CRUISES TO NOWHERE AND PRIVATE ISLANDS

Well,,, that open a whole new can of worms. It will be interesting how they rule on transition cruises that carry no passengers, since the crew status is the issue. More questions... thanks for this new bit of knowledge.

My pleasure...muddy waters is my specialty!!!

Good article that I've read on more than one occasion, however it never states why cruises to nowhere were not considered a violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act, or if they were, why it wasn't enforced. The PVSA has been in effect since July 19,1886 and violations carry a fine of over $700 per passenger for the cruise line. There is the possibility it was being enforced and the cruise lines paid the fines themselves, or figured out a way to hide the fine in the cost of the cruise for each passenger. Being a U.S. flagged vessel the Pride of America is the only major cruise ship I'm aware of that would not be in violation, since the PVSA only restricts foreign flagged vessels.

Very interesting.

Interesting - the act of ship lines owning islands when that law was passed didn't exist at that time. Wonder if it could be challenged in court for that specific case? But do they actually own the islands? or are they leasing? Is Coco Cay technically under Bahamian law?

Are you trying to horn in on my swamp making biz??? heheh...durn good question, so I started GOOGLING it..two diff websites have opposite answers for COCO CAY...one says its owned by the line, the other says its leased long term...HALF MOON CAY appears to be owned by the line, purchased outright from the "previous owner" for 6m. Now you would think that if there was an advantage to a lawsuit to resolve that "cruise to nowhere" issue, somebody would've tried it already. But being cynical, mebbe the cruise lines came to the conclusion they wouldn't get too much sympathy in US FEDERAL COURTS....hmmm...wonder why heheheh

Private Islands. Is it just that the cruise lines own them but they are still within the foreign country such as Bahamas or is it a case where the cruise lines owns the island and it is outside of any country.

In the case of the latter, who provides jurisdiction and protection for the private island? What is to stop a group of rogue modern day pirates from landing and taking the islands. Who would respond to such an act?

OUTSTANDING! Have a "MUDDY WATERS OAR AWARD"!!! There are such things as truly "private islands" all over the world, but are they really like little independent countries? owned by the mega rich? or some shell corporation?? who could probably provide their own security and do as they please? (think BOND..JAMES BOND) or merely like the purchase of a mega-estate anywhere else. Money talks...VERY LOUD....on the other hand, who would want to give up a piece of their sovereign territory, probably within their own territorial waters, over which they would have no jurisdiction? Methinks actual ownership of those so-called "private islands" is retained by the nation. Which may explain the lack of lawsuits over it. They would have been filed pre-plague, when cruise ships owned the world...certainly not now..

The private islands are not owned by the USA. Therefore, it is a foreign port. That's blonde logic.

Trust AUNTIE to clarify what we worked soooo hard to complicate !!! no matter who owns it, it ain't the US of A!!! But on the other hand, if its NOT the USA, it HAS to qualify as a foreign port no??? and so "cruises to nowhere" stopping at them should be legal.. ok ok, I'll find something else to do...hehehehe