Capt. Bill wrote:


The discussion was specifically about the owner of the boat being
hired as the captain.

Discussions tend to broaden as the flow.

In other words, you can't read for content.

....

The boat wasn't "foreign flagged" at the time. As I said, it was
foreign built.
If the vessel was US flagged then the only significance of being
foreign built is that it would not be eligible to carry passengers for
hire at all. In this case, it would be very important for the owners
to make sure nobody was actually paying, or if they were, it was
strictly "bare boat." If it did have the Jones Act exemption
(intended for "small vessels," but your 90 footer might qualify), then
your "foreign" comment was totally gratuitous.

Not in the contexted of which I was speaking.

See, there's that content thing again.

Where? I seem to have missed it again. Was there any significance to
the fact that you said the vessel was "foreign"?



And owners of a 90' boat don't get to operate under a different set of
rules, believe me.
Whatever you say. Everyone, rich and poor, gets treated exactly the
same in our world.

They seem to by the USCG. Ask Tiger Woods.

Large vessels get boarded nowadays - I was anchored last week in a
cove where a new large SeaRay got boarded at 10PM by the CG. I heard
the next morning it was just a "routine" inspection and that all new
"drug running capable" boats in the area will get boarded. However,
rich people have much better lawyers and will have the proper advice
and paperwork. And, if the glove won't fit, you must acquit!