Some comments about Alaska cruises

 

One of the things I hate about cruising these days is the scheduling of time in port.  Specifically, I would have considered taking an Alaska cruise this year, but substandard schedules sealed my decision not to take advantage of cruise line sales to this destination.

In the example above, I see little reason for the ship to make only a 6-hour stop in Ketchikan, and a 3-hour stop in Victoria.  Both places deserve more time to explore.  And in the case of Victoria, there is little reason to get off the ship with only 3 hours in port.  But why does this happen?  Although I can't say much about the Ketchikan port stop, I can say something about the Victoria stop.

The United States has two laws that force cruise lines to make a stop in Canada when sailing an Alaska cruise:

1. The Jones Act
2. The Passenger Vessel Services Act

Together, these laws prohibit foreign flagged cruise ships from transporting passengers between United States Ports.  If the foreign flagged ship makes at least one stop in a foreign port before returning to a United States port, then many of the provisions of these laws do not apply.  Yet, things can be a little tricky when scheduling cruises.  For example, one cruiser attempted to book a "back to back" cruise on a Royal Caribbean ship as follows:

1. Cruise from Hawaii to Vancouver, BC.
2. Cruise from Vancouver, BC to Whittier, AK.

If the cruiser had removed his/her bags from the first ship (from Hawaii) and booked passage on a second ship going to Alaska, there would have been no violation of United States laws, and there would have been no problems.  However, the cruiser booked a ""back to back" on the same ship, and could have caused the cruise line to break the law.  Instead of paying the US Government $850/pp in fines, the cruise line cancelled the second leg of this trip.

Yet, there are ways that foreign flagged ships can transport passengers between United States ports.  Panama Canal cruises are perfect examples of this:

In the case of the above itinerary, I would guess that although the cruise is sold as one booking, to the US Government, it is a series of two (or more) itineraries.  It confuses me as to why the Hawaii to Vancouver to Alaska connections were prohibited and that the Panama Canal itinerary is allowed. 

- - - - - -

As I write this, the British Columbia Longshoreman's Union has decided to strike.  If they decided to take action against cruise ships flying "flags of convenience", it would have scuttled the remainder of the 2023 cruise season.  Luckily, this dis not happen.  The longshoremen realize that if they scuttle the remainder of the 2023 cruise season, the United States may enact permanent exceptions to the Jones Act and the Passenger Vessel Services Act to allow foreign flagged ships to make their Alaska runs. If this were to happen, there would no longer be a need to stop in either Vancouver or Victoria.  This would be a shame, as I think that both cities are well worth a full-day visit, and not the ridiculous 3-hour stop in Victoria as made in the first itinerary.