Anchoring but not checking in (if needed)

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by Adelie

Best people to answer legal questions are lawyers.

IMHO, the best people to answer specific legal questions, esp. regarding international and more specifically maritime issues are the authorities who will be enforcing the laws of that country.

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by JebLostInSpace

Looks like I was right about getting a show from the sea lawyers opc orn:

Will somebody please bring up COLREGS now? That'll really get 'em going!

Hmm...I'm not pretending to be a 'sea lawyer,' and it doesn't take a lawyer to perform searches on the Internet. As long as a person can read above a 9th grade level with a high comprehension rate this stuff is not difficult to understand.

It doesn't take a lawyer to understand the rules; it takes a lawyer to attempt to obfuscate the rules.

[JebLostInSpace]

*sigh.... I'm really disappointed I have to explain the joke here, but it seems my tongue-in-cheek comments were taken a bit too seriously by some

Apologies for hijacking your thread OP, that'll teach me to try to have a bit of fun on the forum

The term "sea lawyer" refers to a sailor that eloquently and obstinately argues legal points at sea, even though they are unqualified and uninformed. There is some great usage of the term in Patrick O'Brien's wonderful Master and Commander series, which I highly recommend. If you don't want to read 20 novels just to understand what I'm talking about, here are some definitions for you:
https://www.urbandictionary.com/defi...m=sea%20lawyer
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sea%20lawyer

I commented on this thread the first time, saying that I was looking forward to listening to the sea lawyers argue. This was a bit of a joke about how posts on this forum that involve laws and regulations often descend into arguments, with posters citing regulations or statutes and insisting on their interpretation of them - ie sounding like sea lawyers.

I commented a second time also saying that somebody should mention COLREGS. This was not because I thought COLREGS were relevant, but because they are another subject that comes up on the forum where posters with questionable qualifications cite the regulations and loudly argue about their competing interpretations. Sadly, it seems the connection to the "sea lawyer" term was lost on the users on this forum.

So once again, I apologize for derailing the thread. I'll show myself out and find some people who get my sense of humor.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by JebLostInSpace

*sigh.... I'm really disappointed I have to explain the joke here, but it seems my tongue-in-cheek comments were taken a bit too seriously by some

......

So once again, I apologize for derailing the thread. I'll show myself out and find some people who get my sense of humor.

Isn't there something about: If you have to explain a joke?

[buddhadawg]

hey capt scott, we traveled from st marten to grenada earlier this year. most places you can get permission, dominica, st lucia, st vincent and guadeloupe, the others we arrived later, hung the q flag, and left early, and we were not bothered.. not to say your experience would be the same.. but things in general seem to be easing up..

[rjwdoc]

Scott,
Dont pull this stunt in BVI. Gov here is exceedingly hard on illegal stops or trespassing.
St Lucia to to Guadalupe is easy passage. From there i would shoot for St thomas. If you have a good autopilot you can sleep in the cockpit and keep your green crew just for the lookout, wind shifts etc. So all you need is one stop. French islands are usually the most forgiving.

[Nicholson58]

Policies are opening up but only for fully vaccinated persons.

We are in Antigua now. Clearing in here is easy, English Harbor, jolly Harbor. The French islands are pretty much business as normal but there are strikes as only the French can do.

Advise the local CG on the VHS of your intention to anchor and stay aboard.

Stay out and away from the BVI, they are unpredictable and currently have a well deserved bad rap.

Dominica may require advance permission. I suggest only use Prince Rupert Bay.

[Karlt]

I was recently sailing from St. Lucia to St. Martin. We had a malfunctioning navigation light and wanted to stop for the night so anchored at a secluded spot off Nevis and left early the next morning with no problems.

If you arrive after customs closes you can't clear in any way. It doesn't make much sense to wait around the next morning for 9:00 a.m. or whenever customs and immigration decide to show up just to check-in and out. As long as it is not a high-traffic area I am willing to take the risk for the safety of my crew.

[CaptJimFrei]

Originally Posted by Captain Scott

I will be sailing from St Lucia to the USVIs in about a month and will have a green crew. ... Any experience on the subject with any of the Caribbean islands is appreciated.
Thanks!, Capt Scott

You can make it to St Croix in a straight shot w/o stopping at any islands; its only about 310 nm.

[mtrees]

Originally Posted by Captain Scott

I will be sailing from St Lucia to the USVIs in about a month and will have a green crew. We plan on stopping where we can, though that is always changing with Covid. It is possible that I will not be comfortable sailing through the night while passing by an island that is not allowing visitors or requiring tests with too short a lead time.
Drop late, weigh early, fly the Q flag, contact their coast guard (likely best with the French) &/or ???? Any experience on the subject with any of the Caribbean islands is appreciated.
Thanks!, Capt Scott

Caught in a tropical storm off Eleuthera which damaged the steering ram. Had to pull in to Spanish Wells for hydraulic fluid. Immigration would not accept port of refuge. Was charged something like $250 for one night. That was the fee for one year cruising permit. Contacted my representatives at the time but they never did follow up on the legality of international law.

[ron17571]

I've read so many stories of people getting jammed by authorities and locals over the years that it always made me wonder about sailing around the world. The fear of covid has made it even worse. For me, there are plenty of lakes to visit and the coasts of North America. I bet even this will have many problems with so many fearful people/states.

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Anchoring is not regarded as innocent “ passage “ unless essentially it’s forced upon the ship by distress or to aid someone in distress

Originally Posted by Discovery 15797

If you drop your hook you have officially entered the country and are no longer considered "innocent passage" through the country.

These agree with my understanding. IANAL. I know the Bahamas sometimes go on enforcement jags and grab people on the Banks; folks have lost their boats. The BVI is recently famous for this.

That's different from a night landfall and anchoring off a port of entry with a Q flag flying waiting for C&I to open.

Originally Posted by Paul L

Anchoring is a little more flexible than what you state. If you were getting ready to pass through a strait and you anchored to wait for the tide to change, or if you were in an engineless sailboat and there was no wind etc, would all probably be technically OK and be considered in the normal course of navigation. In practice it all depends on the enforcers and their level of suspicion.

I would call the authorities and explain what I planned and ask.

Heaving to is simple.

[CyKlop]

Originally Posted by Discovery 15797

(a) traversing that sea without entering internal waters or calling at a roadstead or port facility outside internal waters." (Roadstead def. - 'a sheltered stretch of water near the shore in which ships can ride at anchor.')

And it is phrases like this that lawyers make their milk money on. Does that phrase mean:


"... traversing that sea (without entering internal waters) or (calling at a roadstead) or (port facility outside internal waters)


or, as I think it means:


... without (entering internal waters or calling at a roaststead or port facility outside internal waters).


Why do I think that? Because the first and last items in that list are both verboten, so I believe that implies the sandwiched activity is ALSO verboten.

However, I am not a maritime lawyer, so my advice isn't worth a 4 year old gum drop. Ask a real lawyer.

[motion]

Fly the "L" flag. That means quarantine but not clearing into the port

[StuM]

Originally Posted by CyKlop

And it is phrases like this that lawyers make their milk money on. Does that phrase mean:
"... traversing that sea (without entering internal waters) or (calling at a roadstead) or (port facility outside internal waters)
or, as I think it means:
... without (entering internal waters or calling at a roaststead or port facility outside internal waters).

Why do I think that? Because the first and last items in that list are both verboten, so I believe that implies the sandwiched activity is ALSO verboten.

However, I am not a maritime lawyer, so my advice isn't worth a 4 year old gum drop. Ask a real lawyer.

It's quite straightforward. Obviously calling at a roadstead in internal water is already covered by "without entering internal waters', so it is obviously referring to "a roadstead or port" outside internal waters.


The sentence is covering
1. Entering Internal Waters, or

2. outside internal waters, calling at
a. a readstead or
b. a port facility.