Jones Act

[firefly333]

I'm not sure about the schedule for the Alaska or Hawaii trips as I have never researched those. But is there more than one ship sailing from the port? Is it like in some of the Florida ports where some ships sail on Saturday and some sail on Sunday? If so, could you give off the ship, stay the night in the port city at a hotel and then get on the other ship the next day? That way you wouldn't have to fly twice.

 

I read the big thread last year about this and I seem to remember that as long as you stay the night at the port city, you wouldn't be violating the act.

 

Maggie

 

If you read my posts in this thread .. the problem is I booked thru a discount group cruise deal. Only 3 dates are offered, and looks like the one I booked is the only one that will work for me.

 

Without going thru the rules of how I booked, I seem to have booked the only date that I can do.

 

Its not possible to easily cancel .. and there are not other discounted groups to Alaska being offered thru my group TA at this time. Its not that simple to explain how I booked. I can only choose from the dates/groups offered .. though coincidently one of the 3 dates was the cruise before my Hawaii date, so I thought I could just change to the other group, but Carnival says no.

 

Would have been nice.. but changing to another full priced ship and trying to cancel what I booked would not be worth doing, lets leave it at that.

 

Well I still have Panama on my bucket list .. maybe the next time its offered I will have a open date and do that one .. but not cancelling either Alaska (bucket list) or Hawaii (used to live there for 10 years, so it will be some what of a homecoming).

 

Im planning just doing both and what was meant to be is.

[e150club]

Firefly:

i understand your fustration about a law that is outdated. I have learned a bit about how the Jones act and pvsa works because of your post. [Thanks all] But I still wish I had your problems. Enjoy at least half of your B2B cruise.

[k2excursion]

I was not aware of this continuation aspect of this law. I would've thought, before reading this thread, that you could do those 2 cruises back to back. It stinks that you can't. This law just keeps getting more and more ridiculous.

 

Another poster mentioned it, and I'm wondering too. What constitutes a continuation? From this thread, I can see that the same ship debarking and embarking on the same day is interpreted as a continuation. How long do you have to wait for it to not be? Is just one day enough? A week? What about someone who sailed the Elation's last Mobile cruise, then they jumped on the Elation's first New Orleans cruise one or two days after the first one ended. Is that a continuation?

 

This law was designed to help protect American jobs and money, but it has really hurt American jobs and money within the cruise industry. With how things are now in this country, cruiselines will not build & flag their ships as US, and employ them with all US citizens, except for the one NCL ship (because it does Hawaii cruises). So trying to pressure cruiselines into doing so is useless. Financially, all this law does, within cruising, is ship money from Seattle & California ports to Vancouver, Victoria, & Ensenada.

[PaulMedik]

Throw a wrench into the monkey; book it as a B2B2B where you'll return to your embarkation port (Assuming the ship returns to where you first boarded.)

[zqvol]

This is because you have been out of the country(Vancouver) so would have had to do Customs and immigration at your first port of entry back into USA not second.

 

Could you imagine if it was allowed, getting all the b2b cruisers luggage off the ship at first port for customs and getting it all back on again with all the security checks for the next leg.

 

Den

 

 

It has nothing to do with customs, in fact on the cruise that is being discussed the only out of US port is Vancouver and you clear US customs BEFORE you board the ship.

[zqvol]

I was not aware of this continuation aspect of this law. I would've thought, before reading this thread, that you could do those 2 cruises back to back. It stinks that you can't. This law just keeps getting more and more ridiculous.

 

Another poster mentioned it, and I'm wondering too. What constitutes a continuation? From this thread, I can see that the same ship debarking and embarking on the same day is interpreted as a continuation. How long do you have to wait for it to not be? Is just one day enough? A week? What about someone who sailed the Elation's last Mobile cruise, then they jumped on the Elation's first New Orleans cruise one or two days after the first one ended. Is that a continuation?

 

This law was designed to help protect American jobs and money, but it has really hurt American jobs and money within the cruise industry. With how things are now in this country, cruiselines will not build & flag their ships as US, and employ them with all US citizens, except for the one NCL ship (because it does Hawaii cruises). So trying to pressure cruiselines into doing so is useless. Financially, all this law does, within cruising, is ship money from Seattle & California ports to Vancouver, Victoria, & Ensenada.

 

 

This law has nothing to do with building ships in the US, in fact a US flagged ship could do what the OP wanted to do because the law only applies to foreign flagged ships. Ships are not built in the US because of the myriad government regulations that apply to domestically built cruise ships, and they are not flagged in the US because of tax laws among other issues.

[H82seaUgo]

the people continually posting that this law is silly must not realize what this law prevents in the big picture.

[kingoftheicedragons]

I must admit to still be slightly confused by this.

 

Surely, this can't be simply because it's B2B.....I understand that a foreign flagged ship must stop at a foreign port and can't just be US to US.

 

So, if a cruise is Seattle round trip to Alaska with a stop in Canada, and then an open loop cruise from the US to Hawaii with a stop in Canada.......it seems to me that the open loop is the problem and that then the cruise line would not be able to operate that itinerary at all, or am I missing something?

[zqvol]

I must admit to still be slightly confused by this.

 

Surely, this can't be simply because it's B2B.....I understand that a foreign flagged ship must stop at a foreign port and can't just be US to US.

 

So, if a cruise is Seattle round trip to Alaska with a stop in Canada, and then an open loop cruise from the US to Hawaii with a stop in Canada.......it seems to me that the open loop is the problem and that then the cruise line would not be able to operate that itinerary at all, or am I missing something?

 

 

In short the law says that foreign flagged ships cannot carry passengers between two different US ports without stopping in what is called a distant foreign port. Canada does not qualify. What the OP wants to do is start in one US port and end in a different one. The fact that Carnival (and other lines) set this up as two different cruises doesn't matter, the government considers it as a single cruise, so it is a violation. If the second cruise returned to the port where the first one sailed from it would not be a problem.

 

If you want it to get really interesting their have been reports that it is disallowed if it is on two different ships even if they belong to different carriers (how they figure it out is beyond me). There has to be some break between the cruises but no one knows how long that break must last.

[pascalburns]

just write your congressman/senator and see if they can

look into the law and possible make some changes.:)

[k2excursion]

This law has nothing to do with building ships in the US, in fact a US flagged ship could do what the OP wanted to do because the law only applies to foreign flagged ships. Ships are not built in the US because of the myriad government regulations that apply to domestically built cruise ships, and they are not flagged in the US because of tax laws among other issues.

 

Actually, you just said exactly what I was saying. Cruiselines won't do it, because of the reasons you gave, so there's no reason to keep the law exactly like it is. We need to make an exception for foreign flagged cruise ships, so that we're not shipping money to neighboring countries. If the exceptions are made for cases like this (cruising), it will create more jobs & bring more money to the country, not less. The concept that some people have is that this law will make cruiselines build & flag their ships as US, creating more jobs & bringing in more money through that. But you & I & cruise history all agree that it hasn't & won't.

[bythehex]

In short the law says that foreign flagged ships cannot carry passengers between two different US ports without stopping in what is called a distant foreign port. Canada does not qualify. What the OP wants to do is start in one US port and end in a different one. The fact that Carnival (and other lines) set this up as two different cruises doesn't matter, the government considers it as a single cruise, so it is a violation. If the second cruise returned to the port where the first one sailed from it would not be a problem.

 

If you want it to get really interesting their have been reports that it is disallowed if it is on two different ships even if they belong to different carriers (how they figure it out is beyond me). There has to be some break between the cruises but no one knows how long that break must last.

 

Then how do those New England/Canada cruises work? It was my understanding that the ships leave from the US, stop in Canada, and then go back to the US. If they don't count Canada as the foreign port, how do they get around that law? Am I missing something?? :confused:

[yst347]

Then how do those New England/Canada cruises work? It was my understanding that the ships leave from the US, stop in Canada, and then go back to the US. If they don't count Canada as the foreign port, how do they get around that law? Am I missing something?? :confused:

 

The PVSA prevents carrying passengers from one USA port to a different USA port without stopping at a distant foreign port. Round trip cruises are not effected by this rule because passengers are getting off where they got on.

 

Cruise A leaves from New York City, visits the Canadian Maritime Provinces and returns to New York. This is legal because passengers aren't transported to a different USA port.

 

Cruise B leaves from New York City, visits the Canadian Maritime Provinces and returns to Boston. This cruise is illegal because it is transporting passengers from New York to Boston. Only USA flagged vessels are allowed to transport passengers from one USA port to a different USA port without visiting a distant foreign port.

[yst347]

Here's another example of how a fine can be triggered. Carnival offers a Bermuda cruise leaving from New York City. The ship sails to Bermuda and returns to New York City. On the way back the ship stops in Newport Rhode Island for a day. This is Ok as long as the ship doesn't allow passengers to permanently disembark in Newport, all passengers must return to the ship and continue on to New York City.

 

If passengers are late and miss the ship in Newport, Carnival will be fined $300 for each passenger failing to reboard. Carnival will bill the ship account for each passenger for the $300.

 

This can happen in any USA port that serves as a port of call during a cruise itinerary so it includes Key West, Port Canaveral, Newport, Catalina Island and the Alaska ports for cruises leaving from Seattle or another Pacific coast port.

[klfrodo]

Then how do those New England/Canada cruises work? It was my understanding that the ships leave from the US, stop in Canada, and then go back to the US. If they don't count Canada as the foreign port, how do they get around that law? Am I missing something?? :confused:

 

Yes, you are missing a major word.

DISTANT Foreign Port vs. NEAR Foreign Port

 

Canada is a Near foreign port, thus closed loop cruises only.

Jamaica, Grand Cayman, Cozumel,,, Near Foreign Ports,,,, Closed loop cruise only

 

LA, Panama City, Panama Canal, ARUBA (classified as DISTANT Foreign Portt, Miami,,, AKA a repositioning cruise,, legal according to PVSA because of the ship stopping at a DISTANT foreign port.

[maggieworkman]

If you read my posts in this thread .. the problem is I booked thru a discount group cruise deal. Only 3 dates are offered, and looks like the one I booked is the only one that will work for me.

 

Without going thru the rules of how I booked, I seem to have booked the only date that I can do.

 

Its not possible to easily cancel .. and there are not other discounted groups to Alaska being offered thru my group TA at this time. Its not that simple to explain how I booked. I can only choose from the dates/groups offered .. though coincidently one of the 3 dates was the cruise before my Hawaii date, so I thought I could just change to the other group, but Carnival says no.

 

Would have been nice.. but changing to another full priced ship and trying to cancel what I booked would not be worth doing, lets leave it at that.

 

Well I still have Panama on my bucket list .. maybe the next time its offered I will have a open date and do that one .. but not cancelling either Alaska (bucket list) or Hawaii (used to live there for 10 years, so it will be some what of a homecoming).

 

Im planning just doing both and what was meant to be is.

 

Sorry Firefly. I didn't realize that you ALREADY booked. I thought you were just looking to book.

 

Maggie

[bythehex]

The PVSA prevents carrying passengers from one USA port to a different USA port without stopping at a distant foreign port. Round trip cruises are not effected by this rule because passengers are getting off where they got on.

 

Cruise A leaves from New York City, visits the Canadian Maritime Provinces and returns to New York. This is legal because passengers aren't transported to a different USA port.

 

Cruise B leaves from New York City, visits the Canadian Maritime Provinces and returns to Boston. This cruise is illegal because it is transporting passengers from New York to Boston. Only USA flagged vessels are allowed to transport passengers from one USA port to a different USA port without visiting a distant foreign port.

'

Got it now. VERY helpful answer, you explained it perfectly. Thanks!

[sail7seas]

HAL has a seven day cruise, Boston to Montreal, and that, of course, is permitted because it ends in a foreign port thus no transportation from U.S. port to U.S. port.

 

We always do that cruise round trip and stay on for the return to Boston, back-to-back. It is allowed because we are considered boarding in Montreal... a foreign port.

 

[yst347]

HAL has a seven day cruise, Boston to Montreal, and that, of course, is permitted because it ends in a foreign port thus no transportation from U.S. port to U.S. port.

 

We always do that cruise round trip and stay on for the return to Boston, back-to-back. It is allowed because we are considered boarding in Montreal... a foreign port.

 

 

You are allowed to do the back to back because you wind up back where you started.....in Boston. If the ship sailed one way Boston to Montreal then sailed one way Montreal to New York each itinerary is allowable but you could not book back to back because you would be going from Boston to New York which isn't allowed.

[GaNavy]

Im back home and just dont get it. I admit I cant see why both legs stopping in Vancouver isnt enough.

 

yst 347's post says it all - the regulation is what defines a "distant" foreign port. By that definition, Canadian ports aren't "distant" foreign ports. You may intuitively think of Vancouver as a foreign port and as "distant," but as long as the statute or regulation says otherwise, you're out of luck, sorry. And even as an intutive matter, let's face it: Vancouver is not "distant" from the USA, only foreign.

 

I hope you have a good time with whatever plans you can work out.

[zqvol]

HAL has a seven day cruise, Boston to Montreal, and that, of course, is permitted because it ends in a foreign port thus no transportation from U.S. port to U.S. port.

 

We always do that cruise round trip and stay on for the return to Boston, back-to-back. It is allowed because we are considered boarding in Montreal... a foreign port.

 

 

That is not why it is allowed. It is allowed because you round trip out of Boston, not because of a turn around day in Montreal.

[Sparky2]

I was wanting to move my cruise to Alaska to a B2B with the cruise from Vancouver to Hawaii.

 

I dont see why its legal for Carnival to go to Alaska at all if Canada is not considered a distant port .. but it doesnt count if its on a B2B.

 

Im going to call guest solutions and see if I can get a answer that makes sense, as to me all of the miracle cruises dont go to a distant foreign port do they? What am I missing.

 

SS Oceanlover did say he thought Carnival's answer would be no, and so it was .. though to me Vancouver Canada, which both cruises go to is a foreign port, so why is one ok and not the other if combined. .. or why are any of the Alaskan cruises ok then?? I dont get it.

 

Fire - When I first read you were doing B2B Alaska & Hawaii, I thought something must have changed because I remembered a post from a few years ago about someone not being able to do that. What a bummer!

[sail7seas]

You are allowed to do the back to back because you wind up back where you started.....in Boston. If the ship sailed one way Boston to Montreal then sailed one way Montreal to New York each itinerary is allowable but you could not book back to back because you would be going from Boston to New York which isn't allowed.

 

That is not why it is allowed. It is allowed because you round trip out of Boston, not because of a turn around day in Montreal.

 

 

Yes.

[PaulMedik]

the people continually posting that this law is silly must not realize what this law prevents in the big picture.

 

 

The law prevents free enterprise and inhibits tourism along the US coastline. It's an example of government regulations hampering tourism and business and it's cloaked in a veil designed to look like it protects US passenger cargo businesses from outside competition.

 

What other 'big picture' do you see?

[negc]

Im back home and just dont get it. I admit I cant see why both legs stopping in Vancouver isnt enough.

 

You seem to be refusing to understand that Vancouver doesn't qualify as the "distant foreign port" that is required if a cruise(or back to back cruises in your instance) starts in one US port but finishes in a different US port. Until or unless you are willing to recognize this, you will continue not to "get it"