Cruises U.S. Congressional Committee Asks Canada to Reconsider Cruise Ban

[Joanandjoe]

I'm puzzled by the legislation.  For now, cruise ships are not just prohibited from stopping in Canada:  they are not allowed to cruise in Canadian waters.  One of the points of Alaska cruises is that much of the sailing is in the relatively protected Inside Passage.  If the ships can't cruise between the Canadian mainland and Vancouver Island  (& Prince Rupert Island), they will have a much longer, rougher passage between (for e.g.) Seattle and Seward.  Can that even be done with the 7 day CDC cruise limitation? As for Alaska to Alaska cruises, I don't believe any port other than Seward can handle large ship embarkation and disembarkation.

 

Of course, if the legislation passes, maybe Canada will let ships pass through their waters as long as they don't stop in Canada.

[Mudhen]

12 minutes ago, Joanandjoe said:

I'm puzzled by the legislation.  For now, cruise ships are not just prohibited from stopping in Canada:  they are not allowed to cruise in Canadian waters.  One of the points of Alaska cruises is that much of the sailing is in the relatively protected Inside Passage.  If the ships can't cruise between the Canadian mainland and Vancouver Island  (& Prince Rupert Island), they will have a much longer, rougher passage between (for e.g.) Seattle and Seward.  Can that even be done with the 7 day CDC cruise limitation? As for Alaska to Alaska cruises, I don't believe any port other than Seward can handle large ship embarkation and disembarkation.

 

Of course, if the legislation passes, maybe Canada will let ships pass through their waters as long as they don't stop in Canada.

But isn't there some quirky law in the US (name escapes me) that foreign flagged ships must stop in a foreign port as they are not allowed to do only US ports on a cruise. I could be very well be wrong, but I thought this was a sticking point for both Alaska AND East Coast "Leaf Peaking" cruises.

[rallydave]

12 minutes ago, Mudhen said:

But isn't there some quirky law in the US (name escapes me) that foreign flagged ships must stop in a foreign port as they are not allowed to do only US ports on a cruise. I could be very well be wrong, but I thought this was a sticking point for both Alaska AND East Coast "Leaf Peaking" cruises.

Not sure what you mean about it being a quirky law but, it is PVSA Passenger Vessel Services Act of 1886  Yes it is a sticking point for all cruises to anywhere in the world with the exception of closed loop cruises to the Caribbean.   This is why cruises from the West Coast to and back from Hawaii have to make a Technical Stop in Ensenada to comply with the law.

 

Yes this effects the cruises in the fall between the US and Canada as well although a lot more in the Alaska region.  Technically the law does not allow passengers to embark and then disembark between 2 US Ports without a stop at a foreign port.   Technically they can travel between only US Ports but, nobody could then get off at any of those ports.  There is a penalty of I believe $300 per person for violations and sometimes people do have to leave the ship without having stopped at the foreign port and most cruise lines have to do lots of paper and charge the passengers for these costs.

[rallydave]

 

 

41 minutes ago, Joanandjoe said:

I don't believe any port other than Seward can handle large ship embarkation and disembarkation.

Seward  Whittier and Juneau can handle large ship embarkation and disembarkation.   As to the current CDC 7 day limit agree that would not be possible with turn arounds in Seward or Whittier without fewer port calls as at least a full day more from Seattle than Vancouver or Victoria. and missing the inside passage would also be a problem.

[Mudhen]

11 minutes ago, rallydave said:

Not sure what you mean about it being a quirky law but, it is PVSA Passenger Vessel Services Act of 1886  Yes it is a sticking point for all cruises to anywhere in the world with the exception of closed loop cruises to the Caribbean.   This is why cruises from the West Coast to and back from Hawaii have to make a Technical Stop in Ensenada to comply with the law.

 

Yes this effects the cruises in the fall between the US and Canada as well although a lot more in the Alaska region.  Technically the law does not allow passengers to embark and then disembark between 2 US Ports without a stop at a foreign port.   Technically they can travel between only US Ports but, nobody could then get off at any of those ports.  There is a penalty of I believe $300 per person for violations and sometimes people do have to leave the ship without having stopped at the foreign port and most cruise lines have to do lots of paper and charge the passengers for these costs.

I guess what I meant by quirky was that it seems like a law that's been kept on the books for a LONG time and to me, doesn't really make a whole lot of sense in this day and age. But thank you for the name of this law.

[MightyQuinn]

57 minutes ago, Joanandjoe said:

I'm puzzled by the legislation.  For now, cruise ships are not just prohibited from stopping in Canada:  they are not allowed to cruise in Canadian waters.  One of the points of Alaska cruises is that much of the sailing is in the relatively protected Inside Passage.  If the ships can't cruise between the Canadian mainland and Vancouver Island  (& Prince Rupert Island), they will have a much longer, rougher passage between (for e.g.) Seattle and Seward. 

 

The original Order by the Canadian Minister of Transport included a carve-out which allowed vessels to transit the Inside Passage.  

Foreign vessels in certain waters

(2) Despite section 3, a foreign vessel may, in the Great Lakes, the Inside Passage, the St. Lawrence River, the Gulf of St. Lawrence or the St. Lawrence Seaway

• (a) navigate, if passage is expeditious; and
• (b) moor, berth or anchor if those activities are incidental to the passage.

So cruise ships could "expeditiously" sail the Inside Passage enroute to Alaska from Seattle, but they would still be bound by the PVSA requirement to stop at a foreign port.  That's the real sticking point.

[JMARINER]

3 hours ago, Joanandjoe said:

I'm puzzled by the legislation.  For now, cruise ships are not just prohibited from stopping in Canada:  they are not allowed to cruise in Canadian waters.  One of the points of Alaska cruises is that much of the sailing is in the relatively protected Inside Passage.  If the ships can't cruise between the Canadian mainland and Vancouver Island  (& Prince Rupert Island), they will have a much longer, rougher passage between (for e.g.) Seattle and Seward.  Can that even be done with the 7 day CDC cruise limitation? As for Alaska to Alaska cruises, I don't believe any port other than Seward can handle large ship embarkation and disembarkation.

 

Of course, if the legislation passes, maybe Canada will let ships pass through their waters as long as they don't stop in Canada.

The United States and most maritime nations consider the inside passage to be an international strait, which means that foreign vessels have right of "transit passage." Thus it is not subject to the term "Canadian Waters," if the ship is indeed just transiting. The same is true of the Saint Lawrence seaway. 

 

J

[Joanandjoe]

Thank you, Mighty Quinn and J Mariner, for clearing up this point..  So I guess an Alaska cruise would be difficult with the 7 day limit, but nonetheless possible.  Joe