Paul Allen's yacht allegedly destroys acres of coral

[tankersteve]

^^^Agreed. I don't believe the use of a pilot relieves a captain/master of any liability.

...a pilot would ordinarily be able to limit his liability as authorised by a port tariff; Section II Rule 420 of the tariff authorises the use of special contracts and tariffs between pilots and the master of the vessel to this effect. The Rule contains precedent terms and provisions on which such contracts should be substantially formulated. These terms stipulate that the pilot would be on board in an advisory capacity with the master remaining in control of the vessel at all times. In essence, the pilot would be a servant of the vessel. Further, the owners, operators and master would expressly covenant not to assert any personal liability to the pilot for any damages whatsoever resulting from his actions or omissions. In consideration for entering into such a tariff and thus benefiting from the covenant the pilot’s fees would be reduced accordingly to reflect their diminished risk.

Note that this is a specific example and not a generalization, but I believe that it is based on common English tradition with regard to harbor pilots.

Tankersteve

[tdoster]

Originally Posted by morven55

Regardless of where the captain "is directed to anchor" the ultimate responsibility rests with him. It is up to the captain of a vessel to determine what is safe, responsible etc. Surely you understand that?
"Life on the hook" does not relieve one of responsibility.

I assume you didn't read my prior post where I said:

"That in no way absolves them or the rest of us for any damage we happen to do whether purposefully or not..."

Paying a pilot or even being told where to anchor by someone deemed to be in an authority position does not, as you stated, remove the ultimate responsibility of the master of the vessel. My point is that it is easy to make a mistake without local knowledge and support the posters position that it happens. How many times have we been somewhere where local knowledge kept us out of trouble in the simplest of terms?

If you are running down the ICW and a Tug Captain tells you to center up a half mile down due to shoaling, do you take the advise or trust the greens are where they are supposed to be?

Point being is that if you know the area, you know there is a sliver of sand to anchor in for the cruise ships and mega yachts. If you are or have been a professional mariner, you know that you would rarely override the advise of a pilot as if you are wrong and he is right, you are truly going to be cooked, so you better be damn sure you are right and he is wrong.

There is nothing better than local knowledge for any of us on the water. And who cares who is legally at fault under the archaic admiralty system, we already know where that always falls, but who is right?

Should we sit comfortably back as bystanders and point the finger at these guys or say - It could have easily been me. Bad Luck, I feel for you.

[Sailing55]

Originally Posted by tdoster

I assume you didn't read my prior post where I said:

"That in no way absolves them or the rest of us for any damage we happen to do whether purposefully or not..."

Paying a pilot or even being told where to anchor by someone deemed to be in an authority position does not, as you stated, remove the ultimate responsibility of the master of the vessel. My point is that it is easy to make a mistake without local knowledge and support the posters position that it happens. How many times have we been somewhere where local knowledge kept us out of trouble in the simplest of terms?

If you are running down the ICW and a Tug Captain tells you to center up a half mile down due to shoaling, do you take the advise or trust the greens are where they are supposed to be?

Point being is that if you know the area, you know there is a sliver of sand to anchor in for the cruise ships and mega yachts. If you are or have been a professional mariner, you know that you would rarely override the advise of a pilot as if you are wrong and he is right, you are truly going to be cooked, so you better be damn sure you are right and he is wrong.

There is nothing better than local knowledge for any of us on the water. And who cares who is legally at fault under the archaic admiralty system, we already know where that always falls, but who is right?

Should we sit comfortably back as bystanders and point the finger at these guys or say - It could have easily been me. Bad Luck, I feel for you.

I am not pointing anything at anyone...simply stating a fact. The master of the vessel is ultimately the responsible party. If there was damage, the excuse "but they told me where to anchor" is pointless. Those are the rules of the game...

[Sailing55]

Originally Posted by tdoster

I assume you didn't read my prior post where I said:

"That in no way absolves them or the rest of us for any damage we happen to do whether purposefully or not..."

Paying a pilot or even being told where to anchor by someone deemed to be in an authority position does not, as you stated, remove the ultimate responsibility of the master of the vessel. My point is that it is easy to make a mistake without local knowledge and support the posters position that it happens. How many times have we been somewhere where local knowledge kept us out of trouble in the simplest of terms?

If you are running down the ICW and a Tug Captain tells you to center up a half mile down due to shoaling, do you take the advise or trust the greens are where they are supposed to be?

Point being is that if you know the area, you know there is a sliver of sand to anchor in for the cruise ships and mega yachts. If you are or have been a professional mariner, you know that you would rarely override the advise of a pilot as if you are wrong and he is right, you are truly going to be cooked, so you better be damn sure you are right and he is wrong.

There is nothing better than local knowledge for any of us on the water. And who cares who is legally at fault under the archaic admiralty system, we already know where that always falls, but who is right?

Should we sit comfortably back as bystanders and point the finger at these guys or say - It could have easily been me. Bad Luck, I feel for you.

By the way, I was responding to Tacoma Sailor, not your comment.

[TacomaSailor]

Originally Posted by morven55

Regardless of where the captain "is directed to anchor" the ultimate responsibility rests with him. It is up to the captain of a vessel to determine what is safe, responsible etc. Surely you understand that?
"Life on the hook" does not relieve one of responsibility.

Have you dealt with mini-tyrants and local authorities? One does what one is told or the local demi-god can make life miserable.

What should the captain have done? Should the captain tell the local port authority representative that he, the local rep, does not understand the port that he operates? Should the mighty white captain have told the local person that he, the CAPTAIN, knows best and will ignore the local authorities?

I think NOT - my experience cruising in small countries is to do what I am told and to not question the local authority.

But, I am open to suggestions from experienced Caribbean cruisers as to how they would deal with being told to anchor on coral and knowing they should not.

[Sailing55]

Originally Posted by TacomaSailor

Have you dealt with mini-tyrants and local authorities? One does what one is told or the local demi-god can make life miserable.

What should the captain have done? Should the captain tell the local port authority representative that he, the local rep, does not understand the port that he operates? Should the mighty white captain have told the local person that he, the CAPTAIN, knows best and will ignore the local authorities?

I think NOT - my experience cruising in small countries is to do what I am told and to not question the local authority.

But, I am open to suggestions from experienced Caribbean cruisers as to how they would deal with being told to anchor on coral and knowing they should not.

Don't get your knickers in a twist...I was simply stating a fact. "I was doing what I was told" is a poor defense for the master of a vessel.

[TacomaSailor]

Originally Posted by morven55

Don't get your knickers in a twist...I was simply stating a fact. "I was doing what I was told" is a poor defense for the master of a vessel.

I do get my knickers knotted when platitudes are offered that are irrelevant to the reality of the situation.


Why is it a poor defense if there was nothing else the captain could have done?

[the_fixer]

This is the third time this has happened in a short period of time.

Carnival
Royal Caribbean
Paul Allen

Carnival made a donation
No idea what happened to Royal Caribbean


They are looking at building new cruise port to accept larger cruise ships as they are losing out on revenue since the large ships can not stop there. When we were there a few months ago there was tension about it many people do not want it because they already have enough issues with the amount of people that are coming on the cruise ships but the government approved it. In the process of building the new port they will be destroying several well know reefs and other could suffer damage due to the dredging.

Here is a video of the Royal Caribbean chain / anchor.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U3l31sXJJ0c

Here is a site about the new cruise port

http://savecayman.org

http://www.travelpulse.com/news/dest...velopment.html




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by tankersteve

^^^Agreed. I don't believe the use of a pilot relieves a captain/master of any liability.

...a pilot would ordinarily be able to limit his liability as authorised by a port tariff; Section II Rule 420 of the tariff authorises the use of special contracts and tariffs between pilots and the master of the vessel to this effect. The Rule contains precedent terms and provisions on which such contracts should be substantially formulated. These terms stipulate that the pilot would be on board in an advisory capacity with the master remaining in control of the vessel at all times. In essence, the pilot would be a servant of the vessel. Further, the owners, operators and master would expressly covenant not to assert any personal liability to the pilot for any damages whatsoever resulting from his actions or omissions. In consideration for entering into such a tariff and thus benefiting from the covenant the pilot’s fees would be reduced accordingly to reflect their diminished risk.

Note that this is a specific example and not a generalization, but I believe that it is based on common English tradition with regard to harbor pilots.

Tankersteve

I dont believe this is correct, though ill wait to hear from some of our commercial tanker captains. In australia im pretty sure 'the captain' relinquishes his role to the port pilot and that relinquishing starts upon the captain speaking the words 'Pilot in charge'. Theres no advisory aspect to it at all.

But, ill take heed of more experince in this area.

The following is a good read on the relationship between pilot and master in North America.


http://www.impahq.org/admin/resource...1228231036.pdf

[Simonsays]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

I dont believe this is correct, though ill wait to hear from some of our commercial tanker captains. In australia im pretty sure 'the captain' relinquishes his role to the port pilot and that relinquishing starts upon the captain speaking the words 'Pilot in charge'. Theres no advisory aspect to it at all.

But, ill take heed of more experince in this area.

The following is a good read on the relationship between pilot and master in North America.

http://www.impahq.org/admin/resource...1228231036.pdf

under German law:
the Pilot is an advisor.
the Captain remains in charge of the ship.
BLK - Rolle des Lotsen
i have not heared of a country where that is any different.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Simonsays

under German law:
the Pilot is an advisor.
the Captain remains in charge of the ship.
BLK - Rolle des Lotsen
i have not heared of a country where that is any different.

Then read the link i provided.

Im fairly certain there not advisory roles in australia too, but need someone more knowledgable than me to confirm that.

And i dont read German, so an English link would help please.

[Rustic Charm]

This is what the Australian Pilotage Association describes the relationship as,

"The legislation requires the ship’s master (captain) to hand over the conduct of his vessel to the marine pilot. While the ship’s master retains the command of the vessel, the marine pilot has the conduct of the vessel and is responsible for manoeuvring it safely through the designated pilotage waters"

http://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_...ns/mfsub37.pdf

So, now you see Australia also has a difference to Germany?

[Simonsays]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

This is what the Australian Pilotage Association describes the relationship as,

"The legislation requires the ship’s master (captain) to hand over the conduct of his vessel to the marine pilot. While the ship’s master retains the command of the vessel, the marine pilot has the conduct of the vessel and is responsible for manoeuvring it safely through the designated pilotage waters"

http://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_...ns/mfsub37.pdf

So, now you see Australia also has a difference to Germany?

no difference.
Captain knows the ship, Pilot knows the water.
Captain is in command.
Pilot navigates.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Simonsays

no difference.
Captain knows the ship, Pilot knows the water.
Captain is in command.
Pilot navigates.

There is a huge difference. You suggested the pilot is an 'advisor', thats NOT the case in Australia. And, NO, the pilot is not navigating.

[Simonsays]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

There is a huge difference. You suggested the pilot is an 'advisor', thats NOT the case in Australia. And, NO, the pilot is not navigating.

Lost in translation.
the Pilot is responsible to guide the ship safely through the pilotage.
He is not in command but reports to the captain.
more like an OOW.
German pilots use the word "advisor" to describe their role, but it is the same any country i visited.