Could 2022 Vancouver departure cruises be moved to Seattle or similar?

[Kitty Ellas Mom]

Hi, I know this is probably too early to ask, but I keep wondering if my June 2022 Alaska cruise from Vancouver to Anchorage will be moved to start from someplace like Seattle instead of Vancouver, due to the covid Canada closures (and potential for more, if that isn't an issue in 2022).  It's on Princess.  I read somewhere that Alaskan government is trying to get a waiver from the Jones Act more permanent than what they got for 2021.  That sounds far from settled.  I may have some of these details incorrect.  Thanks for any thoughts.  I am not planning to purchase any flights until much closer to the cruise and this is part of the reason.  

[Heidi13]

The Jones Act is the US Cabotage Act for cargo, passengers are covered under the PVSA (Passenger Vessel Services Act).

 

Canadian Ports will open to cruise ships again at the end of November, which was announced a couple of months ago. The latest update, as of a couple of days ago, is everyone onboard must be fully vaccinated.

 

Being fully vaccinated will also be required to board a flight originating in Canada, starting next month. In BC, we currently must be fully vaccinated to go into a pub, restaurant, nightclub, sporting event and a number of other non-essential businesses/event. We must show our Govt issued digital vaccine passport and visitors must show a recognised vaccine card.

 

As an additional public safety measure, all employees in Federally regulated industries, which includes marine and flights, must be fully vaccinated by the end of this month. 

 

Our local vaccination rates are approaching 90%, and our daily infections are again trending down, so at present, I see no reason to prevent cruise ships operating safely out of Vancouver to Alaska in 2022. 

[CruiserBruce]

Seattle doesn't have unlimited docking facilities for cruise ships, without setting up temporary facilities. So not every cruise ship could just be moved over to Seattle. 

 

I would expect Vancouver to be operating next summer, pending some much worse variant issues.

 

As to airfares,  look at the airline change rules. They have become far more lenient and generous during Covid,  with no sign yet of cutbacks, that I have heard.

[rkacruiser]

15 hours ago, Kitty Ellas Mom said:

I am not planning to purchase any flights until much closer to the cruise and this is part of the reason.  

 

You are doing what I think is prudent at this point in time.  The previous two posters are offering good information.  Besides, airline schedules this far out from the 2022 Alaska cruise season are quite likely to have changes.  Some have made very advanced air bookings during the pandemic only to find schedules/aircraft used to change--and change--and change.  This a source of stress and frustration for them.  Is that what you want?  

[Italy52]

On 10/9/2021 at 6:14 AM, Heidi13 said:

The Jones Act is the US Cabotage Act for cargo, passengers are covered under the PVSA (Passenger Vessel Services Act).

 

Canadian Ports will open to cruise ships again at the end of November, which was announced a couple of months ago. The latest update, as of a couple of days ago, is everyone onboard must be fully vaccinated.

 

Being fully vaccinated will also be required to board a flight originating in Canada, starting next month. In BC, we currently must be fully vaccinated to go into a pub, restaurant, nightclub, sporting event and a number of other non-essential businesses/event. We must show our Govt issued digital vaccine passport and visitors must show a recognised vaccine card.

 

As an additional public safety measure, all employees in Federally regulated industries, which includes marine and flights, must be fully vaccinated by the end of this month. 

 

Our local vaccination rates are approaching 90%, and our daily infections are again trending down, so at present, I see no reason to prevent cruise ships operating safely out of Vancouver to Alaska in 2022. 

We will be doing a B2B leaving out of Vancouver in June.  We usually fly in a few days prior to our cruise departure.  My concerns for 2022 are whether we will need a COVID test to fly into Vancouver, will we need a test to board the ship and will we need a test to fly back into the US.  I will definitely be watching and listening to all chatter about this issue.  I know it is too soon to tell and things are constantly changing so we will remain flexible if we want to cruise.

[Kitty Ellas Mom]

Thanks everyone for your very useful advice.  I will proceed as though it will continue to start in Vancouver, but I will still hold off on flights for now.  I really would like to see Vancouver as I've never been there.

[GTJ]

On 10/9/2021 at 9:14 AM, Heidi13 said:

The Jones Act is the US Cabotage Act for cargo, passengers are covered under the PVSA (Passenger Vessel Services Act).

To provide further explanation of the particular statutes involved:

 

What is commonly referred to as the Passenger Vessel Services Act was enacted by Congress on June 19, 1886, at section 8 of chapter 421 (the chapter being entitled, “An act to abolish certain fees for official services to American vessels, and to amend the laws relating to shipping commissioners, seamen, and owners of vessels, and for other purposes.”), 24 Stat. 81. It read as follows:

 

“That foreign vessels found transporting passengers between places or ports in the United States, when such passengers have been taken on board in the United States, shall be liable to a fine of two dollars for every passenger landed.”

 

The provision was amended by Congress on February 17, 1898, at section 2 of chapter 26 (the chapter being entitled, “An Act To amend the laws relating to navigation.”), 30 Stat. 248. It amended the Passenger Vessel Services Act to read as follows:

 

“No foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, either directly or by way of a foreign port, under a penalty of two hundred dollars for each passenger so transported and landed.”

 

The provision was later codified within the United States Code, at 46 U.S.C. § 289, and later recodfied by Congress on October 6, 2006, as positive law within the United States Code, Pub. L. No. 109-304, § 8(c), 120 Stat. 1633, at 46 U.S.C. § 55103. It presently reads as follows:

 

"(a) In General.—Except as otherwise provided in this chapter or chapter 121 of this title, a vessel may not transport passengers between ports or places in the United States to which the coastwise laws apply, either directly or via a foreign port, unless the vessel—

"(1) is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade; and

"(2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement under chapter 121 or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement.

"(b) Penalty.—The penalty for violating subsection (a) is $300 for each passenger transported and landed."

 

What is commonly referred to as the Jones Act was enacted by Congress on June 5, 1920, at section 27 of chapter 250 (the chapter being entitled, “An Act To provide for the promotion and maintenance of American merchant marine, to repeal certain emergency legislation, and provide for the disposition, regulation, and use of property acquired thereunder, and for other purposes,” the entire chapter also being commonly referred to as the Merchant Marine Act.), 24 Stat. 81. It read as follows:

 

“That no merchandise shall be transported by water, or by land and water, on penalty of forfeiture thereof, between points in the United States, including Districts, Territories, and possessions thereof embraced within the coastwise laws, either directly or via a foreign port, or for any part of the transportation, in any other vessel than a vessel built in and documented under the laws of the United States and owned by persons who are citizens of the United States, or vessels to which the privilege of engaging in the coastwise trade is extended by sections 18 or 22 of this Act * * * .”

 

Over the years this provision was amended by Congress numerous times. The provision was later codified within the United States Code, at 46 U.S.C. § 883, and later recodfied by Congress on October 6, 2006, as positive law within the United States Code, Pub. L. No. 109-304, § 8(c), 120 Stat. 1633, primarily at 46 U.S.C. § 55102. It presently reads as follows:

 

"(a) Definition.—In this section, the term “merchandise” includes—

"(1) merchandise owned by the United States Government, a State, or a subdivision of a State; and

"(2) valueless material.

"(b) Requirements.—Except as otherwise provided in this chapter or chapter 121 of this title, a vessel may not provide any part of the transportation of merchandise by water, or by land and water, between points in the United States to which the coastwise laws apply, either directly or via a foreign port, unless the vessel—

"(1) is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade; and

"(2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement under chapter 121 or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement.

"(c) Penalty.—Merchandise transported in violation of subsection (b) is liable to seizure by and forfeiture to the Government. Alternatively, an amount equal to the value of the merchandise (as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security) or the actual cost of the transportation, whichever is greater, may be recovered from any person transporting the merchandise or causing the merchandise to be transported."

 

Administrative regulations of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security on Coastwise Procedure further interpret the Passenger Vessel Services Act, at 19 C.F.R. § 4.80a, and the Jones Act, at 19 C.F.R. § 4.80b. Of course, the regulations are not, themselves, statutory provisions.

 

To summarize: the Passenger Vessel Services Act relates to the carriage of passengers, while the Jones Act relates to the carriage of merchandise. The Passenger Vessel Services Act is the older of the two acts. With the 2006 recodification into positive law within the United States Code, both acts were placed within the same chapter 551 of Title 46. However, their historic origins are separate, notwithstanding their similar subject matter of being coastwise (cabotage) laws. I am not entirely certain of how so many people have become confused and refer to the Jones Act in discussions of passenger transportation. If a discussion relates to the transportation of passengers, then cite to the Passenger Vessel Services Act. If a discussion relates to the transportation of merchandise, then cite to the Jones Act.

[don't-use-real-name]

Flights to Vancouver (YVR) are more expensive than flying into Seattle (SEA) and taking

surface transportation to YVR - a scenic alternative.

YES most definitely plan a couple day stay in YVR - you can DIY tours or find a tour to see

more of the city - hotels are expensive check out the websites to see what is reasonable

and close to your tour planning. In most cases the booking limitation is about 300 days

ahead - watch the fares and seize the moment for the best buy - free cancellations are usually

allowed right up to the date of the registration - see a lower or better deal pounce on it !

CC members are really helpful here but if you have a motor or travel club (agency) membership

seek out their literature and advice and then there is always this internet thingy.

 

Prior to the virus conflicts - - -

Cruises from Seattle are round-trip***  - cruises from Vancouver are one-way to Alaska

*** with a required PVSA Canadian port call (Victoria)

 

Whether the waiver of the PVSA port call will be in effect next year is uncertain - does not

appear that this will happen - if the virus concerns abates

 

Beginning and End of season cruises have a combination of port calls positioning of the

cruise ship for regular service or deployment in another region market

 

Find a booking that is to your liking - check out booking it with the cancellation refund rules.

Cruise Ship Cancellation after the Final Payment date may/will have penalties 

Airlines don't offer refunds (vouchers one thing) unless they are cancelling your travel

Efforts are now being made to eliminate that Change Fee 

Hotels are more generous with refunds and cancellations

So be careful of the travel web that you weave so that you don't lose money  

 

 

 

[Northern Aurora]

On 10/8/2021 at 9:38 PM, Kitty Ellas Mom said:

Hi, I know this is probably too early to ask, but I keep wondering if my June 2022 Alaska cruise from Vancouver to Anchorage will be moved to start from someplace like Seattle instead of Vancouver, due to the covid Canada closures (and potential for more, if that isn't an issue in 2022).  It's on Princess.  I read somewhere that Alaskan government is trying to get a waiver from the Jones Act more permanent than what they got for 2021.  That sounds far from settled.  I may have some of these details incorrect.  Thanks for any thoughts.  I am not planning to purchase any flights until much closer to the cruise and this is part of the reason.  

 

 

One of our federal senators, Senator Lisa Murkowski introduced the bill allowing the temporary waiver to allow RT cruises out of Seattle without the prior required stop in Canada.  The remaining members of our congressional delegation supported it, and it passed.  This was the Alaska Tourism Recovery Act.  

 

Senator Murkowski has subsequently introduced a bill which, as I understand the reporting, would enact a more permanent waiver of the required stop in Canada.  There has been no current media reporting of the status of that bill.  Personally I was surprised that Alaska Tourism Recover Act passed and my crystal ball doesn't provide any insight into the more recent bill.

[Northern Aurora]

10 hours ago, Italy52 said:

We will be doing a B2B leaving out of Vancouver in June.  We usually fly in a few days prior to our cruise departure.  My concerns for 2022 are whether we will need a COVID test to fly into Vancouver, will we need a test to board the ship and will we need a test to fly back into the US.  I will definitely be watching and listening to all chatter about this issue.  I know it is too soon to tell and things are constantly changing so we will remain flexible if we want to cruise.

 

We are in a similar situation.  We are booked on a Celebrity Vancouver to Honolulu and then back to Vancouver B2B.  Both my husband and I have been to Vancouver a number of times both on business and vacation, so would be satisfied to fly in the day before the cruise.  I will not be surprised if we need to provide negative covid-19 test results to enter Canada.  We just did a B2B on Celebrity, and their policy is to require a negative test result 48 hours before boarding, which we were able to satisfy with a proctored telehealth test.  There were a number of Canadian passengers on both legs, and Celebrity provided, at Celebrity's expense, tests to allow them to easily re-enter their own country.  It certainly will be interesting to follow how the cruise lines are going to handle testing protocols.  I am also going to be following the CC forum for Canadians for their insight.

[Italy52]

1 minute ago, Northern Aurora said:

 

We are in a similar situation.  We are booked on a Celebrity Vancouver to Honolulu and then back to Vancouver B2B.  Both my husband and I have been to Vancouver a number of times both on business and vacation, so would be satisfied to fly in the day before the cruise.  I will not be surprised if we need to provide negative covid-19 test results to enter Canada.  We just did a B2B on Celebrity, and their policy is to require a negative test result 48 hours before boarding, which we were able to satisfy with a proctored telehealth test.  There were a number of Canadian passengers on both legs, and Celebrity provided, at Celebrity's expense, tests to allow them to easily re-enter their own country.  It certainly will be interesting to follow how the cruise lines are going to handle testing protocols.  I am also going to be following the CC forum for Canadians for their insight.

If Canada would accept the Rapid Antigen test then I would be happy.  However, from what I can see (at the present time) they are not accepting it.  The rapid PCR test is VERY costly for us as we would have to pay out of pocket for this.  The PCR tests from the pharmacies are reimbursable by insurance but take too long and I don't want to be stressing about turnaround time. 

Was your proctored telehealth test a Rapid Antigen test? 

 

I hope all goes well with your travel plans.  Maybe the early Alaska cruisers out of Vancouver will be able to provide some insight so we can get some clarity --- keeping the faith --- it's all that we can do at this point.

[Heidi13]

4 hours ago, don't-use-real-name said:

Flights to Vancouver (YVR) are more expensive than flying into Seattle (SEA) and taking

surface transportation to YVR - a scenic alternative.

YES most definitely plan a couple day stay in YVR - you can DIY tours or find a tour to see

more of the city - hotels are expensive check out the websites to see what is reasonable

and close to your tour planning. In most cases the booking limitation is about 300 days

ahead - watch the fares and seize the moment for the best buy - free cancellations are usually

allowed right up to the date of the registration - see a lower or better deal pounce on it !

CC members are really helpful here but if you have a motor or travel club (agency) membership

seek out their literature and advice and then there is always this internet thingy.

 

Prior to the virus conflicts - - -

Cruises from Seattle are round-trip***  - cruises from Vancouver are one-way to Alaska

*** with a required PVSA Canadian port call (Victoria)

 

Whether the waiver of the PVSA port call will be in effect next year is uncertain - does not

appear that this will happen - if the virus concerns abates

 

Beginning and End of season cruises have a combination of port calls positioning of the

cruise ship for regular service or deployment in another region market

 

Find a booking that is to your liking - check out booking it with the cancellation refund rules.

Cruise Ship Cancellation after the Final Payment date may/will have penalties 

Airlines don't offer refunds (vouchers one thing) unless they are cancelling your travel

Efforts are now being made to eliminate that Change Fee 

Hotels are more generous with refunds and cancellations

So be careful of the travel web that you weave so that you don't lose money  

 

 

 

 

Incorrect.

 

Alaska cruises from Vancouver can be either one-way or R/T. When Alaska cruises started from Vancouver, they were all R/T, as the one-way to Prince William Sound is a newer addition.

[urbanhawk]

Carnival's cruises in 2022 will start and end in Seattle with a stop in Victoria ( except for its cruises out of S.F.), just  as an fyi.

[GTJ]

21 hours ago, don't-use-real-name said:

Flights to Vancouver (YVR) are more expensive than flying into Seattle (SEA) and taking

surface transportation to YVR - a scenic alternative.

I recall it being back in 1986 that I was scheduled to fly to Vancouver from Spokane, Washington, on Frontier Airlines. But the day before the flight, Frontier Airlines suspended all operations and went belly-up. With no other air carriers flying the same route between Spokane and Vancouver, Northwest Airlines--which had issued my air transportation ticket--rerouted me via Pacific Southwest Airlines from Spokane to Seattle, and then I utilized Greyhound Lines from Seattle to Vancouver. There was regularly-scheduled direct service, pre-COVID, from Seattle's airport to Vancouver several times daily, operated by Quick Coach Lines, an easy and convenient trip; I would expect this service to resume once the border is reopened to casual travel.

[GTJ]

20 hours ago, Northern Aurora said:

Senator Murkowski has subsequently introduced a bill which, as I understand the reporting, would enact a more permanent waiver of the required stop in Canada.

The purpose of the PVSA has been to protect American shipping and labor interests, but most of the vessels plying the route to Alaska are foreign flag vessels. Congress had previously granted exceptions in the case of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, because no American flag vessels were providing service to and from those islands; the exception is somewhat permanent in that it will last until an American flag vessel provides such service. So a similar permanent waiver could be applied for travel to and from Alaska. Except that there are American flag vessels: American Cruise Lines and Alaska Marine Highway both operate such vessels. By sailing on their vessels, no stop in Canada is required. And I would anticipate that both operators, and their labor unions, would be opposed to a permanent exception that would benefit foreign flag vessels and their operators. That said, given that the Alaska Marine Highway is a division of the State of Alaska, and Sen. Murkowski represents the State of Alaska, she could, presumably, forfeit her state's interest in protecting the Alaska Marine Highway because the economic benefit to the state from all the foreign flag vessels serving Alaska ports is a greater interest. But that still leaves the interest of the labor unions representing American employees of the Alaska Marine Highway and American Cruise Lines, and the interest of the corporate owners of American Cruise Lines, in the lurch. In sum, it is a political game to be played, with Sen. Murkowski at the pivot point.

[GTJ]

17 hours ago, Heidi13 said:

When Alaska cruises started from Vancouver, they were all R/T, as the one-way to Prince William Sound is a newer addition.

Can you recount the history on this? I know that Alaska Steamship Company, which had made regular sailings from Seattle to Alaska, discontinued its passenger operations in 1954. Canadian Pacific was involved, but I don't know its history. Princess Cruises began its Alaska operations in 1969, but I don't know the details: one-way or round-trip cruises, whether from Vancouver or Seattle. In sum I only have a very sketchy understanding of this era. Perhaps you might be able to explain the entry of the various carriers, and the services that were being offered and how those services changed over time. Any scans of old timetables or cruise brochures?

[rkacruiser]

17 minutes ago, GTJ said:

In sum, it is a political game to be played, with Sen. Murkowski at the pivot point.

 

I believe Senator Murkowski's concern was to help protect the small businesses of Southeast Alaska as best she could by getting some tourism dollars into that area of her State.  She succeeded.   Her service for the 2021 benefit to her constituents ought to be recognized.

 

Did "politics" raise its ugly head in her efforts?  Since she is up for re-election in 2022, of course that cannot be discounted.  We, the voters, I think, are more likely to reward our "statesmen/stateswomen" by returning them to Office when we realize that "they are working and accomplishing something to our benefit".  

 

What happen in 2022?  Stay tuned.  

[Northern Aurora]

22 hours ago, Italy52 said:

........

Was your proctored telehealth test a Rapid Antigen test? 

 

I hope all goes well with your travel plans.  Maybe the early Alaska cruisers out of Vancouver will be able to provide some insight so we can get some clarity --- keeping the faith --- it's all that we can do at this point.

 

Initially Celebrity had a test requirement for a negative covid-19 test taken 72 hours before embarkation.  While we may live in the second largest community in Alaska there were only two testing sites which offered tests accepted by Celebrity and thought they could get us results before we flew out.  At one facility the tests were $335 per person and the costs at the other site were $209 per person.  

 

When Celebrity changed their testing requirements to 48 hours before embarkation I knew we had an issue as there was no way we were willing to board a plane and try to find a testing site in Seattle.  We totally rearranged our plans for our Alaska B2B cruises, and I ordered a six pack of the Abbott BinaxNow Covid-19 Ag Card tests from the company eMed.  These proctored tests were easy to do, and at a cost of $150 plus the $37 FedEx shipping were a bargain compared to what we could find locally.

 

I will be closely following the Canadian test requirements in the upcoming months, as I expect the situation will be fluid.

[Heidi13]

4 hours ago, GTJ said:

Can you recount the history on this? I know that Alaska Steamship Company, which had made regular sailings from Seattle to Alaska, discontinued its passenger operations in 1954. Canadian Pacific was involved, but I don't know its history. Princess Cruises began its Alaska operations in 1969, but I don't know the details: one-way or round-trip cruises, whether from Vancouver or Seattle. In sum I only have a very sketchy understanding of this era. Perhaps you might be able to explain the entry of the various carriers, and the services that were being offered and how those services changed over time. Any scans of old timetables or cruise brochures?

 

CP continued Vancouver/Victoria service to the N/Coast and Alaska until about the 1950's, but continued sailings to Vancouver Island until the late 1950's. An SIU strike shut down the CP ships and being Federally regulated, the Provincial Govt had no jurisdiction, to order them back to work.

 

This led the BC Premier to start a Provincial Govt owned ferry company - BC Ferries. They started with 2 ferries, but built an additional 1 or 2 ships per year for about 6 years. They contracted barge service to the BC N/Coast, but did not provide service to Alaska, which was operated by Alaska State Marine Hwy.

 

Princess & HAL were some of the first cruise ships sailing from Vancouver to Alaska, sometime in the 1960's, I believe, but note this is well before my time . I only started with P&O/Princess in 1975 and sailed to Alaska in 1979 and 1980. With the exception of some smaller ships, all Alaska ships used Vancouver as the home port. Vancouver was 100 miles closer, which is 10 hrs steaming on a R/T cruise and did not need to visit Victoria, so many more hours were available to spend in Alaska.

 

The current cruise ship terminal - Canada Place, was built in the early 1980's, replacing the original CPR Berths B-C. It was designed to accommodate 5 ships - 2 on each side and 1 across the end. They also had a secondary berth at Ballantine Pier, which could handle 1 or 2 ships.

 

As ships increased in size, starting about the mid 80's, the 5 ship Canada Place terminal could only accommodate 2 ships, with an additional smaller ship at the end. It was extended in 2001 to accommodate a 3rd large cruise ship, with an additional smaller ship on the end.

 

However, the cruise lines wanted more berths and Vancouver refused to develop additional berths and they even shut down cruise ships at Ballantine Pier. I have no doubt the Metro Port Vancouver figured they had the Alaska market and could dictate to the cruise lines. The cruise lines wanted more weekend sailings, but the port responded they have lots of empty berths during the week.

 

Therefore, the cruise lines went to Seattle, who happily created more berths. They get less time in Alaska and spend days in the Pacific Ocean, but most pax don't know any difference.

[don't-use-real-name]

GTJ -

Except that there are American flag vessels: American Cruise Lines and Alaska Marine Highway both operate such vessels.

 

 

These cruise lines are not in the same 7 seas league with the huge mammoth cruise ships. 

These smaller ships go into shallow draft water ports with their carriage of cars trucks boats RVs.

Not competitive in any respect - time for a change to archaic regulations from a by-gone era.

 

Yes this will raise the ire of the labor unions and the small ship operators but what have they

done to keep competitive within the industry  - no new ships - leaving the SS United States

rust away !

So much for build it and they will come ! 

 

 

[GTJ]

9 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

I believe Senator Murkowski's concern was to help protect the small businesses of Southeast Alaska as best she could by getting some tourism dollars into that area of her State.

I think that you are probably correct. In balancing the interests of all the businesses in Alaska (especially in panhandle) on the one side, and organized labor and one small vessel carrier on the other side, the former seems likely to prevail. And in a matter where there is really only a single state's interest at stake, Congress is more likely to defer to that state's representatives (though in this time of extreme partisanship, that deference might not be counted upon . . . especially if there is a possibility that exceptions might be sought for other states . . . Hawai'i first comes to mind). I will be staying tuned!

[GTJ]

5 hours ago, Heidi13 said:

Therefore, the cruise lines went to Seattle, who happily created more berths. They get less time in Alaska and spend days in the Pacific Ocean, but most pax don't know any difference.

A fascinating history--and I don't think maritime history is generally documented as well as land and air transport. (I am presently writing a local history, and as to one integrated railway-steamship company, much more material is available on the route of the railway, and relatively little as to the routes of the steamships.) There was, of course, a large shift, generally stretching from the mid-1950s to the mid-1970s, when steamship companies were transitioning from the operation of ocean liners going from place-to-place to the operation of cruise liners going on excursions (around the same time that the railroads were abandoning all their trains, leaving only a relatively inconsequential Via Rail and Rocky Mountaineer excursions). I have not found many good books documenting that transition, and how the cruise lines came to flourish and supplant the ocean liners.

 

It sounds like Vancouver made at least two mistakes. First, at the time it was building Canada Place it did not predict the greater size of vessels that would soon be going into service. Five slips is a good size, but to now have effective lost two slips is not good. Second, taking the position that the vessel operators were captive and had no choice but to respond to the city led to the Seattle flight. Where I reside, in New York City, the municipality often takes the same approach with businesses, and as a result many businesses flee to the other side of the Hudson River and set up shop in Jersey City. Is Vancouver now doing anything to get those cruise vessels back?

 

In another (roll call) forum, I asked a question of others, from outside the New York area, who would be joining us on an 11-night cruise out of Bayonne, New Jersey, to the Caribbean, why they elected to leave from New Jersey instead of Florida. In my mind was the same type of reasoning you stated: "They get less time in [the Caribbean] and spend days in the [Atlantic] Ocean." Not many responses, but mostly in the nature of visiting, or cruising together with, friends and family in the northeast. Not enough responses to judge whether the passengers know any difference . . . is it really the case that a good understanding geography is missing from so many passengers?

[GTJ]

1 hour ago, don't-use-real-name said:

These cruise lines [American Cruise Lines and Alaska Marine Highway] are not in the same 7 seas league with the huge mammoth cruise ships. These smaller ships go into shallow draft water ports with their carriage of cars trucks boats RVs.Not competitive in any respect - time for a change to archaic regulations from a by-gone era.

From a competitive perspective, the American flag vessels are dwarfed, and a good argument can be made as to the tail wagging the dog. Yet, if you look at the statutory provision granting an exception for Puerto Rico, the competitiveness of an American flag vessel has no relevance as to the continuation of an exemption for foreign flag vessels: "On a showing . . . , by the vessel owner or charterer, that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States pursuant to a certificate, the Secretary shall notify the owner or operator of each vessel transporting passengers under subsection (b) [allowing foreign flag vessels to provide such service to and from Puerto Rico] to terminate that transportation within 270 days after the Secretary’s notification." 46 U.S.C. § 55104(c)(1). Under the foregoing statutory provision, a small motorboat could displace a fleet of megavessels. It may well be that the 1886 statute is archaic and no longer relevant in the twenty-first century. But the unions and the small vessel owners may oppose repeal if it will hurt them at all. Still, that opposition might not hold much weight these days, especially when compared to the power they wielded in 1886.

 

A parallel question for thought and consideration: Should British Airways be permitted to transport passengers between New York and Los Angeles? It is essentially the same issue . . . .

[Heidi13]

5 hours ago, GTJ said:

It sounds like Vancouver made at least two mistakes. First, at the time it was building Canada Place it did not predict the greater size of vessels that would soon be going into service. Five slips is a good size, but to now have effective lost two slips is not good. Second, taking the position that the vessel operators were captive and had no choice but to respond to the city led to the Seattle flight. Where I reside, in New York City, the municipality often takes the same approach with businesses, and as a result many businesses flee to the other side of the Hudson River and set up shop in Jersey City. Is Vancouver now doing anything to get those cruise vessels back?

 

 

 

The concept for replacing the CPR Berths B-C with Canada Place started in the late 70's, at which time the latest generation of new cruise ships were around 500 - 550' LOA. Island/Pacific Princesss, Spirit of London, Cunard Princess/Countess.

 

Royal Viking's 3 ships were a few feet longer and then in the early 80's they were extended by about 100', by cutting the ships in 1/2 and inserting a middle section. This was really the return to building longer ships, with the Royal Princess launching about 1984 at about 750' LOA. Therefore, even when Canada Place opened about 1986, it was already too small to handle the number of ships sailing to Alaska.

 

Vancouver is constrained by the 1st Narrows Bridge, with the limiting Air Draught, restricting arrival times of the largest mega ships. They also will be unlikely to get approval for new cruise ship berths inside the harbour and we really have nowhere suitable outside the harbour.

 

Many have speculated developing berths in the Fraser River or at the Deltaport Container/Coal Port. Have taken ferries up river to our refit facility many times, when the wind is blowing it is a tough transit for high sided/shallow draft vessels. Deltaport is similar with both the prevailing tides and winds on the beam. Deltaport is also almost 30 miles from Vancouver, where most of the tours take place.

[rkacruiser]

17 hours ago, Heidi13 said:

they even shut down cruise ships at Ballantine Pier. I have no doubt the Metro Port Vancouver figured they had the Alaska market and could dictate to the cruise lines.

 

I was surprised when the Pier was shut down.  Never used that pier, but I read reports that Canada Place was a much more pleasant pier from which to sail or to arrive.  Was cruise guest satisfaction a factor in that decision?

 

11 hours ago, GTJ said:

. I have not found many good books documenting that transition, and how the cruise lines came to flourish and supplant the ocean liners.

 

Making a friendly suggestion for your consideration:  Are you familiar with the writings of John Maxtone-Graham and William H. Miller?  They may be of some help to you.

 

11 hours ago, GTJ said:

A parallel question for thought and consideration: Should British Airways be permitted to transport passengers between New York and Los Angeles? It is essentially the same issue . . . .

 

Given the issues that a couple of air carriers have had in recent weeks, more competition would be welcome, I think.  

 

My airport is like many in the United States.  A good deal of tax money has been, and continues to be spent to pay off the bonds, to make our airport an "International" and/or a hub airport.  Only to eventually be shunned by the air carriers.  DAY has one entire concourse that was built to accommodate international flights.  That lasted for a short period of time.  That concourse has been in mothballs for many, many years.  Yet, our taxes continue to pay for the bond that financed that white elephant.