Carnival to Drop Vancouver and use Seattle

[vanislandcruisers]

USA Today is reporting that Carnival will be dropping Vancouver and using Seattle for all but a couple of Alaska Cruises beginning in 2010

 

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/cruises/blog.aspx

[G'ma]

I'll bet it has to do with new rules for traveling to Canada coming up in June.......

 

http://gocanada.about.com/od/canadatravelplanner/qt/valid_travel_ID.htm

[Fazzdaan]

My PVP included that in an e-mail she sent me earlier today.

[mariemorgan]

I'll bet it has to do with new rules for traveling to Canada coming up in June.......

 

http://gocanada.about.com/od/canadatravelplanner/qt/valid_travel_ID.htm

 

but if they are stopping in canada as a port.. wouldn't they need those documents anyway :confused:

[imacruiser2]

Hoorah!!!!!We now have a cruise port 2 hours from home. I'm so excited. We loved our first Alaska cruise and have been talking about doing another so this will make it happen faster.

[bassclari]

I'll bet it has to do with new rules for traveling to Canada coming up in June.......

 

http://gocanada.about.com/od/canadatravelplanner/qt/valid_travel_ID.htm

 

Maybe someone from Canada and who is more familiar with the Fast cards could confirm or correct...but my understanding from when I worked at a transport company in Ontario is that the Fast cards are only to be used when a commercial driver is transporting a Fast approved load to and from Fast approved companies. Before anyone holding a Fast card tries to use it as a travel document for personal use, I would look closely at the rules.

[Fazzdaan]

No more Sitka and it looks like no more cruising in College Fjord, which I think is unfortunate. The upside is that travel should be cheaper and easier and you do get a day in Victoria, which is lovely.

[big_duck]

I'll bet it has to do with new rules for traveling to Canada coming up in June.......

 

http://gocanada.about.com/od/canadatravelplanner/qt/valid_travel_ID.htm

 

More likely, Carnival had the 2 ports bidding and they took the cheaper. (not that there is anything wrong with that).

[dec2007w3boys]

Maybe so the cruisers wouldn't need a passport (US Citizens that is). Since it is departing and returning to the same US port.

[Powriv]

Maybe so the cruisers wouldn't need a passport (US Citizens that is). Since it is departing and returning to the same US port.

 

You would need a passport if you got off in a Canadian port, but otherwise you are correct

[AZ Karaoke Girl]

I would say it has to do with money. Ships have to stop at a foreign port. That is why Hawaii cruises have a stop in either Canada or Mexico and Alaskan cruises have a stop in Canada. The NCLA ships does not have to cuz it is an American Flagged ship.

 

The article actually says why they are doing it after reading the link:

 

The move to Seattle is in keeping with the line's renewed focus on cruise hubs that are easy for Americans to reach by car.

[deepnite10]

just wish they had done this sooner..one of the reason s i cruise

NCL is for this very reason..*too expensive to get to vancouver*

[G'ma]

but if they are stopping in canada as a port.. wouldn't they need those documents anyway :confused:

 

I would assume there would be no Canada stop. The ship would sail right to Alaska and the inside passage..... Dropping Whittier as a port is interesting too.

 

Who knows, it's all speculation anyway....we'll all know soon enough...as soon as 2010 Alaska cruises show up on the website.

[G'ma]

Maybe someone from Canada and who is more familiar with the Fast cards could confirm or correct...but my understanding from when I worked at a transport company in Ontario is that the Fast cards are only to be used when a commercial driver is transporting a Fast approved load to and from Fast approved companies. Before anyone holding a Fast card tries to use it as a travel document for personal use, I would look closely at the rules.

 

The Fast cards are only for commercial drivers, etc.

 

Nexus and the Enhanced DL would be applicable to cruise passengers.

[swansonia]

I love Sitka....this makes me very sad....I guess the move to Seattle will make travelling easier, but still....Sitka was my favorite stop.....

[nybumpkin]

I would assume there would be no Canada stop. The ship would sail right to Alaska and the inside passage..... Dropping Whittier as a port is interesting too.

 

Who knows' date=' it's all speculation anyway....we'll all know soon enough...as soon as 2010 Alaska cruises show up on the website.[/quote']

Victoria is the Canadian port on this itinerary. They have to stop in one port in Canada to comply with the Passenger Services Act.

[LHP]

I am sure it has to do with the expense of flying to (or from) Anchorage.

 

With folks starting and ending at Seattle, transportation to/from the port will be a lot less hassle and expense.

 

Yes a stop in Canada will still be required to satisfy the Jones Act.

[old sole]

So is Spirit's Hawaii itinerary in the Spring and Fall gone after April 2010? I don't see how the Spirit can continue to do those trips if Seattle is it's new home.

[misguidedangel]

It will not matter, you will need a passport to be in Canadian waters, or in a port like Vancover or Victoria. A passport is going to be needed anyhow. There should be no exception to not have it to come to Canada. We need a passport to go to your country, so you should need it to come to ours.

 

As for that quick pass card for transport trucks, it wouldn't apply...

 

Vancouver to Vancouver cruises would be great. I do not want to see ships take awaw Vancouver. It is easy and cheap for me to get to Vancouver (direct flight) and not cheap or easy to get to Seattle (connections in Calgary, Vancouver, or Victoria).

[CC Help Michell]

Well, drat -- I liked those CCL one way itineraries and was considering one after a land visit for '10. On the bright side, Carnival subsidiaries like HAL and Princess still offer the one way cruises, which are my favorite Alaska itineraries. The Seattle round trips just don't do it for me.

[Maxax]

Its always about the money! But I say...Hurray for Seattle!

[starlight0229]

I am sure it has to do with the expense of flying to (or from) Anchorage.

 

With folks starting and ending at Seattle, transportation to/from the port will be a lot less hassle and expense.

 

Yes a stop in Canada will still be required to satisfy the Jones Act.

 

The Jones Act requires a distinct foreign port only when departing from one US port and returning to a different one. If they are doing round trips, a stop in Canada should not be necessary to satisfy the Jones Act. In fact Canada may not classify as one of the "distinct foreign ports" for purposes of the Jones Act.

[Fazzdaan]

Sure Carnival can still do Hawaii as a re-positioning. The distance from Seattle to Vancouver is relatively minimal. The Seattle to Hawaii will either make a quick stop in Victoria or perhaps embark in Vancouver anyway.

[murphalina]

I loved departing from Seattle. A GREAT port!!!

[rjg41]

See if these reasons make more sense:

 

1) Roundtrip Seattle appeals much more to the US market while round-trip Vancouver appeals to the Canadian market. The US market provides much higher demand.

 

2)Round-trip air into Seattle is much cheaper than round trip Vancouver, even for Canadians.

 

3)One of the provisions of the passport law that was and may still be being considered by Homeland Security was cruise passengers going round-trip from a US port will not need passports. This is a provision that the cruise lines have been lobbing for. Thus round-trip Seattle make more sense than Vancouver since a flight to and/or from Vancouver requires a passport. Read this entire article if you don't believe me. http://www.baltimoresun.com/travel/bal-tr.passports22feb22,0,2868697.story

 

Time will tell.