Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

In what way does simply having had the opportunity to get the vaccine accomplish anything?  A higher risk person who had the opportunity (but did not get the vaccine), along with every other person who did not get the vaccine is capable of becoming infected and spreading the virus.

 

 

right.  Which is unfortunate.   And that’s on them for not getting vaccinated. 

 

Continuing to make policy based on what “could happen” is exactly what’s going to keep us in this state for a long, long time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, RiotAct said:

right.  Which is unfortunate.   And that’s on them for not getting vaccinated. 

 

Continuing to make policy based on what “could happen” is exactly what’s going to keep us in this state for a long, long time.

Because there are no absolute certainties, making policy based upon what "could happen" is the best we can do.  Letting people who refuse immunization interact with others means quite likely that continued contagion "could happen".

 

So, as long as you are not going to require people to get vaccine, the responsible thing to do is to avoid the negative results of their refusing to get vaccine. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Tippyton said:

Don't forget the ?? percent (20-30?) that have had Covid already....

My brother's 86 year old mother-in-law had a month long case of covid (luckily didn't need hospitalization) before Christmas and was told to get the vaccine by her doctor.  The CDC recommends it too in their Covid FAQs (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html)

 

Yes, you should be vaccinated regardless of whether you already had COVID-19. That’s because experts do not yet know how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19. Even if you have already recovered from COVID-19, it is possible—although rare—that you could be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19 again. Learn more about why getting vaccinated is a safer way to build protection than getting infected.

 

If you were treated for COVID-19 with monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma, you should wait 90 days before getting a COVID-19 vaccine. Talk to your doctor if you are unsure what treatments you received or if you have more questions about getting a COVID-19 vaccine.

 

Experts are still learning more about how long vaccines protect against COVID-19 in real-world conditions. CDC will keep the public informed as new evidence becomes available.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing should be clear:  there will still be Covid cases on cruiseships no matter what precautions are taken.  Australia requires a mandatory quarantine for 14 days in a secure government facility upon arrival and they still have cases slipping through the cracks.  No matter the precautions taken, there will be cases.

 

Now this leaves the cruiselines in a precarious position.  Do they try to advertise and cater to those who want #ZeroCovid?  Or would they be wiser to admit that cruising carries an inherently elevated risk of infectious disease and cater to a crowd that is more risk tolerant?  They've also got a third crowd that might need to be pleased in either case (whoever decides where a ship may port).  

 

Here's the problem with catering to the #ZeroCovid crowd:  Many might chicken out at the last minute.  They will hear people on TV talking about the risks of cruising, even with precautions, and in the end will simply not board the ship.  Even if they get a few takers on the first sailings, just wait until the first positive shows up on a cruise (it WILL happen), they'll be cancelling faster the Visa and Mastercard can process refunds.

 

Alternatively, the cruiselines could cater to the risk tolerant crowd and simply do a rapid test on departure, but otherwise run things like 2019.  When the cases happen(they will), the risk tolerant folks won't be cancelling, they'll just be happy to have a normal vacation.  (Like all the folks that keep showing up on the beach in Mexico...)

The problem is that pesky third group of tyrants that are busily trying to please the #ZeroCovid crowd while simultaneously lining their pockets with money that comes from companies that ultimately need business to be open to make the money to line their pockets.  They muck with either case.  A wise cruiseline would avoid this by utilizing land border crossings in TX and CA to avoid the tyrants.  Ensenada already has a port and I'm sure they could figure out how to tender folks from Mexico to a ship off the coast of South Padre.  Alternatively, they could shuttle folks by air to Freeport from Florida (and only needing to deal with the air border crossing restrictions of a negative test). 

 

It's clear Mexico is more than willing to take American tourism dollars without stressing about Covid.  I suspect Bahamas is in a similar situation (or will be soon).


Will they do it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, capriccio said:

My brother's 86 year old mother-in-law had a month long case of covid (luckily didn't need hospitalization) before Christmas and was told to get the vaccine by her doctor.  The CDC recommends it too in their Covid FAQs (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html)

 

Yes, you should be vaccinated regardless of whether you already had COVID-19. That’s because experts do not yet know how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19. Even if you have already recovered from COVID-19, it is possible—although rare—that you could be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19 again. Learn more about why getting vaccinated is a safer way to build protection than getting infected.

 

If you were treated for COVID-19 with monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma, you should wait 90 days before getting a COVID-19 vaccine. Talk to your doctor if you are unsure what treatments you received or if you have more questions about getting a COVID-19 vaccine.

 

Experts are still learning more about how long vaccines protect against COVID-19 in real-world conditions. CDC will keep the public informed as new evidence becomes available.

 

 

 

I get it - but CDC has been grasping this whole time.  They don't know and are scared of a wrong decision.  However there is just as much science, if not more,  that says my immunity is robust and long lasting.  Furthermore, those that have had it get a more pronounced physical reaction, esp. after the second dose.  Overlay that with the fact that those healthy people have had a much milder case if they get it again (mine was mild), it's a big nope for me.       

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BoozinCroozin said:

What is their plan for those that cannot be vaccinated and are completely healthy to travel? I am talking about everyone under the age of 16. There is no vaccine for them and the earliest will be is sometime in 2022 at the earliest. Should families with children be banned from cruising? The answer is no. They will face massive backlash and most likely a Class Action lawsuit for age discrimination. Then you have the others that have religious reasons not to be vaccinated.

 

I am 100% in agreement that anyone that is eligible to receive the vaccine be vaccinated. By the end of June there should be enough to vaccinate 250M people in the US. Take out the under 16 age group and you have maybe 90% of the US vaccinated.

Why shouldn’t they be banned if not vaccinated? If it is required then that is their rule. Pregnant women after a certain time in their pregnancy aren’t allowed to cruise either. A class action lawsuit is ridiculous. This will eventually go away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

A wise cruiseline would avoid this by utilizing land border crossings in TX and CA to avoid the tyrants.

I wonder what % of cruisers sail out of US ports? For us, really none.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

A wise cruiseline would avoid this by utilizing land border crossings in TX and CA to avoid the tyrants.  Ensenada already has a port and I'm sure they could figure out how to tender folks from Mexico to a ship off the coast of South Padre.

 

Ensenada has been tried before and it wasn't too successful. The real problem is getting people over the land border in an efficient manner.  Pre-COVID border wait times could be multiple hours when crossing at the worst times for those without SENTRI/Global Entry.   Commercial buses have a somewhat better access in terms of wait times than the general lines, but everyone still needs to file off the bus and go through immigration and then get back on for a trip to somewhere like the San Diego airport.  All in I would bet it would be a minimum 3-4 hours to get across the border from Ensenada.  Of course you could fly out of Tijuana, but then you will need to fly South to somewhere like Guadalajara or Mexico City before catching a flight north.  

 

I can't find the reference, but their was brief talk of building a harbor and dedicated cruise crossing where the border goes out into the Pacific.  It would have been similar to the dedicated crossing between the US and the Tijuana airport.  It would have been very expensive and speculative so I am sure the idea was quickly shelved and largely forgotten.

 

44 minutes ago, clo said:

I wonder what % of cruisers sail out of US ports? For us, really none.

 

You are definitely in the minority as more than 50% of cruise passengers world wide originate in US ports if you want to believe CLIA reports (https://cruising.org/-/media/research-updates/research/2019-year-end/updated/2019-global-market-report.ashx).   The Port of Miami alone boarded 6.8 million passengers in 2019 (https://www.miamidade.gov/portmiami/cruise.asp) which is about the same as all of Europe when looked at in total!

 

image.png.c3330a711d1c6d02e168fd5dbffb59f2.png

 

Edited by SelectSys
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SelectSys said:

All in I would bet it would be a minimum 3-4 hours to get across the border from Ensenada.  Of course you could fly out of Tijuana, but then you will need to fly South to somewhere like Guadalajara or Mexico City before catching a flight north.  

Keep in mind it takes a non-trivial amount of time for a ship to dock and clear customs in the US, which I suspect is much faster (particularly for a price) in Mexico.  Any time lost at the US land border crossing could be made up elsewhere.

If the cruiselines want to get going again, its time to stop waiting for a US bureaucracy with no interest in helping them and start to consider things that were previously unthinkable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

non-trivial amount of time for a ship to dock and clear customs in the US, which I suspect is much faster (particularly for a price) in Mexico

 

I have no idea about relative times clearing ships.  I do know the road from Ensenada and the border very well and it's going to be a turn off for many passengers.

 

I think a much better idea for Mexico would be to create a port in Cancun.  Cancun is the 2nd largest airport in Mexico with good connections to US, Canada and Europe.  They have all the hotels and infrastructure to absorb passengers.  All they need to do is to build a cruise port/terminal.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SelectSys said:

I think a much better idea for Mexico would be to create a port in Cancun.  Cancun is the 2nd largest airport in Mexico with good connections to US, Canada and Europe.  They have all the hotels and infrastructure to absorb passengers.  All they need to do is to build a cruise port/terminal.

Is it feasible to ferry over from the cruise port in Cozumel?  

Hopefully the cruise folks are thinking outside the box at this point.  I know Disney would pick up and leave California if it were feasible to move a theme park.  Cruiseships are much more mobile however...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jfunk138 said:

Is it feasible to ferry over from the cruise port in Cozumel?  
.

 

Yes.  Ferries run from at least Cancun and Playa del Carmen to Cozumel.  The Cozumel ferry terminal is close to the cruise terminals.  The biggest downside are that the cruise terminals in Cozumel  are mostly just piers and don't really have much in the way of infrastructure for processing passengers and luggage, but the could be reconfigured.  

 

The trip from Playa del Carmen would be the best as the bus ride from the airport is about an hour and the ferry would be less than an hour to cross. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SelectSys said:

 

Yes.  Ferries run from at least Cancun and Playa del Carmen to Cozumel.  The Cozumel ferry terminal is close to the cruise terminals.  The biggest downside are that the cruise terminals in Cozumel  are mostly just piers and don't really have much in the way of infrastructure for processing passengers and luggage, but the could be reconfigured.  

 

The trip from Playa del Carmen would be the best as the bus ride from the airport is about an hour and the ferry would be less than an hour to cross. 

Yeah, that sounds plausible.  Though I just remembered the potentially largest benefit of Ensenada is a viable land border crossing.  Land border crossings eliminate the test and quarantine requirements that are imposed on air crossings.  I think many folks would find that reducing the risk of being trapped outside the US for 14 days would tip the scales in Ensenada's favor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

Yeah, that sounds plausible.  Though I just remembered the potentially largest benefit of Ensenada is a viable land border crossing.  Land border crossings eliminate the test and quarantine requirements that are imposed on air crossings.  I think many folks would find that reducing the risk of being trapped outside the US for 14 days would tip the scales in Ensenada's favor.

 

Well up until now, and currently, the border is closed between the US and Mexico for land crossings.  So, unless that changes I don't see this being a feasible alternative. You can fly in but you can't drive in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, clo said:

I wonder what % of cruisers sail out of US ports? For us, really none.

I think it must be a significant percentage (likely close to 50%) of those on mass market ships.  And a lot of them do so without passports- making the concept of flying to a nearby foreign embarkation problematic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

Well up until now, and currently, the border is closed between the US and Mexico for land crossings.  So, unless that changes I don't see this being a feasible alternative. You can fly in but you can't drive in.

At least for law-abiding US Citizens....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waiting for cruise passengers to be vaccinated isn't the only issue, you also need the locals at destinations to have high vaccination rates. If there is someone who is infectious on the ship it could shut down destinations if they start a local outbreak. Governments of cruise ship destinations would be foolish to rely on cruise lines getting it right, they need to vaccinate their own population if they really want to be safe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jfunk138 said:

Though I just remembered the potentially largest benefit of Ensenada is a viable land border crossing.

It's certainly possible to cross the land border but it's a real "pain in the ass" a lot of the time if you don't have SENTRI/Global Entry.  Most people don't have SENTRI/Global Entry and I can't imagine how painful it would be to cross on a regular basis.

 

9 hours ago, sanger727 said:

Well up until now, and currently, the border is closed between the US and Mexico for land crossings.  So, unless that changes I don't see this being a feasible alternative. You can fly in but you can't drive in.

Sorry, the land border has never closed where I am at.  Turn on the Spanish language radio and you'll hear border wait times called out all day long.  

 

3 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

I think it must be a significant percentage (likely close to 50%) of those on mass market ships

Unless you have blocked me, look at what I posted above from CLIA and you'll see it is really higher than 50%.

 

3 hours ago, Tippyton said:

At least for law-abiding US Citizens....

Not true.  US citizens and permanent residents have been able to cross the whole time as have Mexicans with valid reasons for travel.  What has dried up are the casual legal crossings by local Mexicans with visas who cross to buy things in the US.   I know people that live in McAllen, TX and they say the same thing about crossing into Reynosa.   

 

You are true in that the change of administration policy has caused a restart of illegal crossing and sanctuary seekers.  Look for this wave to build as we move into the Spring.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/feb/14/overwhelmed-border-patrol-fears-mass-migration-und/

https://www.kusi.com/us-unwinds-trump-policy-making-asylum-seekers-wait-in-mexico/

 

3 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

Governments of cruise ship destinations would be foolish to rely on cruise lines getting it right, they need to vaccinate their own population if they really want to be safe. 

I agree that the decisions of governments to open is totally independent of what cruise lines say or do.  At the end of the day it will come down to a tradeoff between economics and public health.

 

Barbados seems interested in hosting cruises as does Mexico.  I think the Bahamas wants to get in the game as well.   

 

 

Edited by SelectSys
Link to post
Share on other sites

The waters bordering the Cancun shoreline are fairly shallow and are noted for its reefs.  It might not be possible to build a pier that could accommodate today's large cruise ships in such shallow water, and tendering may be the only option.

 

We all know how many cruisers are averse to tendering, or using water shuttles. Many cruisers who presently dock at Cozumel are reluctant to use the 1/2 hour ferry  to PDC.

 

If it were feasible to safely construct the docking infrastructure somewhere along the Cancun mainland corridor, Mexico would probably have done it already.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SelectSys said:

It's certainly possible to cross the land border but it's a real "pain in the ass" a lot of the time if you don't have SENTRI/Global Entry.  Most people don't have SENTRI/Global Entry and I can't imagine how painful it would be to cross on a regular basis.

 

Sorry, the land border has never closed where I am at.  Turn on the Spanish language radio and you'll hear border wait times called out all day long.  

 

Unless you have blocked me, look at what I posted above from CLIA and you'll see it is really higher than 50%.

 

Not true.  US citizens and permanent residents have been able to cross the whole time as have Mexicans with valid reasons for travel.  What has dried up are the casual legal crossings by local Mexicans with visas who cross to buy things in the US.   I know people that live in McAllen, TX and they say the same thing about crossing into Reynosa.   

 

 

 


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-borders/u-s-extends-travel-restrictions-at-land-borders-with-canada-mexico-through-march-21-idUSKBN2AJ22P

 

the border has been and continues to be closed to non essential travel. Whether or not people cross often is beside the point. A cruise ship can’t use that as a means to get people to the ship since that is clearly non essential.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sanger727 said:


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-borders/u-s-extends-travel-restrictions-at-land-borders-with-canada-mexico-through-march-21-idUSKBN2AJ22P

 

the border has been and continues to be closed to non essential travel. Whether or not people cross often is beside the point. A cruise ship can’t use that as a means to get people to the ship since that is clearly non essential.

 

100% agree on the cruise ship angle.  It would be hard to organize something on an industrial or commercial scale and get formal governmental blessing.  Individual actions are totally different.  Mexico is simply not enforcing the non essential rule or has a different definition of what constitutes non-essential travel. 

 

BTW - I have not crossed since Feb 2020.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SelectSys said:

I agree that the decisions of governments to open is totally independent of what cruise lines say or do.  At the end of the day it will come down to a tradeoff between economics and public health.

 

No trade off. Sick people can't work, governments have to think about their whole economy not just the tourist industry. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, SelectSys said:

 

100% agree on the cruise ship angle.  It would be hard to organize something on an industrial or commercial scale and get formal governmental blessing.  Individual actions are totally different.  Mexico is simply not enforcing the non essential rule or has a different definition of what constitutes non-essential travel. 

 

BTW - I have not crossed since Feb 2020.

I think the key is Mexico's definition of "essential".  They consider tourism "essential" to their economy, so anyone with money to spend is admitted at the land border.

 

On return, US citizens do not require a reason to return to their country of citizenship and are admitted without any covid test.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

On return, US citizens do not require a reason to return to their country of citizenship and are admitted without any covid test.

That is no longer true. 

 

Airline passengers do require a Covid test.  From the State Department's website (https://mx.usembassy.gov/u-s-citizen-services/covid-19-information/) issued by the US Embassy Mexico City:

 

Last updated:  [02/9/21]

(Original date: May 2, 2020)

Effective January 26, all airline passengers to the United States ages two years and older must provide a negative COVID-19 viral test taken within three calendar days of travel. Alternatively, travelers to the U.S. may provide documentation from a licensed health care provider of having recovered from COVID-19 in the 90 days preceding travel.

At this point in time, those returning via land or sea do not have the same requirement.

This requirement does not apply to travelers entering the United States by land or sea or to children under two years of age.  It applies to U.S. citizens, as well as foreign nationals, regardless of vaccination status.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • Register Now for Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • Q&A with the Quark Expeditions Team: New Ship Ultramarine
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...