We have not seen anything here on the forum about how it all works and the details of how you get back out to sea when they decide they want to enforce this.
Does anyone have a clause covering this in their policy or is it covered by the liability provisions.
Pretty limited on most policies. It would take a special policy. Mostly you buy towing insurance locally so it actually covers something and then there is always a maximum limit far less than a Navy
resuce. In Chile
they don't have Tow Boat US.
Internationally they have to respond to emergencies, but they don't have to make it free and they can control territorial waters. The insurance requirement was an attempt to ban recreational travel around the Horn without actually banning it. Since you have to travel in territorial waters unless you go way far south they sort of have you. If you make landfall any place in country they could detain you until you produced the desired policy. Lots of small places wheree the natinal government
isn't that well represented but you can't know.
The law has been around a few years. It's not cheap
dragging someone in from the Horn. The only way it could be affordable is to get a one time policy nailed down between the location of coverage and the time period. At 39 degrees S lat. it may be easier so long as you don't want to go farther south. That way there may be a way to do it for the least money
nice and easy. Thatbwould be the best solution. Its sort of is vague as to what the actual coverage requirements by the government
really are from what I have seen in a really short article a good while ago.
An actual rescue at the Horn could get padded into millions. The government will write up the bill. Who is to say what the cost of sending a Navy warship ship is in Chile? They are obviously pressing the Harbor master to do the work of detaining people. Local legal
assistance might help too.