Posted on 02/06/2021 11:40:18 AM PST by Capt. Tom
In a blow to the cruise industry’s efforts to restart operations, the Canadian government on Thursday banned cruise ships from its waters for the rest of the year, citing the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.
The midday announcement, which was made by the country’s Minister of Transport, could effectively end this year’s Alaska cruise season before it even begins and also could stop sailings to New England that include calls in the Canadian Maritimes.
The ban also effectively closes the Canadian Arctic to boat-related tourism until 2022.
The ban will remain for more than a year, until Feb. 28, 2022, and is an extension of an already existing prohibition on cruise ship visits that has been in effect since the coronavirus pandemic began.
The Canadian government said the ban would apply to any cruise vessel carrying 100 or more people.
The ban is likely to force most cruise lines to cancel all 2021 sailings to Alaska, as many cruise lines rely on Canadian ports to make Alaska itineraries viable.
By law, foreign-flagged cruise ships cannot cruise in American waters without stopping at least once per voyage at a foreign port. What this means for Alaska cruising, on a practical level, is that the ships operated by Princess Cruises, Holland America, Royal Caribbean and most other big players in the region cannot cruise there unless their itineraries include at least one stop in Canada. Most big cruise lines flag their ships in foreign countries.
Only a waiver of the law would allow for continued Alaska cruises by the big lines.
U.S.-flagged vessels, such as those operated by small-ship cruise operators UnCruise Adventures, Alaskan Dream Cruises, Lindblad Expeditions and American Cruise Lines, still will be able to operate in Alaska.
Many cruises to Alaska start and end in Seattle, and include a Canada stop along the way. Others begin or end in Vancouver, British Columbia. San Francisco and Los Angeles also are gateways for Alaska cruises that include a stop in Canada.
In addition to cruise ships carrying 100 people or more, the ban also applies to adventure-seeking pleasure craft that operate in the Canadian Arctic. Passenger vessels carrying more than 12 people will be prohibited from entering Arctic coastal waters, including Nunatsiavut, Nunavik and the Labrador Coast.
That’ll mean that “expedition-style” sailings into the Northwest Passage and other Arctic areas around Canada on even very small vessels will not be able to take place in 2021.
“Temporary prohibitions to cruise vessels and pleasure craft are essential to continue to protect the most vulnerable among our communities and avoid overwhelming our health care systems. This is the right and responsible thing to do,” Canadian Minister of Transport Omar Alghabra said in a statement.
One caveat: Alghabra has the authority to rescind the ban should the situation with COVID-19 improve.
The Canadian government on Thursday also said it continued to advise Canadian citizens and permanent residents to avoid travel on cruise ships outside Canada until further notice.
Thursday’s announcement leaves Alaska facing an unprecedented two straight years without almost any cruise tourists. All major lines canceled Alaska sailings in 2020 in the wake of Canada’s initial cruise ship ban and a “no-sail” order from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Among major North American destinations, Alaska is relatively unusual in its reliance on cruise ships to deliver a large percentage of its visitors. In a typical year, Alaska draws about 2 million visitors. Of those, nearly 1.2 million — or almost 60% — are cruisers. That’s a massive chunk of Alaska’s tourist base that could be impacted by Canada’s decision.
Last year’s cruise cancellations had a devastating effect on coastal Alaska tourist towns such as Juneau, Skagway and Ketchikan, where nearly all visitors are cruisers. But even interior destinations such as Denali and Fairbanks saw large segments of their tourist business disappear due to cruise cancellations.
Carnival Corp., the parent company of the two cruise lines with the biggest Alaska operations, Princess and Holland America, said in a statement Thursday afternoon that it was assessing whether there was any way to preserve part of the upcoming Alaska season.
“We are disappointed to learn about Canada’s decision to extend the interim order that prohibits cruise ships from sailing in its waters,” the Carnival Corp. statement said. “This extension, if not amended as pandemic conditions improve, or through action by U.S. authorities, would require our brands to cancel our Alaska (West Coast) and Canada/New England (East Coast) cruise vacation seasons this year.”
A spokesperson for the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA), the cruise industry’s main trade group, told The Points Guy that it and its member cruise lines were considering all options.
“The industry may consider asking for temporary relief from the Passenger Vessel Services Act,” CLIA manager for strategic communications Laziza Lambert said, referring to the 135-year-old U.S. law that forces foreign-flagged cruise ships to make a stop at a Canadian port when sailing to Alaska.
Still, some industry observers late Thursday already were assuming the 2021 season for cruises in Alaska was done.
“This announcement essentially means that 2021 Alaskan cruises and New England/Maritime Provinces cruises will not be happening,” Truist Securities analyst C. Patrick Scholes said in a bulletin sent to investors.
Noting that Alaska cruises have historically accounted for an important portion of cruise line revenue in the summer, Scholes said the ban would increase the likelihood that the big, publicly traded cruise companies such as Carnival Corp. and Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings would have to raise more capital from Wall Street to stay afloat.
“While Alaskan deployment has historically been approx. 5-9% of annual deployment and 11-22% of (third quarter deployment), the impact on revenues is greater than these percentages as Alaskan cruises are premium priced cruises,” Scholes wrote.
The anti cruise people have a few more cards to play.
Even if the cruise ships use USA crews, the cruise ships are foreign built and should not be used for carrying passengers in the USA.
Also CDC 7 day cruise restrictions limits them from visiting a foreign country in cruises leaving from parts of the West Coast and New England. -Tom
Canada has a Deep State, too.
From its *waters*????? From its ports...maybe,but what harm can come from a ship sailing from Seattle to Anchorage without a stop in Canada? Absolutely disgusting!
To read about the economic hardships on some of the Alaskans you can glean it from this similar article below. -Tom
It would just be way to simple and reasonable to grant at least a temporary exception to the stupid Maritime laws of the US. The giverment might actually have to do something useful and constructive for a change. I’m sure if they did the whole system would simply explode.
No harm at all. The only problem there is that the Jones Act has a bunch of very onerous and expensive requirements for all domestic maritime travel between U.S. ports. Any ship making this trip must be U.S.-made, U.S.-flagged, and operated by a U.S. crew.
This is why it's cheaper to transport cargo between Los Angeles and Singapore than between Los Angeles and Honolulu ... even though the ship traveling from Los Angeles to Singapore sails past Hawaii on its voyage.
Tariffs on imports to protect U.S. industries from foreign competition: "That's patriotic! MAGA!"
Restrictions on domestic maritime transportation to keep out foreign competition: "That's stupid!"
Where I live (near Seattle), they usually stop in Victoria BC en route to AK.
So why not pull into port for 2 hours or so, no one gets off the boat, and then takes off again. I guess the pilot who gets on or off would be the only concern?
So why not pull into port for 2 hours or so, no one gets off the boat, and then takes off again. I guess the pilot who gets on or off would be the only concern?
Canada has banned any cruise ships in their ports until 2022. -Tom
Nothing to work with here. No sense wasting time.
Cruising is over forever. 😟
Transmountain looks like it goes to Burnaby. I don't find a Rupert, but I do see a Prince Rupert. There are the connections to the US - Keystone (not to be confused with the democrat cancelled Keystone XL) and the lines to Wisconsin and Montana. There are always the ports at Houston and Louisiana that the Canadians can use.
I know. I lived and worked in Vancouver 2982-85. I can believe they wouldn’t let a token pit stop in Victoria like I suggest. Turdo’s government is more nuts than what I recall from back then
That’s what Keystone was supposed to be fur, to get our oil to Texas, Loisysba and Oklahoma. The tradeoff was our access to world markets in exchange for a secure access to oil fir the US.
A lot of cowards in Canada. Sad. Pathetic.
Yes, Prince Rupert. That’s a basically a massive port city that is closest to China and Russian ports on their east coasts.
It’s quite impressive on Google Earth to see.
Not enough. To be American flagged the ship has to have been manufactured in the US, to protect American shipyards. I don't believe there are any American shipyards making cruise ships, and if there were that would have no impact on existing ships. The solution would be to amend the Passenger Vessel Services Act, which imo would be common sense. Simply eliminating the requirement that a ship embarking from the US visit one foreign port would solve the Alaska problem. Even if just for a couple years. And would require Congressional action. The Big Guy can't do it with an EO. He is in office to enforce American law after all. Not that that matters. I give you the cancelation of construction of the wall, Congressionaly approved and funded. Stopping it a violation of the impoundment act. An impeachable act imo. But so what, who cares about laws.
See post 37. To be American flagged a ship has to have been made in the US. That could easily be changed by Congress.
You're correct. A beneficial swap for both countries, the US allows the pipeline, and Congress amends the Passenger Vessel Services Act. It's all on the US. Needs Congressional action though, so dems will add some funds for refugees.
You had me going there at first. I thought I was going to have to dig out my canned lecture on America no longer being under the rule of law. But you started showing awareness mid-stream.
By the way - I found a ship for you - made at Ingalls. Pride of America. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_of_America
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.