New CDC cruise restrictions

[Belfast Taxman]

Hearing that cruise lines are now wholly responsible for travel back home from the cruise ship by private transportation and the cruise passenger then has to go into a 14 day isolation period. 

Obviously there are no cruises now but this seems a huge obstacle to cruising re- starting in the US or involving US passengers. Canadians are also impacted.

 

the source for this is the the You Tube channel “travel with Bruce”.

[BBWC]

Hopefully this is only for the cruises still returning now, but it is not clear.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/cruise-ship/what-cdc-is-doing.html

[Dolebludger]

And this appears to be a “recommendation”, but I don’t know for certain. One thing appeared on another thread on this board, however, that must be stopped if I am ever to set foot on a cruise ship in the future. It was part of the fine print in NCL’s contract making passengers financially responsible for payment for food and lodging if their time onboard is extended by a quarantine or other governmental order preventing disembarkation. I don’t know if this contractual provision is used by Regent or not, and I don’t know if any cruise line has ever tried to collect under such a provision. If one did, it would become the ultimate public relations nightmare!

[Travelcat2]

Not sure that I believe anything that comes from a source other than the government (U.S) and even then I’d like a confirmation from another source.  I definitely do not believe what “Bruce” stated.

 

Dolebludger, the fine print on our Regent contracts is necessary for many reasons.  However, whenever possible, Regent goes above and beyond what they are required to do.  For instance, Regent not only makes new flight arrangements for passengers when their flights are cancelled, but has put them up in hotels to wait for the flight.  This is not required but is something that Regent does because that is the kind of company that they are.

 

 

[BBWC]

The official US government (CDC) announcement is in the link I posted.

[Travelcat2]

11 minutes ago, BBWC said:

The official US government (CDC) announcement is in the link I posted.

 

I know.  Unfortunately, I do not believe what the CDC has been stating (I’ve Beene saying this since the Coronavirus began).  Not sure what their role is (if they have a role) in terms of cruse ship protocols.  At the moment, I’m watching the news and it seems that everyone is disagreeing or arguing with everyone.  Scientists, doctors and some government officials completely disagree with each other.  So, perhaps I should have posted that I do not believe much of what is being said - not even by our government.

 

On the other hand, the states of Washington and California are fairly quietly working to control the virus and it has leveled off to a certain extent.  We may be the first state to cancel school for the rest of the school year.  

 

The cruise industry does not need more negative press.  I hope that we will hear an update from CLIA.

[Dolebludger]

1 hour ago, Travelcat2 said:

Not sure that I believe anything that comes from a source other than the government (U.S) and even then I’d like a confirmation from another source.  I definitely do not believe what “Bruce” stated.

 

Dolebludger, the fine print on our Regent contracts is necessary for many reasons.  However, whenever possible, Regent goes above and beyond what they are required to do.  For instance, Regent not only makes new flight arrangements for passengers when their flights are cancelled, but has put them up in hotels to wait for the flight.  This is not required but is something that Regent does because that is the kind of company that they are.

 

1 hour ago, Travelcat2 said:

I feel that Regent would do exactly as you say, and agree that there would be no problem on Regent. But not every line is like Regent. For example, I wouldn’t put anything past NCL. They have the “honor” of being the worst cruise line we ever (mistakenly) have been on! And too many people think “all cruise lines are alike”.

 

 

[Caroldoll]

4 hours ago, BBWC said:

Hopefully this is only for the cruises still returning now, but it is not clear.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/cruise-ship/what-cdc-is-doing.html

I think this is only for this crisis

[Caroldoll]

3 hours ago, Travelcat2 said:

 

I know.  Unfortunately, I do not believe what the CDC has been stating (I’ve Beene saying this since the Coronavirus began).  Not sure what their role is (if they have a role) in terms of cruse ship protocols.  At the moment, I’m watching the news and it seems that everyone is disagreeing or arguing with everyone.  Scientists, doctors and some government officials completely disagree with each other.  So, perhaps I should have posted that I do not believe much of what is being said - not even by our government.

 

On the other hand, the states of Washington and California are fairly quietly working to control the virus and it has leveled off to a certain extent.  We may be the first state to cancel school for the rest of the school year.  

 

The cruise industry does not need more negative press.  I hope that we will hear an update from CLIA.

Jackie, our state does not have any school for the rest of the year..Furthermore, your state are ours have the same numbers and we are controlling it, so maybe they will let us out of jail!

[Belfast Taxman]

3 hours ago, Caroldoll said:

I think this is only for this crisis

I would agree that this is the immediate aim of the restrictions in that it is creating protocols to deal with passengers getting off ships that now require to finish their journey in the US, post Zaandam.

However what are the chances of the cruise lines deciding at the same time as the CDC that cruising should resume. In practical and financial terms, this takes that decision completely out of the hands of the cruise companies, and, in my humble opinion, is likely to delay resumption of cruising, involving the USA and US passengers at least, for many months, because the responsibility for the resumption of cruising now passes to the government, and, in a potential election year, I cannot see DT taking any risks on this.

Edited April 7, 2020 by Belfast Taxman

[pappy1022]

The bottom line is that no one knows when things might get back to normal and when the airline and cruise industries will start up again. One thing that this worldwide virus has done is to highlight the complexity and the interdependence we have on each other in this worldwide economy. Same holds true for the travel industry and most other industries as well. Cruiselines can't operate effectively and efficiently without the airlines having a substantial operation in place. Different countries are going through their COVID-19 cycles at different times and we know now that if one person in this world sneezes, we can all get sick with this virus. Most experts agree that this virus will come back (or stay around) until we find an effective vaccine. This is all new, so that's part of the reason why we are seeing people disagree so much. I am disappointed and sad that I had to cancel my cruise this year. It was my wife and my 50 year anniversary of being together. I chose Regent because I wanted this anniversary to be special because my wife is a special person. Although I have cruised with Regent before, it is a bit of a stretch for us because of the cost but I justified it based on the first class experience we would enjoy and the perceived value of the all inclusive policy. I value our health above travel so I am going to wait and see how this all shakes out before I book another cruise (it will be with Regent) in 2021 or 2022 to celebrate 51 or 52 years of being together. Stay safe, keep your distance, pray and help someone in need. We are all in this together,

[tubeamps]

Another point I haven’t seen mentioned, if and when a vaccine is ready and administered to first world populations (because they have the money and distribution systems)

how does this help ports in the rest of the world?

 

If you have a cruise ship full of immunized passengers who could still carry the virus do you think any

port will allow ships to dock without being able to screen 100% of the passengers who may be asymptomatic?

 

I just don’t see that happening and don’t see a way around the risk for the port cities and countries.

[RachelG]

11 minutes ago, tubeamps said:

Another point I haven’t seen mentioned, if and when a vaccine is ready and administered to first world populations (because they have the money and distribution systems)

how does this help ports in the rest of the world?

 

If you have a cruise ship full of immunized passengers who could still carry the virus do you think any

port will allow ships to dock without being able to screen 100% of the passengers who may be asymptomatic?

 

I just don’t see that happening and don’t see a way around the risk for the port cities and countries.

If you are immunized, you can't spread the virus either.  You have to be actually infected with it to spread it.

 

Jackie, as far as school closings, school is closed for the rest of the year in Oklahoma, and we have a fraction of cases compared to New York, Washington, etc.  Numbers of new cases have leveled off as well.  Still seeing some deaths, but no big increase.  Our medical system is not overwhelmed at all (which is why I can be on CC at 9:45 in the morning, since I am sitting in my office with nothing to do).  They need to let us go about normal business.

Edited April 7, 2020 by RachelG

[tubeamps]

Last time I checked immunizations aren’t 100% effective, has this changed?

[flossie009]

8 minutes ago, RachelG said:

Jackie, as far as school closings, school is closed for the rest of the year in Oklahoma, and we have a fraction of cases compared to New York, Washington, etc.

In the UK our schools are closed (apart from a few providing childcare for key workers), but there is a debate as to whether the measure was effective ......... and when they might re-open. 

There is much discussion about an "exit strategy" from our lock-down for the time when the virus spread starts to decrease.

[RachelG]

6 minutes ago, tubeamps said:

Last time I checked immunizations aren’t 100% effective, has this changed?

They aren't for things like the flu, because the virus mutates.  And unfortunately, probably won't be for coronavirus for the same reason.  Plus a person has to have a competent immune system. 

Also the immunity conferred can wear off over time, which is why you have to have tetanus and pertussis boosters, etc.

So immunization will probably not be a complete or permanent solution, but will be better than nothing.  Sort of like when you get the flu shot, you know you may still get the flu, but it may be a milder case.

[flossie009]

16 hours ago, BBWC said:

Hopefully this is only for the cruises still returning now, but it is not clear.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/cruise-ship/what-cdc-is-doing.html

 

From the other side of the pond this April 04 update from the CDC seems very confusing.

• What is its purpose at this time? Are there any cruise ships with US passengers on board still heading for US ports?
• What is a cruise ship traveler? Does that include crew?

 

Overall the announcement seems to be full of retrospective hindsight and simply vilifies the cruise lines.

 

 

[RachelG]

5 minutes ago, flossie009 said:

 

From the other side of the pond this April 04 update from the CDC seems very confusing.

• What is its purpose at this time? Are there any cruise ships with US passengers on board still heading for US ports?
• What is a cruise ship traveler? Does that include crew?

 

Overall the announcement seems to be full of retrospective hindsight and simply vilifies the cruise lines.

 

Agree.  It doesn't seem applicable now, since there are no cruises.  How long is this going to stay in place?  I can't see anyone going on a cruise, if they were available, with these restrictions, and can't see a cruise line offering a cruise while these stay in place.

 

[mrlevin]

I think it will probably just pertain to Coral Princess, and possibly one more ship still to make it in, and repatriation of crew.

[Travelcat2]

9 hours ago, Belfast Taxman said:

I would agree that this is the immediate aim of the restrictions in that it is creating protocols to deal with passengers getting off ships that now require to finish their journey in the US, post Zaandam.

However what are the chances of the cruise lines deciding at the same time as the CDC that cruising should resume. In practical and financial terms, this takes that decision completely out of the hands of the cruise companies, and, in my humble opinion, is likely to delay resumption of cruising, involving the USA and US passengers at least, for many months, because the responsibility for the resumption of cruising now passes to the government, and, in a potential election year, I cannot see DT taking any risks on this.

 

I want to make sure I understand what you have posted  It sounds as if you feel that the decision as to whether or not cruising should resume is in the hands of the CDC.  It is not (unless something changed drastically overnight).  To my knowledge, some top official in the White House met with CLIA shortly before the cruise lines shut down.  Even then, it was a "voluntary" shut-down.  Obviously, it made sense for the cruise lines to agree due to the seriousness of the pandemic.  So, when cruises resume is in the hands of CLIA and the U.S. government (the CDC is not highly thought of by some American's ....... while it used to be a well respected organization, their lack of funding shows in how they mishandle some situations).  

 

In terms of cruising, there are areas of the world where it still is safe to travel.  The first places that come to mind are Australia and New Zealand.  So, IF the cases in the United States drop to a level where it is safe to travel, I don't see why a cruise ship could not cruise down under.  In my opinion, the best scenario would be for the coronavirus quick test (the new one) to be mass produced so that cruise lines could test their passengers prior to boarding.  It would be a pain to do that but it would pretty much guarantee the health of the passengers onboard and should give a level of comfort to ports that Regent would be visiting.  Obviously, Australia and other ports would have to open their ports to cruise ships in order for this to happen.

[RachelG]

41 minutes ago, mrlevin said:

I think it will probably just pertain to Coral Princess, and possibly one more ship still to make it in, and repatriation of crew.

 

Ok, that makes sense.  I didn't realize there were still any cruise ships out there that had passengers onboard.

[Belfast Taxman]

4 minutes ago, Travelcat2 said:

 

I want to make sure I understand what you have posted  It sounds as if you feel that the decision as to whether or not cruising should resume is in the hands of the CDC.  It is not (unless something changed drastically overnight).  To my knowledge, some top official in the White House met with CLIA shortly before the cruise lines shut down.  Even then, it was a "voluntary" shut-down.  Obviously, it made sense for the cruise lines to agree due to the seriousness of the pandemic.  So, when cruises resume is in the hands of CLIA and the U.S. government (the CDC is not highly thought of by some American's ....... while it used to be a well respected organization, their lack of funding shows in how they mishandle some situations).  

 

In terms of cruising, there are areas of the world where it still is safe to travel.  The first places that come to mind are Australia and New Zealand.  So, IF the cases in the United States drop to a level where it is safe to travel, I don't see why a cruise ship could not cruise down under.  In my opinion, the best scenario would be for the coronavirus quick test (the new one) to be mass produced so that cruise lines could test their passengers prior to boarding.  It would be a pain to do that but it would pretty much guarantee the health of the passengers onboard and should give a level of comfort to ports that Regent would be visiting.  Obviously, Australia and other ports would have to open their ports to cruise ships in order for this to happen.

Jackie

i am happy to clarify. The CDC regulations are only about what needs to happen when passengers get off in the US, or fly from aboard having been on a cruise ship. But, their very restrictive nature will in practical terms result in cruising becoming little short of impossible if they were to continue to apply after the cruise lines end their “voluntary” decision to not cruise. So, no, I am not saying that the CDC control the destiny of the cruise lines but unless these restrictions are removed, then US passenger involvement in the cruising market will be very severely reduced.

i fear that we will disagree on the “voluntary” nature of the cruiselines decision to suspend cruising. There can be no doubt that they were pressured into it and certainly prompted to do it by somewhat vague promises of a federal bailout.

as for your suggestion that Australia and New Zealand provide a future location for the cruise industry, then again I fear I must disagree with you. The disasters of the Ruby Princess in Sydney and Artania in Perth have resulted in a serious probability that international cruising will be banned from the region for some considerable time, at least until the criminal investigations into both ships have been undertaken. 

[mrlevin]

16 minutes ago, RachelG said:

 

Ok, that makes sense.  I didn't realize there were still any cruise ships out there that had passengers onboard.

 

Rachel Pacific Princess is still at sea with passengers that were not able to fly from Australia (they were on World Cruise to avoid air travel).  They also took on a few passengers from HAL's World Cruise.  Here is there status:

 

Elsewhere, Pacific Princess has 115 guests onboard sailing back with the ship to Los Angeles, which will take an estimated 14 days.

The ship departed Port Everglades (Ft. Lauderdale, Florida) on January 5 for a 111-day World Cruise. Pacific Princess ended a segment of the current cruise early on March 21, disembarking most guests in in Fremantle, Australia. However, not all guests onboard met the International Air Transport Association fitness standards for air travel or were unable to return home by aircraft due to individual medical conditions unrelated to COVID-19.

An additional service call is anticipated in Honolulu, Hawaii on April 13 before arrival to Los Angeles.

[SusieQft]

3 hours ago, RachelG said:

3 hours ago, tubeamps said:

Last time I checked immunizations aren’t 100% effective, has this changed?

They aren't for things like the flu, because the virus mutates.  And unfortunately, probably won't be for coronavirus for the same reason.  Plus a person has to have a competent immune system. 

In other words, some people who have been immunized will still be able to spread the virus.

[RachelG]

19 minutes ago, SusieQft said:

In other words, some people who have been immunized will still be able to spread the virus.

only if they actually had the virus.  To know if the immunization had worked or not, you would have to do antibody testing.  We went through this at my hospital a few years ago when the measles outbreak happened.  Everyone had to have antibody testing to see if they were still immune after having the disease or getting the immunization.  Actually having the disease generally gives more lasting immunity than an immunization, but immunizations definitely work to halt the spread of disease in the general population.  .