The BVI's, a word of caution

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by jmschmidt

Kd9truck, it doesn't matter what their reasoning is, they have screwed the pooch, killed the golden goose, and dicked themselves with the dangling dong of destiny. I donated money to BVI workers after Irma but no more. They made their beds, now let them sleep in them.

Wow

Funnily I couldn’t enter the US either this year due to Covid

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Favoured Tack

Whatever happened to “The Right of Innocent Passage”?

The UNCLOS defines innocent passage as

“
1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Such passage shall take place in conformity with this Convention and with other rules of international law.”

It could be argued that Covid is treat to the good order of a state hence innocent passage could be suspended

Mind is of only the USA actuality ratified UNCLOS US sailers night then be able to avail of it.

[Pegu Club]

Originally Posted by Dooglas

So the government of the BVI should give up on trying to protect their own citizens, and let passing cruisers do whatever they want during this pandemic? Never mind that most every country on Earth has implemented many restrictions to protect their citizens, despite substantial economic consequences. The BVI should ashamed of doing anything that limits the choices of independent-minded cruisers? Isn't that a little self-centered?

This ^^^

First world whiners, What these geniuses don’t comprehend is that they have no rights outside of their own country, it is truly amazing how willfully ignorant some people are.

Fair winds,

[endlesspursuit]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Answer to the question. IMHO, it is a lot of self-centeredness and presumptuous sense of privilege.

Let us not forget that more borders are closed than open, just try to enter or leave the USA or Canada for example.

There is a pandemic, it is not a big ask to act responsibly and not selfishly.

My original point was not that anyone should be allowed to purposefully cross a closed border. If someone sails into the harbor and drops anchor that is purposeful action. VS someone crossing a line at sea accidently and getting a ridiculous fine. Some common sense has to take place or all is lost in civilization. Maybe its too late.

[Lake-Effect]

Stay away from the BVIs! They eat children! You'll get 20 years for wearing a sleeveless T-Shirt in public!!!

(We're thinking about going back in maybe 2022, and I'm trying to drive the charter rates down. We just loved it there. Thank you)

Stay Awaaaay!

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by endlesspursuit

My original point was not that anyone should be allowed to purposefully cross a closed border. If someone sails into the harbor and drops anchor that is purposeful action. VS someone crossing a line at sea accidently and getting a ridiculous fine. Some common sense has to take place or all is lost in civilization. Maybe its too late.

I suspect if you strayed slightly into national waters with the clear intention of simply transiting the BVI authorities would undoubtably be lenient and accept a genuine mistake

After all it’s not like they have much on water enforcement anyway

You’re arguing the theoretical situation rather then the practical reality

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by contrail

It is also true that cruisers in the Caribbean take a fairly casual view of many regulations, and that the Right of Passage does not cover every situation, as noted above. It probably does no good to get on one's high horse and claim that it does.

United Kingdom ratified UNCLOS. BVI is a British Territory so UNCLOS applies.

UNCLOS is pretty clear on Right of Innocent Passage.

Article 8 Internal Waters Paragraph 2.Where the establishment of a straight baseline in accordance with the method set forth in article 7 has the effect of enclosing as internal waters areas which had not previously been considered as such, a right of innocent passage as provided in this Convention shall exist in those waters.

Section 3 INNOCENT PASSAGE IN THE TERRITORIAL SEA Article 19 Meaning of innocent passage clearly defines 12 situations which are considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State.

Article 21 Laws and regulations of the coastal State relating to innocent passage outlines 8 situation in which a state can create laws that may restrict innocent passage.

Article 24 Duties of the coastal State
1. The coastal State shall not hamper the innocent passage of foreign ships through the territorial sea except in accordance with this Convention. In particular, in the application of this Convention or of any laws or regulations adopted in conformity with this Convention, the coastal State shall not:
(a) impose requirements on foreign ships which have the practical effect of denying or impairing the right of innocent passage;

A $20,000 fine will very likely be challenged in admiralty court as it should. While I respect each nation to establish regulations to restrict entry into the country, innocent passage was intended to allow travel through sea (and air space) without officially "entering" a nation sate.

Also, if the coastal state ratified UNCLOS it must abide by the rules regardless of nationality of the vessel or those aboard.

Personally, I look forward to tracking this as it makes its way through the courts and I hope the BVI loses the case and is heavily penalized for it's draconian over-reach and abuse of authority. If this stands, in the future any country can arbitrarily make rules which could be used to fine and impound vessels that stray into their waters. (Yes....I truly believe in the slippery slope of gov't over-reach.)

I am not a lawyer, but I think it would be difficult for a nation to argue that a ship that is exercising a right of innocent passage would pose a significant danger to the citizens of that nation even during a pandemic if the vessel does not make landfall.

But, these are strange times and many national and local gov'ts have indicated they clearly do not care about the rule of law or individual (or constitutional) rights.

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by endlesspursuit

My original point was not that anyone should be allowed to purposefully cross a closed border. If someone sails into the harbor and drops anchor that is purposeful action. VS someone crossing a line at sea accidently and getting a ridiculous fine. Some common sense has to take place or all is lost in civilization. Maybe its too late.

I am voting its too late. Bummer.

Back around July, kn a different thread, I posted the concerns that we may never get back to the Caribbean. That seemed overly pessimistic then. Not so much now.

[Pegu Club]

It is truly funny ( in a sad way ) to watch folk cite documents, and still not understand reality, every nation/ country reserves the authority to close their boarders to any degree they see fit, regardless of any treaties signed. It is just amazing how some folk can not wrap their minds around this obvious fact. It is happening world wide, and no one is even remotely surprised by this, except first worlders who think they have rights outside of the country they are citizens of, and even then, those rights can be restricted, yes I’m talking to you, “‘I got rights” folk. Just imagine these folk having to live during WWII with all the restrictions that lasted for over a decade in some cases... they couldn’t do it, even if it meant losing WWII... they care only for themselves, regardless of harm done to others by their actions.

Fair winds,

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by Discovery 15797

United Kingdom ratified UNCLOS. BVI is a British Territory so UNCLOS applies.

UNCLOS is pretty clear on Right of Innocent Passage.



Section 3 INNOCENT PASSAGE IN THE TERRITORIAL SEA Article 19 Meaning of innocent passage clearly defines 12 situations which are considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State.

Article 21 Laws and regulations of the coastal State relating to innocent passage outlines 8 situation in which a state can create laws that may restrict innocent passage.


But, these are strange times and many national and local gov'ts have indicated they clearly do not care about the rule of law or individual (or constitutional) rights.

FYI:

BVI is not the only country restricting passage. The USA has no sail orders for passenger ships of occupancy greater than 250.

A New Zealand sailor who attempted the Northwest Passage despite COVID-19 restrictions faces fines
Peter Smith had no “right of innocent passage,” in those waters, Transport Canada says.

A sailor from New Zealand who did not receive permission from Transport Canada to transit the Northwest Passage could face fines of up to $5,000 per day.

Peter Smith’s 52-foot aluminum sailboat, the Kiwi Roa, was spotted on Aug. 20 near Cambridge Bay entering the Northwest Passage from the east.

Transport Canada now says it will take “appropriate enforcement action if a contravention of the Interim Order Restrictive Pleasure Craft Navigation Due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is found to have occurred.”

But Smith has maintained he has the right to travel through the Northwest Passage because it’s an international waterway and his vessel has a “right of innocent passage” for its transit.

The “right of innocent passage,” as defined by the United Nations, is a vessel’s right to enter and pass through another’s territory as long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the other state.

But foreign vessels like Smith’s have no right to “innocent passage” within Canada’s Arctic archipelago, said Michael Byers, a legal scholar who holds the Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia and is the author of “Who owns the Arctic?”

“The Government of Canada’s long-standing position is that these are ‘internal waters’ and not ‘territorial waters,’” Byers said.

But confusion appeared to exist about this in a background document from Transport Canada about measures for pleasure craft in northern communities issued on May 14.

This said its ban on pleasure craft in Arctic waters would exempt “foreign pleasure craft exercising their right of innocent passage through Canada’s Arctic territorial waters; however, these vessels will be required to notify the Minister of Transport 60 days in advance of arriving in Arctic waters and may be subject to conditions.”

“It is astonishing that Transport Canada would make such a basic mistake, especially one that would result in the introduction of COVID-19 into northern communities,” Byers said of Transport Canada’s May statement about the right of innocent passage through Canadian Arctic waters.

However, the final Transport Canada order of May 30 made no mention of an exemption for foreign pleasure craft exercising their right of innocent passage and expanded the definition of Arctic waters to Canadian waters located north of the 60th parallel and the “territorial sea of Canada” in the vicinity of Nunatsiavut, Nunavik and the Labrador coast.

The right of innocent passage does not apply to the Northwest Passage because Canada considers it to be internal waters, not territorial waters, an Aug. 27 email from Simon Rivet, acting manager of media relations, monitoring and social media for Transport Canada, confirmed.

“In actual fact, the right of innocent passage under Articles 17 to 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) only applies to the territorial seas (0 to 12 nautical miles from the coast),” Rivest said.

“The waters of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, including the Northwest Passage, are internal waters of Canada, giving Canada an unfettered right to regulate those waters as it would its land territory. Therefore the right of innocent passage does not apply in the internal waters of the Canadian Arctic.”

But Smith has disputed this.

“Canada has no legal right to apply Canadian law to a foreigner in [an] international waterway,” Smith wrote to CBC News. “Half the world does not recognize Canada’s claims and this needs to be sorted out.”

But Byers said New Zealand is a close ally of Canada and a world leader in the fight against COVID-19, and, as such, would be unlikely to defend Smith.

“I would be very surprised if it protested against an enforcement action. Indeed, I would be very surprised if the Canadian and New Zealand foreign ministries have not discussed this already and come to a quiet agreement — to the effect that New Zealand will remain silent,” he told Nunatsiaq News, when asked for his reaction to what Smith said.

The Kiwi Roa is flagged in New Zealand, so if that country were to express its agreement with the enforcement of Canadian COVID-19 regulations against Smith and his ship, or if it were to simply stay silent, “no dispute in international law could arise,” Byers said.

“Nothing Mr. Smith says or does can change that,” he said.

Transport Canada said on Sept. 1 that it first received a request from Smith to enter Canadian Arctic waters in May, but that his request was refused.

“The department officially denied the request under the Interim Order to reduce safety risks and mitigate the spread of COVID-19 within Canada’s Arctic communities on July 29, 2020,” Transport Canada said in an emailed statement.

Transport Canada said it communicated with Smith throughout June and July to gather more details on his plans before denying the voyage under the Interim Order Restricting Pleasure Craft Navigation Due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

“Throughout this time, Transport Canada indicated to the vessel owner that the intended voyage should not be considered approved,” Transport Canada said.

Transport Canada said was it was “made aware” on Aug. 20 that the Kiwi Roa was spotted near Cambridge Bay, “in alleged contravention of the Interim Order Restricting Pleasure Craft Navigation Due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).”

Transport Canada said it then directed Smith to depart from Canadian waters, to not make landfall and to provide regular updates on the sailboat’s position.

“The vessel confirmed they received this direction on August 21, 2020,” Transport Canada said.

Smith exited waters of the Northwest Passage at Lancaster Sound last week, according to online information about Baffinland Iron Mines Corp. shipping, shared on Facebook by the mining company with the community of Pond Inlet.

“The vessel has been providing regular reports on its location to the Government of Canada through daily contact with Canadian Coast Guard’s Northern Canada Vessel Traffic Services Zone (NORDREG) since August 21, 2020,” Transport Canada said.

[goboatingnow]

The right of innocent passage can be suspended if the safety of nation is threatened , so that argument can be advanced that Covid is such a threat

(Article 19-1 is the overriding decider "Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State")
Article 19-2 merely lists a set of actions regarded as not innocent passage , its not definitive

The Government of the BVI have advanced the reason for excessive covid cases on the arrival of illegal travellers by sea and people smuggling , hence they are clearly making the case under article 19-1

Note the BVI are in good company , Canada banned foreign vessels from the Northwest passage , and Australia denied cruise ships to its territorial waters , Grrece has banned all pleasure vessel movements in its territorial waters at present

Note that the BVI has not banned vessels from all its waters , it has set up an exclusion zone monitored by sea platforms

Disputes over UNCLOS are not resolved in any Admiralty court , The dispute resolution is laid out

" If parties to a dispute cannot resolve their dispute through bilateral means, the
Convention gives them a choice among four procedures,
entailing binding decision, as follows: submission of the
dispute to the International Tribunal for the Law of the
Sea, adjudication by the International Court of Justice,
submission to binding international arbitration procedures or submission to special arbitration tribunals
with expertise in specific types of disputes. All of these
procedures involve binding third-party settlement, in
which an agent other than the parties directly involved
renders a decision that the parties are committed in
advance to respect."

Just like Eu citizens are supposed to enjoy free movement, many so called " conventions" have been thrown out during Covid

as for a yachtie taking a case to the ICJ , I hope they have very deep pockets

[Montanan]

In April, The Bahamas also imposed restrictions on transiting their territoril waterways.

The government of The Bahamas has released official COVID-19-related protocols for all boats in the waters of The Bahamas. The protocols apply to “all boats, yachts, private craft, and recreational craft (‘boats’) including boats for hire for such purposes, that are (a) cruising in, plying the waters of, or sheltering in The Bahamas; (b) intending to visit or depart from The Bahamas; or (c) intending to transit The Territorial Waters of The Bahamas (the ‘boat protocols’).”

In general, no boats can enter Bahamian waters without prior written permission until further notice (request permission at primeminister@bahamas.gov.bs).

THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE BAHAMAS
GENERAL PROTOCOLS FOR
BOATS, YACHTS, PRIVATE CRAFT, RECREATIONAL CRAFT, CRUISING IN, PLYING THE WATERS OF, OR SHELTERING IN THE BAHAMAS OR SEEKING TO DO SO
DURING THE COVID-19 SHUT-DOWN
14 April, 2020

STATE OF EMERGENCY

The Commonwealth of The Bahamas is at present operating under a STATE OF EMERGENCY, with extraordinary powers having been conferred upon the Government to combat and contain the COVID-19 pandemic for the protection of The Bahamian People.

Herein are set forth the General Protocols which shall be the terms and conditions for all boats, yachts, private craft, and recreational craft (“boats”) including boats for hire for such purposes, that are (a) cruising in, plying the waters of, or sheltering in The Bahamas; (b) intending to visit or depart from The Bahamas; or (c) intending to transit The Territorial Waters of The Bahamas (the “boat protocols”).

These boat protocols are not exhaustive. The Government may at any time supplement, amend or rescind all or any part of such boat protocols, and issue any instructions or prohibitions with regard thereto or with regard to any boat or boats, or class of boats, or circumstance as it sees fit.

PREAMBLE

As is well known, there currently exists neither a cure for, nor a vaccine against the COVID-19 virus. The only known defense at present is minimizing interpersonal contact, keeping safe distance, and sheltering in place. For this reason The Prime Minister of The Bahamas, as the Competent Authority for The Bahamas unders the Emergency Powers (COVID-19) Order has mandated a lockdown and curfew for the entirety of The Bahamas, including its Waters.

The Islands of The Bahamas represent relatively closed systems, some of them with very limited resources. As such, they may be particularly vulnerable to outside contact. Accordingly:

GENERAL PROHIBITION OF ENTRY

No boats shall enter Bahamian Waters for whatsoever purpose until further notice, without prior written consent of the Competent Authority pursuant to Par. (15) hereof.
SELF-IDENTIFICATION

All foreign boats and all Bahamian boats on charter to foreigners, within Bahamian Waters, shall immediately declare and identify themselves to the Designated Government Contact (the “D.G.C.”) as described in Par. (19) hereof. Such declaration shall include:
the name / description / location / contact details of the boat;
the date the boat entered Bahamas Waters, and any movements of the boat within The Bahamas;
the names /nationalities / designation (crew, passenger) of the persons on board;
the medical condition of the persons on board, including flu-like symptoms, if any;
PLEASE NOTE THAT ON ACCOUNT OF THE CRISIS THE BAHAMAS DOES NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO SAFELY TREAT ANY FOREIGN BOAT-SOURCED MEDICAL CASES ASHORE; ARRANGEMENTS MUST BE MADE TO TREAT ANY SUCH ILLNESSES OUTSIDE OF THE BAHAMAS.
DEPARTURE FROM THE BAHAMAS – FOREIGN BOATS

In view of the significant restrictions in place, FOREIGN BOATS ARE ENCOURAGED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO DEPART THE BAHAMAS and may do so, weather and safe navigation permitting. A foreign boat departing The Bahamas must proceed DIRECTLY and NON-STOP to its destination / home port outside The Bahamas.
Any foreign boat unable to depart The Bahamas directly and non-stop to its destination outside The Bahamas, shall notify the D.G.C. and shall propose an alternative plan for consideration.
FURTHER RESTRICTIONS – RESTRICTION OF MOVEMENT, FOREIGN BOATS

FOR AS LONG AS FOREIGN BOATS REMAIN IN THE WATERS OF THE BAHAMAS SUBJECT TO THE EMERGENCY POWERS in place, until further notice such foreign boats shall comply with the following restrictions:

All foreign boats shall shelter-in-place where they are.
All foreign boats and those on board shall avoid interpersonal contact with people ashore. If food and/or provisions must be taken on, communication shall be by telephone, and deliveries by dropoff without interpersonal contact. Any re-supply of fuel shall be similarly treated. THOSE ON BOARD SHALL REMAIN ON BOARD. THOSE ASHORE SHALL REMAIN ASHORE.
On no account shall foreign boats travel from one island of The Bahamas to another.
On no account shall foreign boats take on passengers or visitors in The Bahamas for any reason. On no account shall any such passengers or visitors be transported from one place or island to another.
All foreign boats shall remain in place. There shall be no boating, cruising, fishing, day trips or other movement of any kind.
FURTHER RESTRICTIONS – RESTRICTION OF MOVEMENT, BAHAMIAN BOATS

Boats belonging to Bahamians or Bahamian residents whose boats have a regular berth or place in The Bahamas shall comply with the following restrictions:

All boats and those on board shall avoid interpersonal contact with foreign boats and any persons on board or from such foreign boats. If food and/or provisions must be supplied to foreign boats, communication shall be by telephone, and deliveries shall be by dropoff without interpersonal contact. Any re-supply of fuel shall be similarly treated.
On no account shall Bahamian boats travel from one island of The Bahamas to another without prior written consent of the Competent Authority pursuant to Par. (15) hereof.
On no account shall Bahamian boats take on passengers or visitors in The Bahamas for any reason without prior written consent of the Competent Authority pursuant to Par. (15) hereof.
On no account shall any such passengers or visitors be transported from one place or island to another without prior written consent of the Competent Authority pursuant to Par. (15) hereof.
In order to minimize interpersonal contact and to respect the lockdown and curfew requirements, Bahamian boats shall not engage in boating, cruising, day trips or other movement. However, Bahamian boats may engage in subsistence fishing and local fishing for sustenance only (no sports fishing) at allowable times only and with all possible precautions (including Pars. (10) to (13) hereof), and only with the boat departing from and returning to the same location.
APPLICATION TO GOVERNMENT

IF A BOAT WISHES TO SEEK AN EXCEPTION TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THESE BOAT PROTOCOLS, the boat’s owner / operator may apply to the Government in writing by e-mail to primeminister@bahamas.gov.bs with copy to the Designated Government Contact (the “D.G.C.”) as described in Par. (19) below.
An application to seek an exception as cited in Par. (15) shall include:
the name / description / location / contact details of the boat;
the date the boat entered Bahamas Waters, and any movements of the boat within The Bahamas;
the names /nationalities / designation (crew, passenger) of the persons on board;
the medical condition of the persons on board, including flu-like symptoms, if any; and
the exception to these boat protocols sought by the applicant, the reasons for seeking such exception, and the action proposed (in sufficient detail as to allow for a decision to be made).
The Government may accept or reject such application and in this regard may request of the owner such additional information as it deems necessary. The Government may from time to time supplement, amend, alter or rescind any conditions it places on a boat’s movements or operation.
EMERGENCY POWERS

All ships upon entry into Bahamas Territorial Waters until departure therefrom shall be subject to the Emergency Powers Act and Regulations for the duration of such Act and Regulations.
DESIGNATED GOVERNMENT CONTACT

With the exception of an Application – which shall be addressed in accordance with Par. (15) and which shall be copied to the D.G.C. – all correspondence here under shall be addressed to the co- Designated Government Contacts as follows:
Cmdr. Berne Wright, The Port Controller
Port Department, Ministry of Transport
Prince George’s Dock
P.O. Box N8175
Nassau, N.P., The Bahamas
E-Mail: bernewright@bahamas.gov.bs
Phone: (+1-242) 376-3371

and:

Capt. Dwain E. Hutchinson (Advisor)
Director, The Bahamas Maritime Authority
Shirlaw House 226 Shirley Street
P.O. Box N-4679
Nassau, N.P., The Bahamas
E-Mail: Director@bahamasmaritime.com
Phone: (+1-242) 424-1937; (+44-7960) 032-283

[Joli]

Originally Posted by Montanan

FYI:

BVI is not the only country restricting passage. The USA has no sail orders for passenger ships of occupancy greater than 250.

A New Zealand sailor who attempted the Northwest Passage despite COVID-19 restrictions faces fines
Peter Smith had no “right of innocent passage,” in those waters, Transport Canada says.

A sailor from New Zealand who did not receive permission from Transport Canada to transit the Northwest Passage could face fines of up to $5,000 per day.

Peter Smith’s 52-foot aluminum sailboat, the Kiwi Roa, was spotted on Aug. 20 near Cambridge Bay entering the Northwest Passage from the east.

Transport Canada now says it will take “appropriate enforcement action if a contravention of the Interim Order Restrictive Pleasure Craft Navigation Due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is found to have occurred.”

But Smith has maintained he has the right to travel through the Northwest Passage because it’s an international waterway and his vessel has a “right of innocent passage” for its transit.

The “right of innocent passage,” as defined by the United Nations, is a vessel’s right to enter and pass through another’s territory as long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the other state.

But foreign vessels like Smith’s have no right to “innocent passage” within Canada’s Arctic archipelago, said Michael Byers, a legal scholar who holds the Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia and is the author of “Who owns the Arctic?”

“The Government of Canada’s long-standing position is that these are ‘internal waters’ and not ‘territorial waters,’” Byers said.

But confusion appeared to exist about this in a background document from Transport Canada about measures for pleasure craft in northern communities issued on May 14.

This said its ban on pleasure craft in Arctic waters would exempt “foreign pleasure craft exercising their right of innocent passage through Canada’s Arctic territorial waters; however, these vessels will be required to notify the Minister of Transport 60 days in advance of arriving in Arctic waters and may be subject to conditions.”

“It is astonishing that Transport Canada would make such a basic mistake, especially one that would result in the introduction of COVID-19 into northern communities,” Byers said of Transport Canada’s May statement about the right of innocent passage through Canadian Arctic waters.

However, the final Transport Canada order of May 30 made no mention of an exemption for foreign pleasure craft exercising their right of innocent passage and expanded the definition of Arctic waters to Canadian waters located north of the 60th parallel and the “territorial sea of Canada” in the vicinity of Nunatsiavut, Nunavik and the Labrador coast.

The right of innocent passage does not apply to the Northwest Passage because Canada considers it to be internal waters, not territorial waters, an Aug. 27 email from Simon Rivet, acting manager of media relations, monitoring and social media for Transport Canada, confirmed.

“In actual fact, the right of innocent passage under Articles 17 to 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) only applies to the territorial seas (0 to 12 nautical miles from the coast),” Rivest said.

“The waters of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, including the Northwest Passage, are internal waters of Canada, giving Canada an unfettered right to regulate those waters as it would its land territory. Therefore the right of innocent passage does not apply in the internal waters of the Canadian Arctic.”

But Smith has disputed this.

“Canada has no legal right to apply Canadian law to a foreigner in [an] international waterway,” Smith wrote to CBC News. “Half the world does not recognize Canada’s claims and this needs to be sorted out.”

But Byers said New Zealand is a close ally of Canada and a world leader in the fight against COVID-19, and, as such, would be unlikely to defend Smith.

“I would be very surprised if it protested against an enforcement action. Indeed, I would be very surprised if the Canadian and New Zealand foreign ministries have not discussed this already and come to a quiet agreement — to the effect that New Zealand will remain silent,” he told Nunatsiaq News, when asked for his reaction to what Smith said.

The Kiwi Roa is flagged in New Zealand, so if that country were to express its agreement with the enforcement of Canadian COVID-19 regulations against Smith and his ship, or if it were to simply stay silent, “no dispute in international law could arise,” Byers said.

“Nothing Mr. Smith says or does can change that,” he said.

Transport Canada said on Sept. 1 that it first received a request from Smith to enter Canadian Arctic waters in May, but that his request was refused.

“The department officially denied the request under the Interim Order to reduce safety risks and mitigate the spread of COVID-19 within Canada’s Arctic communities on July 29, 2020,” Transport Canada said in an emailed statement.

Transport Canada said it communicated with Smith throughout June and July to gather more details on his plans before denying the voyage under the Interim Order Restricting Pleasure Craft Navigation Due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

“Throughout this time, Transport Canada indicated to the vessel owner that the intended voyage should not be considered approved,” Transport Canada said.

Transport Canada said was it was “made aware” on Aug. 20 that the Kiwi Roa was spotted near Cambridge Bay, “in alleged contravention of the Interim Order Restricting Pleasure Craft Navigation Due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).”

Transport Canada said it then directed Smith to depart from Canadian waters, to not make landfall and to provide regular updates on the sailboat’s position.

“The vessel confirmed they received this direction on August 21, 2020,” Transport Canada said.

Smith exited waters of the Northwest Passage at Lancaster Sound last week, according to online information about Baffinland Iron Mines Corp. shipping, shared on Facebook by the mining company with the community of Pond Inlet.

“The vessel has been providing regular reports on its location to the Government of Canada through daily contact with Canadian Coast Guard’s Northern Canada Vessel Traffic Services Zone (NORDREG) since August 21, 2020,” Transport Canada said.

So at the end of all this do US planes still fly over Canada? Do Canadian planes still fly over Iceland............

[contrail]

Originally Posted by jim King

I have Leopard 45 in charter with Sunsail in the BVI. I was planning to vacation there from Dec 1 (the first day they would be open) until the 25th. I was told that we couldn't arrive by boat from the US Virgin Islands and that only the airport on buck Island would be allowing any tourists in. You must have a Covid 19 test within three days of arrival and another test on arrival. You must then quarantine for eight days in place (on your boat is OK but you can't move from anchorage). Then another test is necessary after which you must again quarantine in place. You are given a gps wrist bracelet to wear at all times from the time you arrive until the second quarantine is over after which you are free to go wherever you wish. The cost of all this is said to be around $600 which you are expected to fork over upon arrival. Since my stay was only going to be three weeks I would have had only five days of unrestricted sailing. I called off my trip and rescheduled for the Exumas where the Covid protocol was much less severe (test before arrival, test five days after arrival) with no restrictions on where we could sail.
jim

To be fair, you (or Sunsail) are quoting regulations that have been amended a couple of weeks ago (and yes, that was leaving it very late, on the part of the BVI Government).



At this point, you cannot enter by private boat. Ferries will resume operation on December 8. Quarantine will be four days (your arrival date is day zero), not eight. There is only a second test on Day 4. You can quarantine on your boat, if it has been inspected. Your boat CAN move, although between designated anchorages. You CAN swim, but your bubble only extends 30 feet from your boat (we are all scratching our heads). Cost for test, bracelet, etc, is $175 per person, not $600.


Let me say that the Government has been very, very slow to develop and then amend these protocols. I think some of them make sense, but even those will drive tourists away....which may be the cost of the virus, albeit a huge one. And, they may change, as they have done in almost every island country, as the virus ebbs and flows.



All I am doing is trying to correct some of the specific protocols, not defend them. But, I will add that the BVI, with its very strict protocols, is among the very top tier in the world for its success with Covid. We have zero cases, have had a total of around 70 for the whole pandemic, of which about 60 were due to one illegal breach of the sea border (which is why ALL of us are sensitive, not just Customs), and one death for the whole pandemic. When people from the US rail about the policies (for which WE have paid a huge price), they might want to take into account that in no part of the US, or any other first world country have there been results anywhere close to ours.....even with our less than ideal medical facilities. Just the facts.



It is fair to be disappointed. It is more than fair to criticize the poor planning and implementation of the re-opening of the borders; almost all of us here feel that! But....Is it fair to say "screw them! I will never go back!" Because the BVI has done an enviable job of protecting its people, whilst denying you the pleasure of a visit? Take a moment and think about that.

[GordMay]

Below is a compendium of measures for international vessels operating in Canadian waters that have been implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Please scroll down this webpage to access the following information:
Shipping Federation of Canada (No. 15/20) ➥ Shipping Federation of Canada

CANADIAN WATERS NORTH OF 60th PARALLEL:
NEW Rule: Vessels that are certified to carry more than 12 passengers prohibited from entering Canadian Arctic waters (waters north of the 60th parallel and the territorial sea in the vicinity of Nunatsiavut, Nunavik and the Labrador coast) until February 28, 2021.
Exception: A vessel exercising its right of innocent passage, provided such vessel has submitted written notice to the Minister of Transport 60 days before its expected date of arrival in the above waters.
NEW Additional exceptions: Same as for vessels operating south of 60th parallel, as per above.
Rule: Other vessels (e.g. small cruise ships under 100 person capacity and tour boats) are permitted to operate subject to restrictions from their provincial, territorial, or local health authority.
Above vessels are still subject to border restrictions prohibiting all foreign nationals (including from US) from entering Canada for leisure purposes. This includes entries into Canadian territorial and inland waters which do not include landing on Canadian soil (touring, sightseeing, whale watching, etc.).