Go Back   Cruise Reviews Forums > General Cruise Chat Questions > General Cruise Chat
Register Forgot Password?
New! Use your Facebook, Google, AIM & Yahoo accounts to securely log into this site, click logo to login  
Search

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2008, 06:37 AM
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cape Coral, Fl.
Posts: 1,319
Default
There might be some hope yet to keep them from changing the law.

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/da...nCoastwise.pdf
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2008, 08:11 AM
Dave's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Alabama
Posts: 17,742
Default
It is an incredibly stupid rule. Some people reading the letter from the Governors may think it is overstating the impact, but it isn't. It is perfectly correct to state that the rule would seriously damage the entire cruise industry in the U.S. Another stirring example of blind bureaucracy run amok.

Of course, if I had dock space just north or south of the Mexican and Canadian boundaries, I'd be hoping for the rule. Similarly, The Bahamas would then be the primary jumping off point for Caribbean cruises.

Fools rush in....
__________________
Dave
Editor, CruiseReviews.com
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2008, 10:20 AM
f-mattox's Avatar  
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Costa Mesa, California
Posts: 4,740
Default
One article said Ensenada was the only place that stood to gain from this new rule if passed (and of course NCL America). God knows Ensenada needs all the help it can get, as does NCL America, but not at our expense.
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2008, 11:07 AM
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cape Coral, Fl.
Posts: 1,319
Default
After what NCL is trying to pull we're finished with them no matter what the turnout.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2008, 05:27 PM
winddanceroz's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12
Default
OK i feel i've missed something here! What are the law changes your talking about and how will it effect the cruise industry. How is NCL invovled. Thanks guys.
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-06-2008, 05:55 AM
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cape Coral, Fl.
Posts: 1,319
Default
This all started last year when NIL-America which had 3 ships sailing in the Hawaiian islands (now down to 1 ship) somehow managed to get their lobbyist to have a change proposed to the PVSA which currently states that a foreign flagged ship must that sails to an American port must make a stop at a foreign port along the way.
The proposed change basically reads " The Customs and Border Protection agency has proposed tightening up the US cabotage law to bar foreign-flagged ships from transporting passengers between US ports unless they stop in a foreign port for at least 48 hours and have foreign ports comprise at least half of the itinerary."

See http://www.traveltrade.com/news_article.htm?id=925 for more info.

The new changes are an attempt to save the NCL-America cruise line which can't seem to make a go of it sailing with an all American crew and if if this proposal does take effect (which could come at any time now) and if instated as originally written would devastate the cruise industry as we know it today. The new proposal states that the ships must also spend at least 1/2 the time at a foreign port as the time spent in an American one. Meaning that a Hawaiian cruise which stops for 4 days in Hawaii must now spend 2 days in Ensenada. This would put an end to the Hawaiian cruises leaving from the US as who in their right minds would pay for a 14 day Hawaiian cruise only to have to get 2 days in Hawaii since there isn't enough time for 4 days or increases the total days to 16 only to have to spend it in a depressing place like Ensenada. (worth about 20 minutes of my time) or leave from Ensenada & bypassing Long Beach, Ca. altogether. Of course you would have to fly (their airport can't handle it) or drive to Ensenada to catch the ship.
Many other cruise ports would also be affected (if not eliminated). I suppose the Alaskan cruises would also have to stop at a Canadian port for 48 hours cutting their time spent in Alaska meaning a 10 day cruise from San Francisco to the inside passage which now stops for 3 days would be cut to 2 days with 2 days at Victoria, BC.
There has been a lot of rumblings that the law would only be selectively applied to the Hawaiian market but nothing that could be confirmed. If my understanding of the proposed changes is wrong, please correct me. Either way it goes I doubt if I'd sail on NCL again in the future after what they've tried to do.
 
Closed Thread

Tags
cruise, ensenada, foreign, map, port, pvsa, ship, stop, terminal, victoria

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Opportunities to Change Money on Ship or Prior to Excursions waterart Princess Cruises 2 10-25-2008 09:23 AM
US Customs Rule mps69 General Cruise Chat 4 05-07-2008 02:59 PM
how strict is the carry on booze rule? stpetejack Royal Caribbean Cruise Line 13 04-03-2006 06:52 PM
no passport needed??rule change jbrooks175 General Cruise Chat 2 09-28-2005 03:56 PM


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
 

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:03 AM.

Contact Us - Terms of Use - Cruise Reviews Home - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2