"Wayne.B" wrote:

Skipper wrote:

All pleasure boats entering the Bahamas must now purchase at their first
Port of Entry a $150 cruising permit for boats up to 35 feet and $300
for boats over 35 feet *each year*.

That's all old news. It's their country and they set the rules.

No sir, I set my own rules. I've researched this outrageous bilking of
American pleasure boaters, understand the roots of the fee, and believe
both a boycott and reciprocal fee for Bahamians entering this country is
in order. The fact is, this $300 entry fee would be history if Floriduh
reciprocated with a Piggly Wiggly fee for them.

If you go for 3 weeks it works out to about $15 a day and includes
fishing licenses for everyone on the boat. In the grand scheme of
cruising on a decent sized boat, $15 a day is peanuts compared to
diesel, dockage, maintenance, etc.

That $300 entry fee is over and above all other expenses and is not
insignificant for most recreational boaters. The fee is very much like a
reverse poll tax and effectively closes these waters to many boaters.
I'm in favor of open access to recreational waters.

Fully loaded operating costs for a sportfish in the 40 to 50 ft range
are well over $100/hour.

Tough beans, most recreational cruising boats in the 40' to 50' range
are able to operate for much less than $100 per hr. What would you judge
the operational costs to run a Skookum 53 ketch over to Aruba?

--
Skipper

On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:17:28 -0600, Skipper wrote:

Fully loaded operating costs for a sportfish in the 40 to 50 ft range
are well over $100/hour.

Tough beans, most recreational cruising boats in the 40' to 50' range
are able to operate for much less than $100 per hr. What would you judge
the operational costs to run a Skookum 53 ketch over to Aruba?

=======================

A Skookum is not a sportfish, it is a long range cruiser. Different
beast. Given that fully loaded costs include amortization,
maintenance, dockage and insurance, I'd be willing to bet that the
costs of running one are higher than you'd think.

What is your experience with costs for a 40 to 50 ft sportfish?

Sorry, I had trouble hearing that.

Here are my numbers for a used 50 ft Hatt:

Purchase price $300K, annualized amortization around $40K

Annual insurance, 12 months, tropics - about $5K

Fuel at 50 gph, 300 hours/yr, 15,000 gals, about $40K at today's
prices.

Dockage at $800/mo, $10K/yr

Maintenance, approx $20/hour, 6K/yr @ 300 hrs

So far we are at just over $100K/yr with no bottom painting, cleaning,
waxing, and no major overhauls.

Dividing $100K by 300 hours, I'm getting about $330/hour.

The only significant savings with a Skookum are for fuel and
maintenance. The rest is about the same.

"Wayne.B" wrote:

Skipper wrote:

Fully loaded operating costs for a sportfish in the 40 to 50 ft range
are well over $100/hour.

Tough beans, most recreational cruising boats in the 40' to 50' range
are able to operate for much less than $100 per hr. What would you judge
the operational costs to run a Skookum 53 ketch over to the Bahamas?

A Skookum is not a sportfish, it is a long range cruiser. Different
beast... Dividing $100K by 300 hours, I'm getting about $330/hour.

The only significant savings with a Skookum are for fuel and
maintenance. The rest is about the same.

Well then, let's compare a Gulfstar 50 ketch. Are you contending it also
costs $330/hour for the run over to the Bahamas? The subject here,
Wayne, is the extraordinary fee Bahamian politicians are imposing on
recreational boaters. Is that same fee imposed on cruiseship passengers?
As a recreational boater, you should be supporting the boycott.

--
Skipper

On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:17:28 -0600, Skipper wrote:

The fact is, this $300 entry fee would be history if Floriduh
reciprocated with a Piggly Wiggly fee for them.

Piggly Wiggly fee? So now you expect Florida to impose a fee on
Bahamians who take your wife for a ride, just because they expect
cruisers to foot some of the expenses imposed on the Bahamian's due to
their cruising life style? Get real, dude.

bb

bb wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:17:28 -0600, Skipper wrote:


The fact is, this $300 entry fee would be history if Floriduh
reciprocated with a Piggly Wiggly fee for them.


Piggly Wiggly fee? So now you expect Florida to impose a fee on
Bahamians who take your wife for a ride, just because they expect
cruisers to foot some of the expenses imposed on the Bahamian's due to
their cruising life style? Get real, dude.

bb
BB,
Isn't it possible to disagree with Skipper without the personal insults?


--
Reggie
************************************************** *********************
If you would like to make rec.boats an enjoyable place to discuss
boating, please do not respond to the political and inflammatory
off- topic posts and flames.
************************************************** *********************

On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 22:29:07 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:

bb wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:17:28 -0600, Skipper wrote:


The fact is, this $300 entry fee would be history if Floriduh
reciprocated with a Piggly Wiggly fee for them.


Piggly Wiggly fee? So now you expect Florida to impose a fee on
Bahamians who take your wife for a ride, just because they expect
cruisers to foot some of the expenses imposed on the Bahamian's due to
their cruising life style? Get real, dude.

bb
BB,
Isn't it possible to disagree with Skipper without the personal insults?

Ya know, I was wondering the same thing. Here is a legitimate thread, providing
information for both sides. But, it has to be drug down by a few who can't resist
going to attack mode.

Un-real!

As for the thread, no, cruise ship passengers aren't required to pay a fee to get off
the ship onto a Bahama Island.

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 22:29:07 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote:


bb wrote:

On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:17:28 -0600, Skipper wrote:



The fact is, this $300 entry fee would be history if Floriduh
reciprocated with a Piggly Wiggly fee for them.


Piggly Wiggly fee? So now you expect Florida to impose a fee on
Bahamians who take your wife for a ride, just because they expect
cruisers to foot some of the expenses imposed on the Bahamian's due to
their cruising life style? Get real, dude.

bb

BB,
Isn't it possible to disagree with Skipper without the personal insults?


Ya know, I was wondering the same thing. Here is a legitimate thread, providing
information for both sides. But, it has to be drug down by a few who can't resist
going to attack mode.

Un-real!

As for the thread, no, cruise ship passengers aren't required to pay a fee to get off
the ship onto a Bahama Island.

Skipper,

The beauty about the tax, is you and anyone else who does not want to
pay the tax, just just avoid going to the Bahamas, If enough people
"boycott" the Bahamas, then they will resend the tax. My feeling is it
will stop some of the "cruisers" who anchor in the Bahamas for the
winter, but don't really spend much money locally. My feeling is those
who are contributing to the local economy really won't care about the
$300 tax. They will consider the $300 tax a pittance to the money they
will spend in gas, fishing and entertainment they spend in the Bahamas.

I think the $300 tax is doing exactly what the Bahamians wanted when
they set up the tax. Discourage the boaters and cruisers who were not
spending money in the Bahamas, from utilizing the services and natural
beauty of the islands.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *********************
If you would like to make rec.boats an enjoyable place to discuss
boating, please do not respond to the political and inflammatory
off- topic posts and flames.
************************************************** *********************

Reggie Smithers wrote:

The beauty about the tax, is you and anyone else who does not want to
pay the tax, just just avoid going to the Bahamas, If enough people
"boycott" the Bahamas, then they will resend the tax.

I see very little "beauty" in *any* additional taxes. Matter of fact, I
can remember a day not too distant where boaters found great freedom in
boating. Made no dif whether the local lake or distant shore, boating
had much more "beauty" before politicians stuck their mugs into the
picture.

Before this current PC big government culture developed, *exorbitant*
tributes and "fees" extracted on foreign shores were considered a form
of extortion or piracy. Now, precisely because we remain silent and not
retaliate, we pay $20+++ per head to enter Mexico and $300 to enter
Burmuda.

I'm for tougher borders and Piggly Wiggly fees for those who gouge us.

My feeling is it will stop some of the "cruisers" who anchor in the
Bahamas for the winter, but don't really spend much money locally.
My feeling is those who are contributing to the local economy really
won't care about the $300 tax. They will consider the $300 tax a pittance
to the money they will spend in gas, fishing and entertainment they spend
in the Bahamas.

Those rationales were not used by the supporters of the fee when it was
initiated. They sold it as rich Americans paying for their "suffering."
It was sold as income redistribution and support for their
"infrustructure."

I think the $300 tax is doing exactly what the Bahamians wanted when
they set up the tax. Discourage the boaters and cruisers who were not
spending money in the Bahamas, from utilizing the services and natural
beauty of the islands.

And I think allowing this targeted abuse against boaters without
retaliation just encourages more of the same in the future.

--
Skipper

Skipper wrote:
Reggie Smithers wrote:


The beauty about the tax, is you and anyone else who does not want to
pay the tax, just just avoid going to the Bahamas, If enough people
"boycott" the Bahamas, then they will resend the tax.


I see very little "beauty" in *any* additional taxes. Matter of fact, I
can remember a day not too distant where boaters found great freedom in
boating. Made no dif whether the local lake or distant shore, boating
had much more "beauty" before politicians stuck their mugs into the
picture.

Before this current PC big government culture developed, *exorbitant*
tributes and "fees" extracted on foreign shores were considered a form
of extortion or piracy. Now, precisely because we remain silent and not
retaliate, we pay $20+++ per head to enter Mexico and $300 to enter
Burmuda.

I'm for tougher borders and Piggly Wiggly fees for those who gouge us.


My feeling is it will stop some of the "cruisers" who anchor in the
Bahamas for the winter, but don't really spend much money locally.
My feeling is those who are contributing to the local economy really
won't care about the $300 tax. They will consider the $300 tax a pittance
to the money they will spend in gas, fishing and entertainment they spend
in the Bahamas.


Those rationales were not used by the supporters of the fee when it was
initiated. They sold it as rich Americans paying for their "suffering."
It was sold as income redistribution and support for their
"infrustructure."


I think the $300 tax is doing exactly what the Bahamians wanted when
they set up the tax. Discourage the boaters and cruisers who were not
spending money in the Bahamas, from utilizing the services and natural
beauty of the islands.


And I think allowing this targeted abuse against boaters without
retaliation just encourages more of the same in the future.

--
Skipper
Skipper,
Have you contacted your senators and congressman? A usage fee charged
to those who use a service provided by the government is the fairest way
to pay for governmental services. Since boaters do utilize the local
infrastructure and services (ie police, coast guard, roads, water etc)
and many bring all of their own food and do not spend money at the local
restaurants, hotels, casinos etc. to me it makes sense for them to
charge boaters a "usage fee".

If you are against the concept of usage fee, it would make more sense
for you to lobby against motel/hotel, airport and rental car taxes used
in most American Cities. They are the exact some "usage fee" that the
Bahamians charge boaters. The Bahamians might say the usage fee is their
retaliation against our exorbitant taxes we impose on their citizens.
; )

--
Reggie
************************************************** *********************
If you would like to make rec.boats an enjoyable place to discuss
boating, please do not respond to the political and inflammatory
off- topic posts and flames.
************************************************** *********************

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 09:03:57 -0600, Skipper wrote:

Reggie Smithers wrote:

The beauty about the tax, is you and anyone else who does not want to
pay the tax, just just avoid going to the Bahamas, If enough people
"boycott" the Bahamas, then they will resend the tax.

I see very little "beauty" in *any* additional taxes. Matter of fact, I
can remember a day not too distant where boaters found great freedom in
boating. Made no dif whether the local lake or distant shore, boating
had much more "beauty" before politicians stuck their mugs into the
picture.

Before this current PC big government culture developed, *exorbitant*
tributes and "fees" extracted on foreign shores were considered a form
of extortion or piracy. Now, precisely because we remain silent and not
retaliate, we pay $20+++ per head to enter Mexico and $300 to enter
Burmuda.

I'm for tougher borders and Piggly Wiggly fees for those who gouge us.

My feeling is it will stop some of the "cruisers" who anchor in the
Bahamas for the winter, but don't really spend much money locally.
My feeling is those who are contributing to the local economy really
won't care about the $300 tax. They will consider the $300 tax a pittance
to the money they will spend in gas, fishing and entertainment they spend
in the Bahamas.

Those rationales were not used by the supporters of the fee when it was
initiated. They sold it as rich Americans paying for their "suffering."
It was sold as income redistribution and support for their
"infrustructure."

I think the $300 tax is doing exactly what the Bahamians wanted when
they set up the tax. Discourage the boaters and cruisers who were not
spending money in the Bahamas, from utilizing the services and natural
beauty of the islands.

And I think allowing this targeted abuse against boaters without
retaliation just encourages more of the same in the future.

Skipper, didn't this happen two and a half years ago? I'm not trying to be obnoxious
here, but what prompted the anger now instead of long ago?

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes