stipmom Posted February 16, 2016 #1 Share Posted February 16, 2016 was it okay because it never docked in an international port? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjnj40 Posted February 16, 2016 #2 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Please remove this port. Why people like you are like a marine police. Give it a rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam.Seattle Posted February 16, 2016 #3 Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) I think it is an intersting question. The answer will prove no value, but still interesting. Perhaps the better question is... Why do we still follow the Jones Act? Edited February 16, 2016 by Sam.Seattle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goofyisme Posted February 16, 2016 #4 Share Posted February 16, 2016 There was no violation of the Jones act since this was a passenger vessel and not a cargo vessel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MommaBear55 Posted February 16, 2016 #5 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Easy answer: It's not the Jones Act, it's the PSVA. No, it did not violate the rules about not stopping at a distant foreign port, as it was a closed loop cruise to nowhere. Harder question: If the rule disallowing cruises to nowhere going into effect in March had been in effect, what kind of problem would this particular cruise to nowhere have caused? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare LMaxwell Posted February 16, 2016 #6 Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) Harder question: If the rule disallowing cruises to nowhere going into effect in March had been in effect, what kind of problem would this particular cruise to nowhere have caused? Monetary fines; though likely to be avoided given the nature of the return to port. I doubt the gov't wants to set a precedence of imposing a fine when the return to port is clearly in the name of safety of US citizens and to check / repair potential damages to a vessel. That's not the intent of the fine. Edited February 16, 2016 by LMaxwell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susie51 Posted February 16, 2016 #7 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Safety should be the priority whether or not the ship has been to a port. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonnaK Posted February 16, 2016 #8 Share Posted February 16, 2016 This is a very interesting question. Thanks for asking it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Family @ Sea Posted February 16, 2016 #9 Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) This provision of the Jones Act makes as much sense as the Volstead Act! Edited February 16, 2016 by Erwin Family @ Sea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouhunter Posted February 16, 2016 #10 Share Posted February 16, 2016 It's never going to end........................:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare A&L_Ont Posted February 16, 2016 #11 Share Posted February 16, 2016 It's never going to end........................:rolleyes: Correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxgoodrich Posted February 16, 2016 #12 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Okay...the Jones Act (Merchant Marine Act of 1920) has nothing to do with this situation as it applies to maritime commerce and commercial vessels only. The PVSA (Passenger Vessel Services Act of 1886) is the law you mean. Since Anthem of the Seas (a foreign flagged vessel) did not transport American citizens from one US port to another US port, the PVSA does not apply either. The cruise started and ended at the same US port with no stops in between. You can find the PVSA on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_Vessel_Services_Act_of_1886 and the relevant part is: "The PVSA does not prevent a ship from taking on passengers at a U.S. port and then returning them to another U.S. city by ground or air, or vice versa, as long as the cruise ship returns to its departing point without stopping (a "cruise to nowhere"), or stops in at least one distant foreign port." The 2/6/2016 cruise on Anthem was essentially a 'cruise to nowhere.' This law had nothing to do with safety. It was about protecting American shipping interests, specifically sea transportation between US ports, from foreign competition. Judy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarea Posted February 16, 2016 #13 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Cruise to nowhere has nothing to do with Jones or PVSA. It was prevented by some customs regulation: http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=6402 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merion_Mom Posted February 16, 2016 #14 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Cruise to nowhere has nothing to do with Jones or PVSA. It was prevented by some customs regulation: http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=6402 Or, simply stated: crew work rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts