Government of Canada announces one-year ban for pleasure craft and cruise vessels

[Boatdrill]

2 hours ago, nocl said:

The protocols do not absolutely guarantee that any one person will not get it. 

Exactly. We must be vigilant, but there are no guarantees.   

[Cocktail613]

All this talk about exemptions or changes to the PVSA appears to ignore the part of the Canadian order that forbids Cruise ships from Canadian waters as well as Canadian ports. That means they cannot use the inside passage. Ships would have to stay 12 miles west of the Queen Charlotte Islands.  Sailing that far out in the North Pacific could be a bit rough and would certainly require more time and fuel. 
 

If you want to cruise to Alaska this year I think your only choice is probably a small ship with under 100 passengers (Seaborne for example).

 

Sacrifices will continue to have to be made to beat COVID, this ban is a particularly small one. 

[kangforpres]

Well since both HAL & Princess and I'm assuming all CCL lines are no longer selling Alaska cruises for 2021, I think the towel has been thrown in by the parent company. 

 

It's a shock not to be able to go on an Alaskan cruises for 2 whole years but that's the reality of the life changing pandemic which is still far from being under control.

 

Stay Safe, 

 

Paul

[richwmn]

@Aquahound

This is in the thread "2021Eastern US Cruises" in a reply by @chengkp75

 

Wikipedia is wrong, as it frequently is.  It also says that US registry allows it to sail "solely between US ports", which is not correct.  Foreign built ships can be US registered (US flag), and yet not be Jones Act or PVSA compliant, and therefore banned from domestic trade.  I've worked several ships that were US flag, but were not Jones Act compliant, having been built overseas, and we could take cargo from US ports to overseas, and from overseas to US ports, but could not load cargo in one US port and discharge it in another US port.

 

Here is a quote from a GAO report (GAO-04-421) that studied the effects of exemptions to the PVSA, with regards to NCL:

 

"However, the exemption limits the markets these ships may serve. NCL is required to keep the ships in “regular service” in Hawaii and is restricted from using the exempted vessels for transporting passengers to ports in the Caribbean, the Gulf of Mexico, or Alaska."

 

The actual exemption is in Public Law 108-7, somewhere in the 544 pages, and I have found, in the past, (too lazy to read the whole omnibus funding bill) the exact section that spells out the limitations on the POA service.  I worked for 4 years on one of the ships granted exemptions to the PVSA for NCL (Pride of Aloha), and know the terms of the exemption.

 

I stand corrected - it is an exception to the PVSA, but was enacted into a law as you mentioned.

[zelker]

Instead of all this ridiculous bickering, how about something we can all laugh at 🤣

 

(you're welcome)

 

[lderochi]

16 hours ago, sleslie said:

All this talk about exemptions or changes to the PVSA appears to ignore the part of the Canadian order that forbids Cruise ships from Canadian waters as well as Canadian ports. That means they cannot use the inside passage. Ships would have to stay 12 miles west of the Queen Charlotte Islands.  Sailing that far out in the North Pacific could be a bit rough and would certainly require more time and fuel

Thank you for this, I was curious about this, as there was a lot of talk on the board about the PVSA but not about territorial waters. I agree, based on this map, it looks like a big problem to avoid Canada’s waters, even with a PVSA waiver. 

[d9704011]

20 minutes ago, lderochi said:

Thank you for this, I was curious about this, as there was a lot of talk on the board about the PVSA but not about territorial waters. I agree, based on this map, it looks like a big problem to avoid Canada’s waters, even with a PVSA waiver. 

I hope you don’t think that boundary line (EEZ) denotes the territorial sea off British Columbia?  Have a look at the chart here....

https://bcmca.ca/datafiles/individualfiles/bcmca_hu_maritimezones_atlas.pdf

 

[PROCRUISE]

Ho Hum - moved our Vancouver departure to Alaska, in late August, to a Seattle departure, several weeks ago, even though Victoria was suppose to be a final port of call before return to Seattle. TA notified us yesterday that ALL Alaskan cruises will be cancelled for 2021. So, just bidding our time until HAL makes the announcement shortly and see if they make any offers or the usual 100% refund of 125% FCC.

Suppose to do the Panama Canal transit in February 2022 but, who know if even that will be a go.

[zelker]

Alaska 2021 cruises no longer show up on HAL or Seabourn as bookable - just Inactive.  We're booked on a Canal transit in December/January and even if they don't cancel it, aren't sure we want to be on one of the first "longer than 7 day" itineraries out of the US.  

[T8NCruise]

Instead of ranting at Canada and also demanding the PVSA be changed so that ports in Canada can be avoided, has anyone considered that the CDC is nowhere near allowing even test cruises to happen?  There is an excellent video on Youtube and on one of the HAL cruiser sites explaining the present situation as it pertains to the CDC, and speculating that year end might see some test cruises.
And, after watching the crowds in Tampa on TV today, very few masks, crammed together, I am not optimistic that the pandemic is going to be over anytime soon.

[trivia addict]

Mmm, a lot of lawyers or Navy men on this thread! I don’t understand half of it. All I know is that my summer cruise to Alaska will not be taking place!

[lderochi]

2 hours ago, d9704011 said:

I hope you don’t think that boundary line (EEZ) denotes the territorial sea off British Columbia?  Have a look at the chart here....

https://bcmca.ca/datafiles/individualfiles/bcmca_hu_maritimezones_atlas.pdf

 

Thank you for the clarification. 

[VMax1700]

There is another way to circumvent the PSVA requirement for Alaska cruises from Seattle and that is for USA to lease Alaska back to Russia for a couple of years, so as Alaska itself becomes the 'distant foreign port'! 😁🤡

(only joking guys!)

[iancal]

People need to get over this.   Alaska is not happening this year unless one does it by land and/or perhaps the State ferry system.

 

Alaska cruise ships are not going to stop in Russia.  Native lands are not going to be recognized as a foreign port.  Relax, this is a done deal. Time to inject some reality and move on to a plan B.  This is happening all over the world...not just about you.

Edited February 8, 2021 by iancal

[ScoutDiver]

Another way the PVCSA exemption could work is to have roundtrip cruises from Whittier or Seward instead of Seattle.  

 

I do not see that happening.  

[kevingastreich]

Tell me it's not a political move if Canada won't even let cruise ships sail in their territorial waters. Do the Canadiens really believe the Covid virus can jump 12 miles of open ocean?  Sheesh. People need to start using some common sense here.

[nocl]

2 hours ago, kevingastreich said:

Tell me it's not a political move if Canada won't even let cruise ships sail in their territorial waters. Do the Canadiens really believe the Covid virus can jump 12 miles of open ocean?  Sheesh. People need to start using some common sense here.

OK its not a political move.  By keeping ships out of their waters, pleasure craft as well as cruise ships creates a barrier so it is unlikely that a ship will have an emergency and need to come into port.  It also means that there is not contact between and ships and any Canadian agencies that deal with or manage ships in Canadian waters including pilots, customs, etc.

[Aquahound]

I do agree the territorial waters piece is a bit of a head scratcher, and I have to wonder how this is going to impact the Alaska Marine Highway ferries that transit the Inside Passage from WA to AK. 
 

Off shore is the biggest head scratcher. Innocent Passage requires no pilots, govt involvement, etc. While I do understand what Canada is doing, I also think the territorial waters piece is a little ridiculous. 

[rafinmd]

13 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

I do agree the territorial waters piece is a bit of a head scratcher, and I have to wonder how this is going to impact the Alaska Marine Highway ferries that transit the Inside Passage from WA to AK. 

I was unable to select a selection of the original post but I expect this excerpt should cover the Alaska Marine Highway.  It better because I do not think I would want to be on especially the Matanuska far out in the Ocean if our coast guard would even allow that:

 

 

Roy

[puppycanducruise]

15 hours ago, ScoutDiver said:

Another way the PVCSA exemption could work is to have roundtrip cruises from Whittier or Seward instead of Seattle.  

 

I do not see that happening.  

How does this get around the PVSA?   A round trip cruise from a US port has to stop at a foreign port, and you can't stop in Canada this year.

[KirkNC]

Thought this was interesting:

 

https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/24329-alaska-cruise-market-goes-from-71-000-berths-to-1-100.html

[iancal]

Despite the pronouncements of cruise lines and cruise line execs about the resumption of cruising I have little doubt that they say is at variance with what they currently know.    

 

I doubt very much whether the Canadian announcement came as a surprise to them or to an politicians in the know.  Same for potential cruise openings in other parts of the world.   They have two goals.  To convince those with cancelled cruises to rebook and to convince those with no bookings to book before the prices zoom up to astronomical levels.

 

I have little doubt that the savvy institutional investors and lenders have a firm understanding  of what is on the horizon. The retail investors....not so much.

[1ANGELCAT]

1 hour ago, Aquahound said:

I do agree the territorial waters piece is a bit of a head scratcher, and I have to wonder how this is going to impact the Alaska Marine Highway ferries that transit the Inside Passage from WA to AK. 
 

Off shore is the biggest head scratcher. Innocent Passage requires no pilots, govt involvement, etc. While I do understand what Canada is doing, I also think the territorial waters piece is a little ridiculous. 

Just curious, does the US have any such provision concerning the presence of Canadian vessels in US territorial waters ?

[nocl]

1 hour ago, Aquahound said:

I do agree the territorial waters piece is a bit of a head scratcher, and I have to wonder how this is going to impact the Alaska Marine Highway ferries that transit the Inside Passage from WA to AK. 
 

Off shore is the biggest head scratcher. Innocent Passage requires no pilots, govt involvement, etc. While I do understand what Canada is doing, I also think the territorial waters piece is a little ridiculous. 

I seem to recall that some of the transits inside Canadian waters did require pilots for some of the channels.

 

Also since it also applies to privately owned craft much easier to enforce preventing someone from sailing to private docks or small ports if they are kept out of territorial waters entirely.  Otherwise someone can say they are just passing through and instead stopping at a private dock, kind of like those that used the excuse of driving through to Alaska then stopping and visiting national parks on land.  One might say that someone could not do that because customs would catch them when they stop, expect a lot of coast and a lot of private docks.

Edited February 8, 2021 by nocl

[KirkNC]

3 minutes ago, iancal said:

Despite the pronouncements of cruise lines and cruise line execs about the resumption of cruising I have little doubt that they say is at variance with what they currently know.    

 

I doubt very much whether the Canadian announcement came as a surprise to them or to an politicians in the know.  Same for potential cruise openings in other parts of the world.   They have two goals.  To convince those with cancelled cruises to rebook and to convince those with no bookings to book before the prices zoom up to astronomical levels.

 

I have little doubt that the savvy institutional investors and lenders have a firm understanding  of what is on the horizon. The retail investors....not so much.

And I have read several write up by analysts of cruise line stocks that are scratching their heads at the lines current valuations.