Empathy List Archives

MM

Mike Maurice

Mon, Apr 21, 2008 8:08 PM

According to the Crescent Beach Yacht Club, British Columbia,
setsail.com documents that Canadian Yachts are exempt from Compulsory
Pilotage. I can find no such confirmation on the setsail web site. In
any event here is the Washington State code below:

The fines in Alaska for not complying with the pilotage laws for foreign
yachts over 65' are even more draconian.

88.16.070
A United States vessel on a voyage in which it is operating exclusively
on its coastwise endorsement, its fishery endorsement (including
catching and processing its own catch outside United States waters and
economic zone for delivery in the United States), and/or its
recreational (or pleasure) endorsement, and all United States and
Canadian vessels engaged exclusively in the coasting trade on the west
coast of the continental United States (including Alaska) and/or British
Columbia shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter unless a
pilot licensed under this chapter be actually employed, in which case
the pilotage rates provided for in this chapter shall apply.

SUMMARY, with specified endorsement(s)
Exempt:
U.S.: Coastwise, Fishery and Recreational endorsements.
U.S. & Canadian: Coastwise.

Not Exempt:
Canadian: Fishery, Recreational
All other foreign.

88.16.150 - Penalty: $10,000, Gross Misdemeanor

Mike

Capt. Mike Maurice
Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

According to the Crescent Beach Yacht Club, British Columbia, setsail.com documents that Canadian Yachts are exempt from Compulsory Pilotage. I can find no such confirmation on the setsail web site. In any event here is the Washington State code below: The fines in Alaska for not complying with the pilotage laws for foreign yachts over 65' are even more draconian. 88.16.070 A United States vessel on a voyage in which it is operating exclusively on its coastwise endorsement, its fishery endorsement (including catching and processing its own catch outside United States waters and economic zone for delivery in the United States), and/or its recreational (or pleasure) endorsement, and all United States and Canadian vessels engaged exclusively in the coasting trade on the west coast of the continental United States (including Alaska) and/or British Columbia shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter unless a pilot licensed under this chapter be actually employed, in which case the pilotage rates provided for in this chapter shall apply. SUMMARY, with specified endorsement(s) Exempt: U.S.: Coastwise, Fishery and Recreational endorsements. U.S. & Canadian: Coastwise. Not Exempt: Canadian: Fishery, Recreational All other foreign. 88.16.150 - Penalty: $10,000, Gross Misdemeanor Mike _____________________________________ Capt. Mike Maurice Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

MM

Mike Maurice

Mon, Apr 21, 2008 9:59 PM

The Alaska regs are in the Coast Pilot #8, 29th ed. page 119.

In Alaska, foreign flag recreational yachts under 65' (20 meters ?) are
exempt from compulsory pilotage. If over 65' I can't make heads or tails
out of the regs; you are on your own. If using Wrangel Narrows or near
Sitka a pilot may be required under 65', not sure about this.

Washington has no exemption for under 65', unless you pay for one. The
fee is about $300.

What a mess?

Mike

Capt. Mike Maurice
Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

The Alaska regs are in the Coast Pilot #8, 29th ed. page 119. In Alaska, foreign flag recreational yachts under 65' (20 meters ?) are exempt from compulsory pilotage. If over 65' I can't make heads or tails out of the regs; you are on your own. If using Wrangel Narrows or near Sitka a pilot may be required under 65', not sure about this. Washington has no exemption for under 65', unless you pay for one. The fee is about $300. What a mess? Mike _____________________________________ Capt. Mike Maurice Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

SH

Scott H.E. Welch

Mon, Apr 21, 2008 10:06 PM

Mike Maurice mikem@yachtsdelivered.com writes:

Washington has no exemption for under 65', unless you pay for one. The
fee is about $300.

Where do I apply for this? I have taken Island Eagle down to Port Townsend
once already with no problem, but I can imaging that one over-zealous water
cop could ruin your whole day.

Scott Welch
FirstClass Product Manager
www.firstclass.com

Those who make no mistakes rarely make anything.

Mike Maurice <mikem@yachtsdelivered.com> writes: >Washington has no exemption for under 65', unless you pay for one. The >fee is about $300. Where do I apply for this? I have taken Island Eagle down to Port Townsend once already with no problem, but I can imaging that one over-zealous water cop could ruin your whole day. Scott Welch FirstClass Product Manager www.firstclass.com Those who make no mistakes rarely make anything.

MM

Mike Maurice

Mon, Apr 21, 2008 11:41 PM

http://www.pilotage.wa.gov/default.htm

Download the form for exemptions.

I can not direct you to the fee schedule nor any information as to the
process or requirements. Or, even if there is any charge, as the entire
process is about as opaque as mud.

If you learn anything I would be interested in the outcome.

Good luck.

Mike

Capt. Mike Maurice
Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

http://www.pilotage.wa.gov/default.htm Download the form for exemptions. I can not direct you to the fee schedule nor any information as to the process or requirements. Or, even if there is any charge, as the entire process is about as opaque as mud. If you learn anything I would be interested in the outcome. Good luck. Mike _____________________________________ Capt. Mike Maurice Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

MM

Mike Maurice

Tue, Apr 22, 2008 4:48 PM

Just to show you how complicated all this is. You may recall that I have
posted that Canadian Yachts are exempt from the compulsory pilotage that
Washington State regulates.

Dashews boat was forced to get an exemption at some $300, since their
boat was not from British Columbia. I gather that they were told that BC
boats were exempt, if you will excuse the expression, "from exemption".
Then the Crescent Beach Yacht Club mentioned that Canadian Yachts were
exempt on their web site.

Now here is where it gets interesting. The WA statutes and the WA
Pilotage boards web site are silent about this, but the exemption is
apparently in a treaty between WA and BC. Since I was under the
impression that a treaty was between countries, it sounds more like some
kind of mutual reciprocity agreement, like that between two states, like
Oregon and Washington.

I am presently looking for the verification of this alleged agreement.

More later.

Mike

Capt. Mike Maurice
Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

Just to show you how complicated all this is. You may recall that I have posted that Canadian Yachts are exempt from the compulsory pilotage that Washington State regulates. Dashews boat was forced to get an exemption at some $300, since their boat was not from British Columbia. I gather that they were told that BC boats were exempt, if you will excuse the expression, "from exemption". Then the Crescent Beach Yacht Club mentioned that Canadian Yachts were exempt on their web site. Now here is where it gets interesting. The WA statutes and the WA Pilotage boards web site are silent about this, but the exemption is apparently in a treaty between WA and BC. Since I was under the impression that a treaty was between countries, it sounds more like some kind of mutual reciprocity agreement, like that between two states, like Oregon and Washington. I am presently looking for the verification of this alleged agreement. More later. Mike _____________________________________ Capt. Mike Maurice Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

SH

Scott H.E. Welch

Tue, Apr 29, 2008 4:14 PM

Mike Maurice mikem@yachtsdelivered.com writes:

Now here is where it gets interesting. The WA statutes and the WA
Pilotage boards web site are silent about this, but the exemption is
apparently in a treaty between WA and BC. Since I was under the
impression that a treaty was between countries, it sounds more like some
kind of mutual reciprocity agreement, like that between two states, like
Oregon and Washington.

I believe that I have tracked this down at last. Yes, as Mike points out, the
pilotage rules are silent about yachts, and yes, treaties are between
countries and not states. But all is revealed, the story goes back over 150
years! Here's the message I received today:

<begin quote> Like a lot of treaties of the time, the "Oregon Treaty of 1846" was drafted and signed by people who had little information on the geography of the area they were dividing up.B The dispute over what was the "main channel" where the border line was established led to a war, with both British and American forts being built on San Juan Island to fight if necessary to establish whether the line was on the east or west side of San Juan Island.B Fortunately, the only casualty was a farmer's pig, shot by a soldier of one of the garrisons.

Anyway, theB treaty guarantees vessels of both nations free travel in the
channels through the San Juans and the Strait of Juan de Fuca.B Technically,
free travel on Admiralty Inlet south of Port Townsend might not be guaranteed
by the Treaty, but Washington has exempted Canadian vessels "engaged
exclusively in the coasting trade on the west coast of the continental United
States ... and/or British Columbia" from compulsory pilotage on Puget Sound
and Grays Harbor.B I don't know that the term "coasting trade" has been
defined as not including yachts, but it would create a huge international
incident and economic disruption in the local pleasure boat industry if we
claimed it did not -- there aren't very many Canadian yachts that cruise the
U.S. side, but thousands of U.S. yachts cruise the Canadian waters every year
without taking pilots.

The treaty is reprinted at [
http://www.ccrh.org/comm/slough/primary/ortreaty.htm
]http://www.ccrh.org/comm/slough/primary/ortreaty.htm.
<end quote>

So there you have it. The treaty was between the US and Britain, and as the
successor country Canada is also covered (Canada did not exist as a country
until 21 years after the treaty was signed). So Canadian vessels are exempt
from pilotage rules in the US, and US vessels are exempt from pilotage rules
in Canada, as long as they are "engaged exclusively in the coasting trade",
which is completely and totally undefined!

Now, presumably British vessels are exempt as well, and I'll bet even the
Dashews could have argued that an New Zealand vessel is exempt as NZ was a
British territory at the time the treaty was signed. But it's pretty clear
that a foreign flagged yacht (e.g. Cayman Islands, Panama, etc.) is not
exempt and is required to have a pilot. Those vessels may request an
exemption, but the onus is on them to do so.

Scott Welch
FirstClass Product Manager
www.firstclass.com

Those who make no mistakes rarely make anything.

Mike Maurice <mikem@yachtsdelivered.com> writes: >Now here is where it gets interesting. The WA statutes and the WA >Pilotage boards web site are silent about this, but the exemption is >apparently in a treaty between WA and BC. Since I was under the >impression that a treaty was between countries, it sounds more like some >kind of mutual reciprocity agreement, like that between two states, like >Oregon and Washington. I believe that I have tracked this down at last. Yes, as Mike points out, the pilotage rules are silent about yachts, and yes, treaties are between countries and not states. But all is revealed, the story goes back over 150 years! Here's the message I received today: <begin quote> Like a lot of treaties of the time, the "Oregon Treaty of 1846" was drafted and signed by people who had little information on the geography of the area they were dividing up.B The dispute over what was the "main channel" where the border line was established led to a war, with both British and American forts being built on San Juan Island to fight if necessary to establish whether the line was on the east or west side of San Juan Island.B Fortunately, the only casualty was a farmer's pig, shot by a soldier of one of the garrisons. Anyway, theB treaty guarantees vessels of both nations free travel in the channels through the San Juans and the Strait of Juan de Fuca.B Technically, free travel on Admiralty Inlet south of Port Townsend might not be guaranteed by the Treaty, but Washington has exempted Canadian vessels "engaged exclusively in the coasting trade on the west coast of the continental United States ... and/or British Columbia" from compulsory pilotage on Puget Sound and Grays Harbor.B I don't know that the term "coasting trade" has been defined as not including yachts, but it would create a huge international incident and economic disruption in the local pleasure boat industry if we claimed it did not -- there aren't very many Canadian yachts that cruise the U.S. side, but thousands of U.S. yachts cruise the Canadian waters every year without taking pilots. The treaty is reprinted at [ http://www.ccrh.org/comm/slough/primary/ortreaty.htm ]http://www.ccrh.org/comm/slough/primary/ortreaty.htm. <end quote> So there you have it. The treaty was between the US and Britain, and as the successor country Canada is also covered (Canada did not exist as a country until 21 years after the treaty was signed). So Canadian vessels are exempt from pilotage rules in the US, and US vessels are exempt from pilotage rules in Canada, as long as they are "engaged exclusively in the coasting trade", which is completely and totally undefined! Now, presumably British vessels are exempt as well, and I'll bet even the Dashews could have argued that an New Zealand vessel is exempt as NZ was a British territory at the time the treaty was signed. But it's pretty clear that a *foreign flagged* yacht (e.g. Cayman Islands, Panama, etc.) is *not exempt* and is *required* to have a pilot. Those vessels may request an exemption, but the onus is on them to do so. Scott Welch FirstClass Product Manager www.firstclass.com Those who make no mistakes rarely make anything.

RB

Roger Bingham

Tue, Apr 29, 2008 4:32 PM

Hi Scott

Perhaps even the Caymans could claim exemption.

The Cayman Islands, an Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom with a
governor appointed by the Crown, a 15-member elected Legislative Assembly,
and an 8-member Cabinet headed by a minister chosen Leader of Government
Business. Cabinet, chaired by the Governor, consists of five ministers
elected by and from within the elected membership of the Legislature, and
three appointed civil servants.

Regards

Roger Bingham
France

Now, presumably British vessels are exempt as well, and I'll bet even
the
Dashews could have argued that an New Zealand vessel is exempt as NZ
was a
British territory at the time the treaty was signed. But it's pretty
clear
that a foreign flagged yacht (e.g. Cayman Islands, Panama, etc.) is
not
exempt and is required to have a pilot. Those vessels may request an
exemption, but the onus is on them to do so.

Scott Welch

Hi Scott Perhaps even the Caymans could claim exemption. The Cayman Islands, an Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom with a governor appointed by the Crown, a 15-member elected Legislative Assembly, and an 8-member Cabinet headed by a minister chosen Leader of Government Business. Cabinet, chaired by the Governor, consists of five ministers elected by and from within the elected membership of the Legislature, and three appointed civil servants. Regards Roger Bingham France > > Now, presumably British vessels are exempt as well, and I'll bet even > the > Dashews could have argued that an New Zealand vessel is exempt as NZ > was a > British territory at the time the treaty was signed. But it's pretty > clear > that a *foreign flagged* yacht (e.g. Cayman Islands, Panama, etc.) is > *not > exempt* and is *required* to have a pilot. Those vessels may request an > exemption, but the onus is on them to do so. > > Scott Welch

MM

Mike Maurice

Tue, Apr 29, 2008 5:00 PM

This is the Treaty mentioned in Scott's earlier post.

http://www.ccrh.org/comm/river/docs/ortreaty.htm

Mike

Capt. Mike Maurice
Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

This is the Treaty mentioned in Scott's earlier post. http://www.ccrh.org/comm/river/docs/ortreaty.htm Mike _____________________________________ Capt. Mike Maurice Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

MM

Mike Maurice

Tue, Apr 29, 2008 5:05 PM

If the Dashew boat was New Zealand flagged, I think that Scott was right
about their having a complaint that should be lodged with their flag
country against the state of WA.

Regards,
Mike

Capt. Mike Maurice
Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

If the Dashew boat was New Zealand flagged, I think that Scott was right about their having a complaint that should be lodged with their flag country against the state of WA. Regards, Mike _____________________________________ Capt. Mike Maurice Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

trawlers@lists.trawlering.com

Washington State Pilotage & Foreign Yachts