Bar Harbor rejects Cruise Ships

[GTJ]

3 hours ago, joyandjerry said:

We were there last month (3 October) and town was elbow to elbow, most not from the ship. * * * Bumper to bumper traffic, full lots, packed trails. Even the buses could not move. 90+% of visitors enter Acadia by car, so that was hardly from the cruise pax. All day long we only met one other couple from the ship. * * *

You've made my point well. Limiting access to Bar Harbor and the national park with respect to persons traveling by cruise vessel (i.e., public transportation), but to allow unfettered access with respect to persons traveling by private automobile, would be unfairly discriminatory against persons relying on public transportation (and also contrary to the national goal of encouraging use of public transportation instead of private automobile). My belief is that the discrimination arises from the prejudices of the local residents, nearly all of whom drive around daily in their private automobiles, and rarely, if ever, travel by cruise vessel.

[Charles4515]

14 minutes ago, GTJ said:

You've made my point well. Limiting access to Bar Harbor and the national park with respect to persons traveling by cruise vessel (i.e., public transportation), but to allow unfettered access with respect to persons traveling by private automobile, would be unfairly discriminatory against persons relying on public transportation

The cruise vessels being limited are not public transportation. Also cruise ships are not a necessity. They are a leisure activity. There is no need to move people to and from Bar Harbor by cruise ship. 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Charles4515

[Mary229]

6 hours ago, GTJ said:

I think that you're getting confused as to the difference between property rights and the town's use of its police power.

 

Among the long-accepted rights bundled with property ownership is the right to exclude. A person who owns a road or a sea port can generally exclude others from using that real property (assuming no easements). And that property owner generally has no obligation to provide access (assuming no use of eminent domain, beach access obligations, etc.). Now there may be lawful limitations on how public entities may acquire and use property, but outside such specific limitations, there is no general obligation for Bar Harbor to provide roads, sea ports, or any other transportation facilities.

 

The real concern is not property rights but rather the police power. Consider an owner of property that desires to provide port facilities to operators of vessels, but the town steps in and, through its use of the police power exacts an ordinance prohibiting the property owner from using its own port facilities. This would have nothing to do with the town, itself, providing, or refusing to provide, port facilities.

 

In short, I think that you're arguing a point against which no one is taking a contrary position.

I am not confused.   The town owns the current port facility, they can refuse service, they can then use whatever resources the law provides to enforce that refusal of service.   I am not arguing except with one person who thinks the town must provide access to the national park through its own property. 

[pmjnh]

I live in Maine and have been to BH many many times. I have been there when there are 4 ships in port at the same time. Unbelievably crowded when this happens. The vote was split and  local businesses will suffer for sure. I would have rather seen them limit the number of cruise ships to one ship at a time rather than the number of passengers. I was glad to see that a similar referendum in Portland did not pass.

Edited November 10, 2022 by pmjnh

[joyandjerry]

5 hours ago, pmjnh said:

I live in Maine and have been to BH many many times. I have been there when there are 4 ships in port at the same time. Unbelievably crowded when this happens. The vote was split and  local businesses will suffer for sure. I would have rather seen them limit the number of cruise ships to one ship at a time rather than the number of passengers. I was glad to see that a similar referendum in Portland did not pass.

Limiting it to one ship seems to be a more practical idea. I realize that many cruise ship pax don't go to Acadia like Jerry and I did. The day we were there, Enchantment of the Seas was the only ship there, which is not a large ship. Many did not disembark. Perhaps my experience was not typical, but BH was so packed that there was no way it was from the cruise ship pax. Bumper to bumper cars on the streets.

[CPT Trips]

19 hours ago, Charles4515 said:

 

They are restricting access to Bar Harbor not to the national park. 

That’s true, but realize that the park itself has taken steps limit access and limit deterioration of its natural environment. A reservation is now required to drive up Cadillac Mt.

In all likelihood motor vehicle access to some popular sites in the park will be similarly restricted. I wouldn’t be surprised to see that only buses or vehicles with campground reservations will permitted on additional roads in the park. 
 

 

 

[Charles4515]

52 minutes ago, CPT Trips said:

That’s true, but realize that the park itself has taken steps limit access and limit deterioration of its natural environment. A reservation is now required to drive up Cadillac Mt.

In all likelihood motor vehicle access to some popular sites in the park will be similarly restricted. I wouldn’t be surprised to see that only buses or vehicles with campground reservations will permitted on additional roads in the park. 
 

 

 

 

I have been to several popular national parks that limit access to buses at certain times of the year. . 

[CPT Trips]

^^^ Ayup ^^^

[shof515]

news article: : https://www.mdislander.com/maine-news/bar-harbor-voters-curb-cruise-ships 

 

 

[1025cruise]

Bar Harbor has only tolerated the ships. The town bought the pier the ferry uses, mainly to keep it from being developed as a cruise ship dock.

 

My one trip to Bar Harbor on a cruise was enough for me. I've been there previously on land vacations and enjoyed it. This time it was just too busy. Wish I had just stayed on the ship.

[BklynBoy8]

Would agree with any arrangement to be able to enjoy one any of the restaurant's seafood meals they are noted for.

 

The Peace and Serenity walking the streets so special.

[OnTheJourney]

On 11/9/2022 at 7:56 PM, 1025cruise said:

It doesn't need the cruise traffic. 

..nor the pollution from ships. Marine wildlife won't miss the ships either.

 

That said, from a peraonally biased (and unfortunately less than desirable carbon footprint) viewpoint, BH is proably one of my favorite NE ports so I'll miss not getting there on NE / Canada itineraries. I will also say that we were just there on the RCL Adventure and the town or shops did not feel in the least bit crowded. Some of the streets we walked on a bit farther off the main drag had hardly anyone. I do understand the residents' concerns. We vacationed in Key West a good many years ago, and it is a totally different place (as in ...much more relaxing) when ships aren't in port. 

[OnTheJourney]

On 11/9/2022 at 11:33 PM, Charles4515 said:

Also cruise ships are not a necessity.

Some on CC might truly disagree..  😁

[latebuyer]

I’m wondering what port bar harbour will be replaced with. Its a popular port. Some cruise ships already go to portland.

[latebuyer]

Could the cruise ships come if they are tendered? I note the celebrity cruise i’m looking at next year is tendered. Maybe the cruise ships could coordinate to keep below the number of visitors.

Edited November 12, 2022 by latebuyer

[njhorseman]

57 minutes ago, latebuyer said:

Could the cruise ships come if they are tendered? I note the celebrity cruise i’m looking at next year is tendered. Maybe the cruise ships could coordinate to keep below the number of visitors.

All cruise ships calling on Bar Harbor tender. There's no cruise ship pier.

[Mary229]

12 hours ago, latebuyer said:

Could the cruise ships come if they are tendered? I note the celebrity cruise i’m looking at next year is tendered. Maybe the cruise ships could coordinate to keep below the number of visitors.

They all do tender and they all take their tender boats to a city owned pier.  They could buy private property and put in their own pier but they would likely need city approval.  Or they could build a pier and man it outside of the city limits.   You don’t get fire, police and other services outside of the city limits. 

[Susan in Maine]

On 11/9/2022 at 11:21 PM, GTJ said:

You've made my point well. Limiting access to Bar Harbor and the national park with respect to persons traveling by cruise vessel (i.e., public transportation), but to allow unfettered access with respect to persons traveling by private automobile, would be unfairly discriminatory against persons relying on public transportation (and also contrary to the national goal of encouraging use of public transportation instead of private automobile). My belief is that the discrimination arises from the prejudices of the local residents, nearly all of whom drive around daily in their private automobiles, and rarely, if ever, travel by cruise vessel.

Seriously? Cruise ships are NOT public transport. Pretty much anyone who gives advice on cruise ships will tell you that. If you want to go from point A to point B, don't count on a cruise ship! Anything can disrupt any itinerary and you are not guaranteed any specific port!

 

And from Bar Harbor's perspective, people who are driving to the town are worth way more money than cruise ship passengers. 

 

There is NO discrimination here at all. If you consider not being able to go to a specific port by cruise ship "Discrimination", you have no idea what that word really means - talk about a 1st world problem?

 

[Susan in Maine]

For the record - fewer than 10% of visitors to Bar Harbor come from cruise ships. Contrary to what die hard cruisers believe, cutting off large cruise ships won't hurt the economy.

 

Portland is a commercial port, and therefore has much better facilities for cruise ships. It makes more sense for the ships to dock there. Portland also has much more capacity than Bar Harbor to absorb 2000 - 4000 people all at once.

 

For those of you who wished Bar Harbor limited the number of ships - that doesn't really help. One ship can have 4000+ passengers. Is that better than 2 1500 passenger ships?

[d9704011]

8 minutes ago, Susan in Maine said:

It makes more sense for the ships to dock there.

I know what you're saying but if a cruise passenger wants to go to Bar Harbor, docking in Portland won't be particularly satisfying... may as well head off to Saint John and spend more time there.

[chengkp75]

On 11/9/2022 at 11:21 PM, GTJ said:

You've made my point well. Limiting access to Bar Harbor and the national park with respect to persons traveling by cruise vessel (i.e., public transportation), but to allow unfettered access with respect to persons traveling by private automobile, would be unfairly discriminatory against persons relying on public transportation (and also contrary to the national goal of encouraging use of public transportation instead of private automobile). My belief is that the discrimination arises from the prejudices of the local residents, nearly all of whom drive around daily in their private automobiles, and rarely, if ever, travel by cruise vessel.

And, as I responded in this thread:

 

The SCOTUS has found that the constitution does not guarantee your right to a particular form of transportation, when traveling between states, let alone when traveling internationally, as you do on a cruise ship.

[Susan in Maine]

20 hours ago, d9704011 said:

I know what you're saying but if a cruise passenger wants to go to Bar Harbor, docking in Portland won't be particularly satisfying... may as well head off to Saint John and spend more time there.

If you really want to go to Bar Harbor, then go to Bar Harbor. Cruise ships are NOT transportation. There is no guarantee that ANY cruise ship will stop at any specific port.

 

PS: Maine is worth a visit for more than a few hours! We're a lot more than just Portland and Bar Harbor. 

 

[d9704011]

4 hours ago, Susan in Maine said:

If you really want to go to Bar Harbor, then go to Bar Harbor. Cruise ships are NOT transportation. There is no guarantee that ANY cruise ship will stop at any specific port.

 

PS: Maine is worth a visit for more than a few hours! We're a lot more than just Portland and Bar Harbor. 

 

Gee, I wish you hadn't quoted me and insinuated that I have some expectation that a cruise ship should deliver me to BH (or darn near anywhere else) for sight-seeing.  I was responding to a previous comment about going to Portland because it has suitable dock space and is a much larger city to absorb lots of cruise ship passenger traffic.  That's all true, but won't help anybody with a desire to see BH and, I agree with you, if a person wants to go badly enough (BH or any other wonderful spots in Maine), they should make a specific and separate land-based trip.

[shipgeeks]

We are booked on a cruise that includes Bar Harbor next September.  If it doesn't go, we won't be disappointed.  We have stayed on the ship during our last two times there, after a number of times going ashore and deciding it was just so-so.  Many other pax stayed aboard when we did.

So now my question is: With a 1,000 person limit, will that mean only a ship with a pax + crew total of 1,000 or less be allowed there?  Or could a 1,500 person total ship, calculating that only 60% of pax and 10% of crew might go ashore, be permitted?

As I said, I don't care; it will be interesting to see what port, if any, replaces it.  We already have Portland, Saint John, Halifax, Boston, all of which we enjoy.

 

[Charles4515]

35 minutes ago, shipgeeks said:

We are booked on a cruise that includes Bar Harbor next September.  If it doesn't go, we won't be disappointed.  We have stayed on the ship during our last two times there, after a number of times going ashore and deciding it was just so-so.  Many other pax stayed aboard when we did.

So now my question is: With a 1,000 person limit, will that mean only a ship with a pax + crew total of 1,000 or less be allowed there?  Or could a 1,500 person total ship, calculating that only 60% of pax and 10% of crew might go ashore, be permitted?

As I said, I don't care; it will be interesting to see what port, if any, replaces it.  We already have Portland, Saint John, Halifax, Boston, all of which we enjoy.

 

The limit applies to the number of persons disembarking not the number of passengers carried by a ship.