GTJ

Perhaps more importantly, it would be important to examine the bailment contract . . . that is, the agreement that sets forth the hotel's liability in the case of damage or theft. (Alas, most motorists, I believe, simply accept the "parking ticket" given to them without a glace as to the terms inscribed there, at least not until there is damage or theft.) If the hotel advertises such service, it would be worthwhile to ask in advance for a copy of the contract.

Yes, I know this location. It is the former "Baltimore Travel Plaza," the intercity bus station for Baltimore that had been used primarily by Greyhound Lines and Peter Pan Bus Lines. I have been there many times while passing through as a bus passenger, and occasionally having boarded or alighted there. In fact, if you look at either Google satellite or street views, you can still see that on the west side of the hotel the elongated parking stalls that had been used as bus slips for the bus terminal. The location was chosen as a bus station in large part because of its easy access to and from the interstate highway, and at the time it was reasonably comfortable as a bus station. But its greatest drawbacks, as already noted, are its isolated location, including lack of many restaurants, along with subpar pedestrian and transit bus access. The station ceased being used for buses in early 2011 (the new Greyhound bus station, while closer to the city center, also has many of the same detriments of the Baltimore Travel Plaza), and I don't know the extent to which the hotel has been renovated, or if it still maintains its aura as a bus station.

You may want to re-visit your assumption. From the National Park Service: "The Senior Passes admit pass owner/s and passengers in a noncommercial vehicle at per-vehicle fee areas and pass owner plus three adults, not to exceed four adults, where per-person fees are charged." http://www.nps.gov/planyourvisit/senior-pass-changes.htm There is nothing stopping persons accompanying a senior pass holder from paying additional fees--the government appreciates all the money its citizens voluntarily donate to it--but there is neither a legal nor a moral obligation to do so. From a public policy perspective, the National Park Service has taken the correct position. Would it make any sense to allow all occupants of a motor vehicle, where a senior pass holder is among the occupants, but to demand fees to be paid if those same individuals were not in an automobile? Obviously, persons using motor vehicles impose greater impacts on a park environment than those same persons not using motor vehicles. The non-use of motor vehicles ought to be encouraged, or at least not penalized by the imposition of additional fees. The National Park Service has not always done this well, but at least in this case, of senior pass usage, it has done so correctly by not demanding additional fees from persons accompanying on foot a senior pass holder. From Island Explorer: "Our buses will stop anywhere along the route that the driver deems safe. Please choose a spot with a good shoulder and good sight lines. Flag the bus with two hands. If you are on a bus and want to get off at a place other than a designated stop, please inform the driver when you board the bus. They will stop at the nearest safe place." http://www.exploreacadia.com/questions.html That is to say, Island Explorer is a typical public transportation system, and you can travel from any point to any other point, whether there is a marked bus stop or not. Walk if you feel fit; ride if you do not want to, or cannot, walk.

Yes, we have done the same thing (and only the same thing) a number of times, both for Celebrity Cruises and Royal Caribbean International. We generally come in the PATH train from 33rd Street in midtown, and change to the light rail train at Hoboken. From World Trade Center, you would change to the light rail train at Exchange Place. No, there typically has not been transportation waiting at 34th Street, but there is quick response when requesting transportation. What can be confusing to drivers meeting you at the station is that there are two distinct areas at which you can meet. First, there is a park-and-ride with bus stop on the east side of the tracks, adjacent to highway 440 and closest to the port. Second, there is a residential street entrance on the west side of the tracks. While the east side location would seemingly be more reasonable for meeting up with a summoned taxi/TNC, it has no street address, and some drivers get lost not knowing where it is. The west side location, while less comforting in having to stand on a sidewalk without benches, has the advantage of having addresses that can be used when summoning a taxi/TNC vehicle. Specifically, we use the address 534 Avenue E, which is that of the business immediately adjacent to, and south of, the station entrance on the west side of the tracks. (You could also use the address 552 Avenue E, which is the house immediately adjacent to, and north of, the station entrance on the west side of the tracks.) Recent roadway changes on the peninsula make the 45th Street station also a practicable connecting point. It has only a single station entrance, and so may be less confusing to drivers (though we have not used this station as a connecting point). Assume a fare of about $10 between the station and the port. Overall, it is a fairly easy trip, at least so long as you have baggage on wheels that you are able to manage on your own. I think that the fares for taxis and cars from Manhattan to Bayonne are an outrage, and we would never consider doing so except under the most extraordinary of circumstances.

Daily Hive reports an incident where Air Canada cancelled a flight to Vancouver, without advance notice of the cancellation, offering to re-book on a flight later in the day after the the cruise vessel will have departed from Vancouver. http://www.dailyhive.com/vancouver/flight-cancelled-stranger-drives-seattle-vancouver A stranger, who had been dropping off her mother at the airport in Seattle, offered to drive the family to Vancouver, to board their cruise vessel on time, gratuitously. Many regards to the kind stranger who undertook this effort. That said, the cruising family did not seem to be especially well-versed with their planning. They had arrived at the airport in Seattle the day prior to the cruise to rent an automobile for the trip to Vancouver, but arrived at the airport at 4:15 p.m., after the rental car location had closed for the day. Renting a car for a one-way trip is ordinarily quite expensive, and the alternative plan, of leaving the rented car parked in Vancouver for the duration of the cruise, would also have been unduly expensive. The car rental plan does not appear to have been a good planning choice. For their "Plan B," the family chose to fly from Seattle to Vancouver the next morning. Yet there was an option to travel that same afternoon, with Quick Shuttle having a bus going direct from the Seattle airport to Vancouver at 5:45 p.m., perfect timing for having missed their rental car appointment. And when their ill-advised "Plan B" fell apart the next morning, when the 6:00 a.m. flight did not materialize, Quick Shuttle had a departure from the Seattle airport at 8:30 a.m., arriving at Canada Place in Vancouver at 2:35 p.m. According the news report, the report stated that the family "needed to be in Vancouver by noon" to board their cruise vessel. The Port of Vancouver's schedule shows three vessels in port that day, Celebrity Eclipse, Serenade of the Seas, and Noordam, the first two departing at 5:00 p.m., and the last at 4:00 p.m. Ordinarily cruise lines require check-in to be completed 90 minutes in advance of departure, so that they can meet the government's mandate for a manifest to be submitted 60 minutes in advance of departure, so that means the real deadline for the family was 3:30 p.m. (or 2:30 p.m., for the Noordam), rather than noon . . . noon likely being merely the "reserved" or "requested" boarding time. This family did not make great planning decisions. Thank goodness for the kindness of strangers to have rescued them from themselves and all that went wrong!

The bus service between the airport and midtown Manhattan, which is operated by a subsidiary of Coach USA, is direct from any of the airport passenger terminal to Port Authority Bus Terminal, Bryant Park, and Grand Central Terminal. The one-way Coach USA fare is $18.70, $9.35 for seniors age 62 and up. The rail service between the airport and midtown Manhattan is indirect, and requires first traveling on the monorail (known as AirTrain), from any of the airport passenger terminals, to the EWR railroad station, and second traveling on either of the two railroads, New Jersey Transit or Amtrak, to New York Pennsylvania Station. Both railroads use the same route and have virtually identical travel times, the difference being that Amtrak offers marginally higher seating comfort and substantially higher fares. The one-way AirTrain fare is $8 (no discounts for seniors); the one-way New Jersey Transit fare is $7.75, $3.25 for seniors age 62 and up; the one-way Amtrak fare is at least $22.00 and as great as $79.00 (no discounts for seniors). The Coach USA and AirTrain plus New Jersey Transit/Amtrak routes are both relatively expensive for daily commuters. Most airport employees instead utilize the much more economical New Jersey Transit route 62 bus, from any of the airport passenger terminals, to Newark Pennsylvania Station, then connecting to the PATH subway trains into New York. The one-way New Jersey Transit fare, exact change required, is $1.60, $0.75 for seniors age 62 and up; the one-way PATH fare is $2.75, $1.25 for seniors age 65 and up. Institutional interests prefer that out-of-town visitors not use the route 62 bus--and instead use the more expensive services--so much information on the route 62 bus is hidden, and the route 62 timetable itself states: "Only two pieces of baggage per customer allowed on buses not to exceed 22" x 16" x 8".

Yes, the order of sites enumerated is practicable and most efficient. But with the caveats that, (1) between Sand Beach, Thunder Hole, and Otter Cliffs, both routes 3 and 4 provide service, and you can board whichever bus route comes first, and (2) between Jordan Pond, Bubble Pond, and the visitor center, both routes 4 and 5 provide service, and you can board whichever bus route comes first. Whether or not you will actually have time to complete the full loop as desired depends, of course, on the amount of time available in Bar Harbor, the amount time allocated to each stop, and timeliness and capacity of the buses themselves. Whether it is more important to devote maximum visiting time to the park itself, or to cut back on park time so as to be able to devote some time to an in-town restaurant, is a personal decision. It would be easy for me to decide for myself because (1) I view the park as individually unique, while restaurants are fairly commonplace, and (2) I despise seafood, which seems to be the specialty of the West Street Café (merely viewing its menu posted online started making me queasy). Your perceptions may differ from mine. I cannot advise on the benefit, if any, in stopping in at the visitor center before, as opposed to after visiting the other park sites. Some people really like viewing exhibits and talking with park rangers, prior to visiting the park itself, in order to enhance their interpretation of the park. The park service itself explains that the Hulls Cove Visitor Center allows one to "purchase your entrance pass, speak with a ranger about planning your visit, use self-service maps, enjoy art from our Artist-In-Residence program, and shop at the Park Store." To the extent that any additional in-person advice is required before visiting, you should be able to receive that from the park service information center at the Village Green. I cannot say at what locations park stamps (presumably for your park "passport") are available. The chamber of commerce has an information center in the heart of the commercial area of Bar Harbor, at the intersection of Main Street and Cottage Street. The park service has an information center at the Village Green, on Firefly Lane between Main Street and Kennebec Street. Whether you decide to purchase a park pass or not is, of course, a personal decision. Note that park visitors who travel by automobile display their pass on a hangtag within their vehicle when parking within the park, and do not have a park pass with them personally when visiting park sites or using park buses. It is virtually impossible to distinguish among inviduals visiting the park who had traveled by automobile and have left their park pass within their vehicle, from those visiting the park who had not traveled by automobile and are carrying their park pass on their person. As one person explained on another board: "If you, or your child, is asked if they have purchased a park pass, just explain. Does this make it possible to cheat? Yes, but please don't."

There is more English generally in the city Québec than in Saguenay. About 95 percent in Québec use French, and about one-third of the population is bilingual. Québec is much more French than Montréal, and in many parts of Québec, as in Saguenay, even in the true commercial areas such as along rue Saint-Paul, one will encounter many people unable to communicate in English. But within the walls defining Vieux-Québec, bilingualism is virtually universal among business employees facing customers, whether hotels, restaurants, or retail stores.

Yes, to work in the tourism trade in Quebec bilingualism is necessary. The companies that target Engish-speaking tourists must necessarily be able to communicate in English. I have rarely found any exceptions to that. Not always great English . . . the hotel clerk where I last stayed overnight in Chicoutimi had some difficulty with English. But the tourism industry can be narrow, and I would not necessarily include transportation as being mostly bilingual. I remember having sought to buy a bus ticket while in Jonquière, destined for Saint-Siméon, with the ticket seller not speaking a word of English. I have traveled virtually the entire province (and more thoroughly than any other province, even remote places such as Chibougamau and Harrington Harbour . . . though I still have not yet been to Chisasibi!), and there is so much variance throughout. In some of these places English will never be heard, while in others there is the oddity of everyone speaking English surrounded by posted signs that are written only in French. Saguenay is one of those areas that is deepest francophone, probably the cruise port that singularly has the highest proportion of non-English speaking persons in the province . . . even Sept-Îles has more English spoken! Going to Québecc is like going to México: English is spoken by many, especially in tourist areas, but the degree of English ability is not uniform. It varies from place-to-place, and with whom one intends to interact.

I would respectfully disagree here. Saguenay is strongly French-speaking, with low rates of English comprehension generally. Within the tourism industry, of course, many can speak English, and so visitors remaining on the tourist circuit can get by without much difficulty. But to claim that "virtually everyone" is bilingual in this area is simply wrong. Going to the numbers, French is the first language for 99 percent of the population, English is the first language for 1 percent of the population. About 20 percent of the population is bilingual, while 80 percent can communicate in French only. In the province as a whole, French is the first language for about 80 percent of the population, and over 40 percent are bilingual (in Montréal nearly 60 percent are bilingual).

As far as safety, both areas are similar in that each has much pedestrian activity, but each also have very busy highways with the safety risks concomitant with their crossing. In sum, each are reasonably safe to walk without excessive risk of becoming injured. That said, my suspicion is that you might actually be focused on security, rather than on safety. Both are urban centers and share common security issues surrounding cities. That said, the hotels in both places surround the centers of government and commerce, and so these areas tend to be the most secure within their respective cities. Over the past few decades, the area of Jersey City immediately adjacent to the waterfront, areas surrounding Exchange Place and Pavonia Avenue (Newport) have been redeveloped from their historic positions as centers of railroading and ferriage into financial centers and a large enclosed shopping mall. These areas are visited by a large cross section of the population and tend to be kept relatively secure in order to maintain the confidence of the financial industry that settled into the area. West of Marin Boulevard, at Grove Street and beyond, is the older and not redeveloped commercial area. Fine during the day, but perhaps a bit less secure after sunset. The hotel in Newark (there really is one, the DoubleTree) is immediately adjacent to the railroad station, and the railroad tracks themselves separate downtown Newark from the Ironbound district, each with distinct characteristics. Downtown Newark has, over the past few decades, seen a flight of commercial activity leaving the area, with no department stores remaining. Virtually all remaining commercial activity is of the lowest economic value. Downtown is also headquarters to Prudential Insurance, is home to a Rutgers University campus and Seton Hall Law School, and hosts the New Jersey Performing Arts Center. Given this mix, there is in the center of downtown a combination of petty disorder in the day and a sense of insecurity at night. Yet the performing arts center a few blocks away is very active and secure in the evening when there are events. On the other side of the railroad tracks, in the Ironbound district, is a Portuguese community with many fine restaurants and being largely secure during the day and evening. The hotel itself is directly connected to the railroad station, going back and forth between the two is always kept secure. Both Jersey City and Newark are exceptionally well-connected to midtown Manhattan. Jersey City has a subway, known as "PATH" (short for Port Authority Trans Hudson), that provides frequent service to and from Sixth Avenue in midtown at a reasonable transit fare. There is also bus service into the Port Authority Bus Terminal and, during rush hours, ferries to the west side (requiring a connecting bus to get to and from midtown), but the PATH subway is likely to be favored choice. Newark has the same PATH subway service, but since the Newark route goes direct only to lower Manhattan, one does have to change trains at Journal Square to get to and from Sixth Avenue in midtown. Quicker than this subway service are the New Jersey Transit commuter trains to and from Pennsylvania Station in midtown. Less frequent and more irregularly scheduled than the PATH trains, the service is quicker overall, albeit at a much higher fare. There is also bus service into the Port Authority Bus Terminal. In sum, transportation to and from midtown Manhattan is not a strong basis for deciding between Jersey City and Newark. Both locations offer good, rapid, safe, secure, and inexpensive transportation to and from midtown Manhattan. To and from EWR: It is my understanding that the hotel in Newark provides a shuttle service. It is unlikely that any of the hotels in Jersey City will provide a shuttle service (but possible nonetheless). To and from Bayonne: It is a shorter journey for hotels in Jersey City than in Newark. It is unlikely that any hotel will provide a shuttle. There is no train or bus directly to the port, though there is New Jersey light rail train service between Jersey City and Bayonne, to and from a point just outside the peninsula upon which the port is located (with taxi/TNC fare about $10 between train station and port). Travel by taxi/TNC between hotel and port will likely be marginally less expensive for hotels in Jersey City (and no tolls).

In effect, there are two distinct starting points for Island Explorer bus routes. Routes 4 and 5 both begin at the Hulls Cove Visitor Center, which is convenient for motorists but rather distant from the center of Bar Harbor where most cruise passengers will begin their explorations. Route 4 operates very frequently, and completely circumnavigates the park road; route 5 provides a quick service to and from Jordan Pond. While you may eventually on one or both of these routes at some point in time, they're not really set up to be of much convenience to cruise passengers. Routes 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 12 all begin at the Village Green, and are much more conveniently located for the cruise passenger. Routes 2 and 12 primarily serve the area hotels, and are unlikely to be of much use to cruise passengers. Routes 1, 6, 7, and 9 are longer-distance routes that serve surrounding communities, rather than the park itself, but may be an interesting diversion for cruise passengers. Routes 3 and 10 serve the park itself. Several of your desired locations are accessible from the Village Green using route 3, which travels along the main park road: Sand Beach, Thunder Hole, and Otter Cliffs. This main park road is one-way, so you'll want to visit these locations in the order I have listed them in the prior sentence. Once at Sand Beach, both routes 3 and 4 continue onward to Thunder Hole and Otter Cliffs, so you can simply take whichever bus comes first indifferently. Continuing onward to Jordan Pond, only route 4 will provide that service. Then, from Jordan Pond, you can continue onward to Bubble Pond and the Hulls Cove Visitor Center by either of routes 4 and 5. Finally, use route 1 from the Hulls Cove Visitor Center to return to the Village Green. While this is the most efficient order to visit the various points of interest, it does mean that the Visitor Center itself is the last stop. Were you to make the Visitor Center your first stop, then you would begin on route 1, from the Village Green to the Hulls Cove Visitor Center. Then continue on route 4 to Sand Beach and all the remaining stops as enumerated above. It also means that you would conclude at the Hulls Cove Visitor Center, using route 1 to travel back to the Village Green. Overall, this is a bit less efficient than the plan in the paragraph above, so follow this plan only if stopping at the visitor center first is important. Schoodic Point is on the other side of Frenchman Bay, and you would need to travel by ferry from Bar Harbor to Winter Harbor. Once on the other side you could use route 8 to get around the point. The ferry operates every two hours (you'll find the ferry schedule incorporated into the route 8 bus timetable). Unless the time you have at Bar Harbor is lengthy, it will likely be a challenge to schedule in a ferry trip in addition to the main park travel. If you desire to purchase a park pass, then you can do so from the National Park Service building on the Village Green.

Liberals, who profess global warming as a religion, apparently do not travel to Alaska. 🙂

The more important issue, as least for those of us who desire to limit Big Brother, is the training of those individuals directing inspection traffic. At Bayonne, New Jersey, I have found that it is very simple to decline photo recognition and instead have regular immigration inspection, with all persons involved cooperative and efficient in doing so. Hopefully Baltimore personnel are being similarly trained.

Have the sidewalks that had existed been removed since Google last took street level photographs in 2020? If so, why would the sidewalks been removed? Especially the fact that there were curb cuts for the sidewalk in 2020, allowing wheelchair users to safely cross McComas Street, it would seem to be unusual for a city to remove both the sidewalk and effective access for people with disabilities along the south curb of McComas Street. (I do note, however, that it appears as though the Port of Baltimore has done a poor job in providing wheelchair access where the McComas Street sidewalk had crossed the exit driveway from the passenger terminal, as the Google street view shows both the absence of a curb cut and a fence barricading the sidewalk alongside the driveway . . . shame on the agency for the apparent indifference to the ADA and people with disabilities.) Of course, there is a problem with so many motor vehicle operators being bad drivers and creating hazards for pedestrians. Trucks can be an issue because of their mass, but at least their drivers are professionals. I believe the larger problem is with automobile drivers . . . so many don't pay full attention to driving safely and will do such distracting things as using cellular telephones while driving! (No, a hands-free cellular telephone is not any safer than a hand-held telephone.) More traffic citations should be issued, more driving licenses should be suspended, and probably one-half the number of people now driving should never drive. Alas, that's not going to happen anytime soon, and so pedestrians need to be able to co-exist with these menaces. Learning how to walk assertively but safely is something parents should teach their children so that they do not become scared as adults and feel compelled to utilize motor vehicles (and possibly exacerbating the problem). Here, the intersection of Key Highway and McComas Street is controlled by a traffic signal, so with some patience for the traffic signal to change one should be able to cross the street safely. When you worked with the Port of Baltimore, were you not able to get the agency to increase pedestrian safety? I would think that the agency carries a lot of weight and influence with the traffic authorities, and that its concerns over pedestrian safety, to and from the passenger terminal.

Again, you're wrongly focused on the details of maritime law, not the general principles of constitutional law. I am certain that the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy does a fine job generally in training mariners, and in particular it delves into matters of law relative to the sea. I looked at the current curriculum, and see that it includes 6 quarter credits of navigation law, 2 quarter credits of admiralty and international law, and 3 quarter credits of business law. This is not even enough education for a minor; it is in the community college range. Nonetheless, as is also the case for many degrees in various majors, and for technical education, it is likely that the academy's curriculum of maritime law--including specific statutes and administrative regulations, perhaps even a handful of cases--provides a deep practical understanding of a narrow are of law, and in most cases likely exceeding the knowledge of many lawyers as to those specifics. As noted, the academy is a fine institution. I reside on the north shore of Long Island, and it is a valued institution here, turning out many capable and valued graduates. But it is an institution that is largely oriented to following established law, not challenging the law; it does not teach constitutional law or legal methods, nor does it teach students how to think and reason as lawyers. In short, the academy does not train its cadets to be lawyers, nor does it graduate lawyers; it is not a law school. That's why I think you're so focused on the narrow area of maritime regulation, for this is what was taught there. But here, the argument is much more broad. This is not an argument about maritime activity, but rather migration activity. Engaging in interstate travel. It is not mode specific, nor can any mode "opt out" of the Constitution. My practice mostly revolves on representing clients in matters relating to passenger transportation law. I know the subject very well. Not necessarily all the specific details without reference to the statutes, regulations, and cases (e.g., whether a particular bus operator qualifies as a small mixed-service operator for ADA purposes, whether a particular foreign qualifies as distant or is nearby), but important is the ability to be able to see larger pictures and frame the issues accordingly. In order to do this effectively, one needs to understand law and its application more generally than just knowing a number of specific statutes, regulations, and cases only in a narrow field. And that is especially true in cases like this, where constitutional issues are involved. The larger picture here is that a number of selfish individuals in Maine do not want others to be welcome. (And in that regard, I get involved in the same type of issue in NYC: residents of particular neighborhoods only want "their" buses being assigned bus stops, but buses serving the entire city being denied bus stops, as a means to exclude others.) Thus, I think that arguing constitutional issues is fine, but getting bogged down in largely irrelevant details of maritime law is really not the issue . . . at least not without a more effective argument that is tied into the larger picture.

With all due respect, I think that you’re confusing the right of individuals to travel freely among the several states with the regulation of transportation by carriers. The U.S. Supreme Court explained that “[t]he ‘right to travel’ . . . embraces at least three different components. It protects the right of a citizen of one State to enter and to leave another State, the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than an unfriendly alien when temporarily present in the second State, and, for those travelers who elect to become permanent residents, the right to be treated like other citizens of that State,” and the Court provided the constitutional bases for the protection of the right. See Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). Other cases expand upon this and related ideas. Now this right does not mean that a person has a right to travel by any particular form of transportation. See e.g., Gilmore v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 1125 (9th Cir. 2006). Thus, there are legitimate restraints on freedom of movement by certain means of transportation for compelling government interests, such as, for example, a license being required for travel by driving a motor vehicle, and security inspection being required for travel by commercial airliner. Restricting interstate travel by commercial vessel might be legitimate for some compelling government interest. Here, however, the interest of Bar Harbor in restricting travel by commercial vessel is not only illegitimate, but directly contrary to the second component of the right as described by the U.S. Supreme Court, “to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than an unfriendly alien when temporarily present in the second State.” The real reason for the Bar Harbor residents is to exclude visitors. Maritime law here is irrelevant because this is not a matter of law relating to navigable waters: this is not a matter of regulating cabotage or establishing civil liability among parties. There is no relevance to a particular carrier’s flag as to constitutionally-protected rights of American citizens who may happen to be aboard that carrier’s vessel. This larger concern relates to the Constitution, to interstate travel, and the efforts of a few selfish residents of a small town in Maine trying to keep other American citizens away.

I think that you are properly viewing the situation with dispassion. Stepping onto a limb, what I think is going on is a segment of the population that dislikes the tourism industry generally. Picking on cruise vessels is easy to do for that segment because the entirety of the passengers on the visiting vessel constitutes a "them," with an eye to exclude "them." On the other hand, the motor vehicles are harder to exclude because, I suspect, the tourism critics themselves rely on motor vehicles. As a result, it is harder to exclude "them" without risking these critics within the ambit of any exclusionary policies they might try to impose. Sensibly, however, the passengers carried by cruise vessels--and also by buses--have the least impact on the environment than any of the others traveling by private automobile . . . including the very critics who are trying to exclude the tourists. These tourists arriving by cruise vessel add zero to motor vehicle traffic, and consume few government-provided resources. Their choice of transportation is the least intrusive choice that could be made. I see the issue as that being local residents who want this region reserved for themselves, and to exclude others. Targeting cruise line vessels is low-hanging fruit for them. Because the Cat ferry is transporting private automobiles, many of which are driven by local residents, that there seems to be a silence on its operations and a desire to treat it differently than the cruise line vessels. But I think that, if there were a way to do so, these people would seek a means by which they could exclude motorists who were not local residents. There's a variant of this near where I reside. People who live in the suburbs of New York City all desire to take advantage of the many benefits of the city, including its commerce, culture, and natural resources. Yet, these same suburbanites, when retreating to their cloistered residences, then do all they can to exclude city residents from their communities, imposing resident-only requirements for various activities. It comes down to selfishness by local residents. A desire to discriminate against outsiders who desire to travel to Maine. An attitude that is at variance with the constitutionally-protected right to interstate travel.

This was my first thought as well. New York City is not like other cities. It is huge, and we can absorb so many events that would overwhelm other cities, and do so with most people not even noticing. That the United Nations is hosting a meeting? Maybe some traffic on the east side, bus so what? There is no single event that affects the city as a whole. And what remains outside these relatively small events is substantial. I would not expect any effect whatsoever on hotels in the other four boroughs, and within Manhattan there are simply so many choices, with the number of available rooms dwarfing the number of United Nations meeting attendees. Just choose a neighborhood outside the east side and, outside of other neighborhood happenings, I would anticipate the usual sense of finding accommodations at the ordinary seasonal prices. But to randomly choose hotels in this city is an impossible task, and at best there can be random responses rather than anything systematic and useful. I would say to first choose a neighborhood. Not necessarily based on proximity to sightseeing, and so upper west side, Union Square, and lower Manhattan are all good starting points. Knowing how to navigate by subway, maybe look outside of Manhattan at some neighborhoods not previously seen. Consider if price is important, and if so, consider appropriate neighborhoods. Then just use Google maps or another hotel search service to start searching. All sorts of things will pop up. From there you will probably have more success in finding online reviews all over, more so than any responses that one can anticipate on this discussion board (I would not rely on Cruise Critic other than for hotels that are particularly directed towards cruise vessel passengers, generally on the basis of proximity to port.)

Many thanks for the information. On your travel between Anacona and Split, do you recall if the arrival in Split was on time? Also, do you recall the amount of time it required to clear immigration and customs inspection upon arrival at Split? My reading of various reviews was that (1) vessels often departed late, sometimes by hours, but the schedule is so padded that arrivals are on time, and (2) there is a chaotic boarding process with huge queues but not much commentary on disembarkation. The schedule is one of the elements that is a bit of a challenge here, particularly in light of the substantial deviations from normal operations that have been implemented on account of the pandemic. I have looked at prior year schedules to get a sense of what is likely to be the case for 2023, but no schedules have yet been published for the year 2023. In the case of Jadrolinija, the present schedule goes to the end of 2022, and has been relatively stable, so I expect to be roughly the same in 2023. Moreover, given its regularity, being stated-owned, and likely transporting other persons (particularly Coatian nationals) who are not specifically destined for Split but points beyond, I have some degree of confidence that connections are intended and will be maintained. Of course, that does not prevent the company from changing the schedule to, say, two hours later and a 9:00 a.m. arrival, thereby destroying the connection (unless the railroad to make the same two hour change). Yes, it is just an overnight trip, less than 12 hours, so not especially enduring . . . unless the conditions on the vessel are truly horrible. Do you recall the vessel you traveled upon and its conditions? And in season there are several choices, but late April is still off-season, and other operators of service across the Adriatic Sea seem to have relatively late starting dates for their summer season. There appear to be very few year-round crossings of the sea upon which one might plan for late April, with Ancona to Split being one of those few. SNAV does appear to start their summer season early, historically the last weekend in April. But I would be more concerned with taking a chance on SNAV having service at that time when we would need to rely upon it. I remember one several years ago planning for a trip in Newfoundland, Canada, relying on a ferry within Gros Morne National Park to have resumed service for the season, and had even communicated by e-mail in advance with the relatively small ferry operator, Bon Tours. It turned out that the ferry company had changed its plans and moved back the start-up date. But since the company had other operations there, and had communicated with me before, it made a special crossing, and return, for the two of us alone. Here, our decision to go ahead (or not) and book the larger cruise vessel itineraries, one with Holland America Line from the United States to Europe and the other with MSC Cruises from Europe back to the Untied States, is somewhat dependent on being able to make travel arrangements within Europe between those two larger itineraries, including service across the Adriatic Sea with Jadrolinija or otherwise. Without a workable schedule across the sea, we might travel overland, by railroad, between Italy and Croatia, but that would influence whether we decide whether to travel overseas in 2023 or not.

I am planning for consecutive ocean cruises in April 2023, with about one week in Italy between the two cruises. I considering travel on the MF Marko Polo, operated by Jadrolinija, the Croatian state-owned shipping line, from Ancona, Italy, to Split, Croatia. The off-season schedule has the vessel departing from Ancona on Tuesday and Friday evenings at 7:45 p.m., and arriving at Split the next morning at 7:00 a.m. Off-season, Hrvatske željeznice (Croatian Railways) operates a single daily train to Zagreb, the ICN "Marjan" train, which departs Split at 8:31 a.m. (except on Sundays when the train departs at 2:25 p.m.). Otherwise, there is regular bus service from Split to Zagreb. I question the timeliness of Jadrolinija sailings. Can I expect it to arrive in Split on schedule? If so, how long might I anticipate for immigration and customs inspection? The railway station is right across the street from the port (and adjacent to the bus terminal), so if I can be off the vessel and through immigration and customs by 8:10 a.m. or so, I should be in good position for boarding the 8:31 a.m. railway departure. It that likely to happen? Or is is more likely that "Plan B," travel by bus, will be required? Any prior experience or guidance on navigating the port in Split would be welcomed. Secondarily, can anyone opine on the quality of service provided by Jadrolinija and the conditions on the vessel MF Marko Polo? What about alternative vessels? I have read a number of largely negative reviews, but since negative reviews are more frequently than positive reviews, I am not certain that the posted reviews are entirely representative of the service. Are there any other services across the Adriatic Sea that might be operating at the start of the last week of April (assume April 25, 2023)? I had hoped that SNAV would be operating at that time, but it seems as though their season on the Ancona-Split route does not typically begin until the last weekend of April, too late for this journey. Similarly, the service between Bari, Italy, and Bar, Montenegro, connecting with the railroad to Belgrade, also would not be operating at this time. (The services across the Adriatic Sea to Dubrovnik, Croatia, and Durrës, Albania, would not be attractive alternatives to Split, as neither have railroad services.)

Many people do carry credit or debit cards, but there is also a large number of people who do not. In my family the filing for bankruptcy has precluded some members from not having such cards. As well, I remember myself years ago without the credit history necessary to obtain a credit card. While I was well-traveled, all of my tickets were paid with cash, and I exchanged currency at international borders. Now having credit and credit cards, the burdens of travel have eased for me. While it is a great comfort for those of us who are able to possess these cards, let us not forget about others who may not be as fortunate. While I have been critical of many strategies and practices of Greyhound Lines, their purposeful plan to accommodate persons without credit or debit cards, so as to be able to buy tickets online, deserves accolades for its attention to this group that is oftentimes overlooked (and in some cases diminished or dismissed as irrelevant). "Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others." Philippians 2:4 (RSV-CE).

A good panoply of thoughts there! Largely in agreement as to a general sense of entitlement, though in many cases I think it arises out of Americans being oblivious or ignorant, as opposed to a purposeful expression of superiority. Yet, there is a legitimacy to the expectation of U.S. dollars being accepted worldwide. The U.S. dollar is a standard used by so much of the world, and particularly valued in regions where the local currency is not stable. In fact, the stability of the U.S. dollar is a reason why some countries use the U.S. dollar as their own currency (e.g., El Salvador, Panama). Prior to the establishment of the U.S. dollar as a stable currency (with Continental dollars being routinely diminished), Americans used the Spanish dollar for that stability. And in that regard the PRC is now trying to replace the U.S. dollar! I do not view it as disrespectful, but at most putting some merchants in an uncomfortable position if dollars are not routinely used in that part of the world and the exchange rate might be not known. For some of us that is good advice. However, not everyone has a credit card. Just look across the United States and you will see some many check cashing establishments serving the cash-using population that is largely devoid of both credit cards and bank accounts. Some transportation companies make substantial efforts to attract business from this large part of American society that has no access, most notably Greyhound Lines that now allows online ticket purchases using cash paid at 7-Eleven, Walmart, CVS, Casey's, and ACE Cash Express. So for people who rely on cash, the issue of whether to exchange that cash or not can be an important question. While Canadian dollars are somewhat stable, the influence of Canada on the rest of the world is so much more limited that Canadian dollars have never taken hold. Canadian dollars are accepted in some parts of the United States, but more as the exception rather than the rule. In Hyder, Alaska, and in Estcourt, Maine, the local economy uses Canadian dollars instead of U.S. dollars because each of the two communities is more closely connected with Canada than with the United States. Other border towns will accept Canadian dollars as a convenience, sometimes even actively promoting the acceptance at par to encourage Canadian shoppers and visitors. And in parts of Florida will also accept Canadian dollars because of some many Canadian snowbirds going to visit. Otherwise, once past the border zone, Canadian dollars are useless in the Untied States.

It depends. When paying for local transit bus fares and other government services, generally Canadian dollars are required. Many privately-owned businesses will accept U.S. dollars (but not coins), typically treating each dollar at a premium, say $1.25 or $1.30. Unscrupulous businesses will accept U.S. dollars at par. Almost always change is provided in Canadian dollars (including coins).

Although I cannot offer first hand information, my understanding is that the hiking trail is gentle. As for the transportation to and from the trail, note the distance is 5.3 miles between Skagway Junction (next to the main railroad station in Skagway) and Denver, and the travel time is about 20 minutes. The round-trip fare is $40, a rather expensive fare compared to other passenger railroads in the United States. On many days there are two trains daily, departing Skagway at 7:40 a.m. and 12:40 p.m., destined for Fraser, B.C. As well, there are typically two trains daily returning from Fraser, B.C., to Skagway, which stop to pick up passengers at the Denver station at 11:50 a.m. and 4:40 p.m. Many other trains pass through Denver station but do not typically stop at Denver for passengers to board and alight. Do confirm train schedules for your day of travel.