all depends on how well the public practices social distancing. I feel terrible for those who are sick or worse, and I am wary about all of the sanitation measure put in place by the lines, but we planned this 18 months ago and there are 19 of us going. We more than likely will not be able to all get our schedules together again. Best wishes to all as we work our way through this.

Canada has closed ports to all cruise ships - this is not a viable option.  No feasible way to get anyone onto the cruise ship. Essentially - NCL would have to literally bus everyone from Seattle to Alaska  - and that would take days - no one would want to do that

[njhorseman]

31 minutes ago, JimVB said:

There is some precedent for a cruise from a US port without a foreign port of call.  Back in the 1990's, Premier Cruise Line did three night cruises from Tampa to Key West (https://www.tampabay.com/archive/1994/01/04/tampa-gets-ship-with-family-ties/).  Don't know how they made it work; my vague recollection is that they paused briefly at a small island that was Mexican territory. Perhaps Canada would make an exception for operational stops with no passengers or crew getting on or off.

 

23 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

It was a common practice on cruises departing the West Coast, which would make a "stop" at Ensenada Mexico without actually allowing passengers to disembark there. That was ruled to be illegal some years ago. Ships are now required to make a legitimate port call at a foreign port.  "Sail bys" such as what you're describing are now forbidden.

 

Even if Canada were to allow it, the US wouldn't.

In addition to my earlier reply, just so there's no misunderstanding those cruises were not "Tampa to Key West", which would require a stop at a distant foreign port. Mexico is a nearby foreign port and doesn't qualify. Those cruises were Tampa to Tampa, with a port call at Key West.

[Newleno]

5 minutes ago, krittykat said:

Canada has closed ports to all cruise ships - this is not a viable option.  No feasible way to get anyone onto the cruise ship. Essentially - NCL would have to literally bus everyone from Seattle to Alaska  - and that would take days - no one would want to do that

San Fran, Astoria, etc...   Sure no problem if the usa deems it is safe to cruise and canada does not want the ships just make a temporary limited exception to the to Jones Act or pass a law,  Easy Peasy Quick Easy =  EPQE

Edited March 15, 2020 by Newleno

[njhorseman]

1 minute ago, Newleno said:

San Fran, Astoria, etc...   Sure no problem if the usa deems it is safe to cruise and canada does not want the ships just make a temporary exception to the Jones Act,  Easy Peasy Quick Easy =  EPQE

It's not going to happen. First, it's the PVSA, not the Jones Act that  has to be waived. That aside, waivers of the PVSA, or the Jones Act for that matter, require a national defense justification. There's no way anyone could cook up a national defense justification so some rich Americans can take a cruise vacation.

[Newleno]

Some of these staunch positions remind me of Dr Robert Ray Redfield Jr.   (He is the current Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) who kept defending the policies of the CDC instead of coming up with solutions to the problem, WORK THE PROBLEM PEOPLE!  I am not interested in what we cant do but how can we change the situation.

Edited March 15, 2020 by Newleno

[elwood_98034]

2 minutes ago, Newleno said:

Some of these staunch positions remind me of Dr Robert Ray Redfield Jr.   (He is the current Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) who kept defending the policies of the CDC instead of coming up with solutions to the problem, WORK THE PROBLEM PEOPLE!

Things are getting pretty real in Seattle. I don't think anyone wants to have to deal with a ship load of sick people, or a bunch of people from somewhere else walking around licking door knobs.

[krittykat]

19 minutes ago, Newleno said:

San Fran, Astoria, etc...   Sure no problem if the usa deems it is safe to cruise and canada does not want the ships just make a temporary limited exception to the to Jones Act or pass a law,  Easy Peasy Quick Easy =  EPQE

They have to make an international stop not another US stop. Astoria is in Oregon...San Fran is Cali...neither qualify.  It cant have all US stops.

Astoria is in the process of closing its port

Edited March 15, 2020 by krittykat

[Newleno]

1 minute ago, elwood_98034 said:

Things are getting pretty real in Seattle. I don't think anyone wants to have to deal with a ship load of sick people, or a bunch of people from somewhere else walking around licking door knobs.

Yeah this whole argument/debate was predicated on the premise of the ban being lifted by the USA before Canada allows cruise ships back in the country.

[elwood_98034]

2 minutes ago, krittykat said:

They have to make an international stop not another US stop. Astoria is in Oregon...San Fran is Cali...neither qualify.  It cant have all US stops.

We were in San Francisco a couple of years ago. It seemed like another planet. It might qualify under the Alternate Reality provision. You never know.

[Newleno]

3 minutes ago, krittykat said:

They have to make an international stop not another US stop. Astoria is in Oregon...San Fran is Cali...neither qualify.  It cant have all US stops.

Yeah this whole argument/debate was predicated on the premise of the ban being lifted by the USA before Canada allows cruise ships back in the country.   aka What if Scenario,  just have to read thru the posts, 

[elwood_98034]

7 minutes ago, Newleno said:

Yeah this whole argument/debate was predicated on the premise of the ban being lifted by the USA before Canada allows cruise ships back in the country.   aka What if Scenario,  just have to read thru the posts, 

BC has a significantly different demographic from Seattle, while I can't say for sure, I have the feeling that BC has been somewhat less stringent in their travel restrictions. Please correct me if I'm wrong. If that is the case, and depending on what strains of the virus they have, they could either be in for a good time, or an extremely bad (Italy) time. There is so much we don't know.

[fastpitchdad]

3 hours ago, Newleno said:

President Donald J Trump has broad powers under a national emergency, your argument is starting to go down a different path than the scope of the situation.  aka Different times call for different measures. Letting cruise ships for a short period of time use usa ports  because Canada wont let the cruise ships in aint harming the alaska highway FERRY system.

 

If we are still under a national emergency I doubt cruise ships will be on the list of things anyone cares about. 

[beachseasand]

40 minutes ago, krittykat said:

Canada has closed ports to all cruise ships - this is not a viable option.  No feasible way to get anyone onto the cruise ship. Essentially - NCL would have to literally bus everyone from Seattle to Alaska  - and that would take days - no one would want to do that

What I meant was for incoming passengers who had booked flights into Vancouver and could not change to get bused to Seattle. The ship would leave from Seattle. Sorry about the confusion.

[YVRBassElectric]

4 minutes ago, elwood_98034 said:

BC has a significantly different demographic from Seattle, while I can't say for sure, I have the feeling that BC has been somewhat less stringent in their travel restrictions. Please correct me if I'm wrong. If that is the case, and depending on what strains of the virus they have, they could either be in for a good time, or an extremely bad (Italy) time. There is so much we don't know.

BC's Chief Medical Officer has epidemic experience and I think we will be ok - will depend on how many follow her advice to self-isolate. We have Pandemic Supplies and a plan and have been testing and tracking since our first case of Jan 25, we only have one case that they don't know where she was infected (unfortunately did start an outbreak at an Elder Care facility)