Interesting article about Zhai Mo's attempted arctic circumnavigation being stopped (or not--that is disputed) by Transport Canada.  
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/northwest-passage-canada-china-1.6178521 

I was not aware of Zhai Mo or his voyage in his "25 metre solar powered yacht", but apparently it has been well covered by CGTN.   

To me, it seems late in the season to be entering Lancaster Sound.   A quick look at the ice charts for his route (as it is shown in the link below) shows the approaches to Resolute at 5 tenths ice coverage, and McClure Strait at 9 tenths, so I could see him wanting to change or delay the voyage for ice reasons. 

Zhai Mo doesn't seem to be in the OCC Membership Directory (perhaps we should invite him), and his voyage seems to be a cross between a private and a state-sponsored expedition.   Some more information about his voyage is at https://www.rcinet.ca/eye-on-the-arctic/2021/07/07/blog-a-chinese-sailboat-is-circumnavigating-the-arctic/

+x

 

Bill Balme - 24 Jul 2021

+x

 

Richard Hudson - 8 Jul 2021

+x

 

Bill Balme - 7 Jul 2021

Is the NW Passage Canadian or International waters?
If the latter as is claimed by Peter, it seems to me the Canadians had no right to close it.
If Canadian, then by all means, they should be free to keep everyone out.

Whether the Northwest Passage (or parts of it) is in Canadian waters seems the crux of the issue, and the answer is that it's disputed (the Lawfare link in Daria's original post explains this well).

So it's not clear that Canada can legally control transits of the NW Passage.

While I agree that cruisers absolutely should respect the laws and customs of the places they visit, I think Peter Smith was put in a difficult situation.  
He had been in contact with the Canadian government, which had initially said that non-stop transits were acceptable ("Foreign pleasure craft exercising the right of innocent passage").

The Canadian government then reversed that and told Peter Smith six days after he left Nome, that he was not going to be allowed to transit the NW Passage ( https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/new-zealand-yacht-cambridge-bay-nunavut-1.5698347 ).

Six days after leaving Nome would have put Peter a fair ways into the NW Passage (which is generally considered to start in the Bering Strait, between Alaska and Russia), somewhere along the north coast of Alaska.

From a position off the north coast of Alaska, to be told by a country that has just reversed it's decision, on allowing transit through waters that may or may not be part of that country, should one abort and head for Panama?   

Would the Panama Canal be open by the time one got there, or could it have locked down for Covid?
Would it be better to sail nonstop (in case Chile locked down) for Cape Horn instead?
Or, as a foreigner on a foreign yacht, to ask the USA for permission to stay in Alaska until Covid was over?

Again, I absolutely do agree that cruisers should respect the laws and customs of the countries they visit and 'leave a clean wake', but I think in this case, there were extenuating circumstances.  

Interestingly, we arrived in Santa Maria, Azores a few days ago, and there's this substantial expedition aluminium boat tied to one of the docks - and on closer examination I see that it's Peter Smith's Kiwi Roa!

So we invited Peter (as well as another OCC boat - Asante) over to Toodle-oo! last night for sundowners - and of course I asked Peter about his recent experience in the NWP.

He's quite clear in his own mind that the NWP is an international waterway - which the Canadians appear to be trying to annex into Canadian Territory, but that many countries - including the UK dispute.

Richard, your summary seems to be right on the money in terms of timing involved in Canada's sudden refusal of passage - and clearly was an onerous task for Peter to adhere to. Instead, he ploughed on, following all normal guidance, including twice daily contact with the Canadian authorities and made it through unscathed, with zero interaction with the locals.

It's somewhat reasonable that the Canadians have something of a say in how the passage is navigated, but it seems to me that they have zero right to prevent a boat from making the passage. The argument that the Canadian CG is exposed unnecessarily, also feel highly bogus, when one considers for example the number of boats present in the NWP compared to, for example, the number of foreign boats the New Zealand CG has to rescue on an annual basis around their international waters.

Anyway, Peter has been fined by the Canadians and is fighting it forthrightly - and is likely to gain backing from various governments that are not willing to allow Canada to quietly annex the NWP as their own territory. Good luck to him!

Hey Bill,
Thanks for sharing this story and getting it directly from Peter. It must have been an interesting encounter.
Cheers,
Daria

Vice Commodore, OCC 

Bill Balme: So we invited Peter (as well as another OCC boat - Asante) over to Toodle-oo! last night for sundowners - and of course I asked Peter about his recent experience in the NWP.

Interesting that you got to hear Peter's story directly.   I'm sorry to hear that Canada has fined him (I only knew that fines were threatened).  

+x

 

Richard Hudson - 8 Jul 2021

+x

 

Bill Balme - 7 Jul 2021

Is the NW Passage Canadian or International waters?
If the latter as is claimed by Peter, it seems to me the Canadians had no right to close it.
If Canadian, then by all means, they should be free to keep everyone out.

Whether the Northwest Passage (or parts of it) is in Canadian waters seems the crux of the issue, and the answer is that it's disputed (the Lawfare link in Daria's original post explains this well).

So it's not clear that Canada can legally control transits of the NW Passage.

While I agree that cruisers absolutely should respect the laws and customs of the places they visit, I think Peter Smith was put in a difficult situation.  
He had been in contact with the Canadian government, which had initially said that non-stop transits were acceptable ("Foreign pleasure craft exercising the right of innocent passage").

The Canadian government then reversed that and told Peter Smith six days after he left Nome, that he was not going to be allowed to transit the NW Passage ( https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/new-zealand-yacht-cambridge-bay-nunavut-1.5698347 ).

Six days after leaving Nome would have put Peter a fair ways into the NW Passage (which is generally considered to start in the Bering Strait, between Alaska and Russia), somewhere along the north coast of Alaska.

From a position off the north coast of Alaska, to be told by a country that has just reversed it's decision, on allowing transit through waters that may or may not be part of that country, should one abort and head for Panama?   

Would the Panama Canal be open by the time one got there, or could it have locked down for Covid?
Would it be better to sail nonstop (in case Chile locked down) for Cape Horn instead?
Or, as a foreigner on a foreign yacht, to ask the USA for permission to stay in Alaska until Covid was over?

Again, I absolutely do agree that cruisers should respect the laws and customs of the countries they visit and 'leave a clean wake', but I think in this case, there were extenuating circumstances.  

Interestingly, we arrived in Santa Maria, Azores a few days ago, and there's this substantial expedition aluminium boat tied to one of the docks - and on closer examination I see that it's Peter Smith's Kiwi Roa!

So we invited Peter (as well as another OCC boat - Asante) over to Toodle-oo! last night for sundowners - and of course I asked Peter about his recent experience in the NWP.

He's quite clear in his own mind that the NWP is an international waterway - which the Canadians appear to be trying to annex into Canadian Territory, but that many countries - including the UK dispute.

Richard, your summary seems to be right on the money in terms of timing involved in Canada's sudden refusal of passage - and clearly was an onerous task for Peter to adhere to. Instead, he ploughed on, following all normal guidance, including twice daily contact with the Canadian authorities and made it through unscathed, with zero interaction with the locals.

It's somewhat reasonable that the Canadians have something of a say in how the passage is navigated, but it seems to me that they have zero right to prevent a boat from making the passage. The argument that the Canadian CG is exposed unnecessarily, also feel highly bogus, when one considers for example the number of boats present in the NWP compared to, for example, the number of foreign boats the New Zealand CG has to rescue on an annual basis around their international waters.

Anyway, Peter has been fined by the Canadians and is fighting it forthrightly - and is likely to gain backing from various governments that are not willing to allow Canada to quietly annex the NWP as their own territory. Good luck to him!





Bill Balme

+x

 

Dick - 8 Jul 2021

+x

 

Richard Hudson - 8 Jul 2021

+x

 

Bill Balme - 7 Jul 2021

Is the NW Passage Canadian or International waters?
If the latter as is claimed by Peter, it seems to me the Canadians had no right to close it.
If Canadian, then by all means, they should be free to keep everyone out.

Whether the Northwest Passage (or parts of it) is in Canadian waters seems the crux of the issue, and the answer is that it's disputed (the Lawfare link in Daria's original post explains this well).

So it's not clear that Canada can legally control transits of the NW Passage.

While I agree that cruisers absolutely should respect the laws and customs of the places they visit, I think Peter Smith was put in a difficult situation.  
He had been in contact with the Canadian government, which had initially said that non-stop transits were acceptable ("Foreign pleasure craft exercising the right of innocent passage").

The Canadian government then reversed that and told Peter Smith six days after he left Nome, that he was not going to be allowed to transit the NW Passage ( https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/new-zealand-yacht-cambridge-bay-nunavut-1.5698347 ).

Six days after leaving Nome would have put Peter a fair ways into the NW Passage (which is generally considered to start in the Bering Strait, between Alaska and Russia), somewhere along the north coast of Alaska.

From a position off the north coast of Alaska, to be told by a country that has just reversed it's decision, on allowing transit through waters that may or may not be part of that country, should one abort and head for Panama?   

Would the Panama Canal be open by the time one got there, or could it have locked down for Covid?
Would it be better to sail nonstop (in case Chile locked down) for Cape Horn instead?
Or, as a foreigner on a foreign yacht, to ask the USA for permission to stay in Alaska until Covid was over?

Again, I absolutely do agree that cruisers should respect the laws and customs of the countries they visit and 'leave a clean wake', but I think in this case, there were extenuating circumstances.  

Hi Richard and all, 
There sound to be extenuating circumstances in what you describe. My only knowledge was the recent posts and the details included there.
As with many of my comments, I respond to Forum posts sometimes specifically or sometimes to make broader and more general observations when I feel that my comments apply and might be of benefit/interest to our wider cruising community.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy

Hi Dick,
I thought your comments on this topic were both well-stated and valuable. 
I agree with your points in general, I just wanted to mention what I saw as extenuating circumstances in this particular situation.
Richard

+x

 

Richard Hudson - 8 Jul 2021

+x

 

Bill Balme - 7 Jul 2021

Is the NW Passage Canadian or International waters?
If the latter as is claimed by Peter, it seems to me the Canadians had no right to close it.
If Canadian, then by all means, they should be free to keep everyone out.

Whether the Northwest Passage (or parts of it) is in Canadian waters seems the crux of the issue, and the answer is that it's disputed (the Lawfare link in Daria's original post explains this well).

So it's not clear that Canada can legally control transits of the NW Passage.

While I agree that cruisers absolutely should respect the laws and customs of the places they visit, I think Peter Smith was put in a difficult situation.  
He had been in contact with the Canadian government, which had initially said that non-stop transits were acceptable ("Foreign pleasure craft exercising the right of innocent passage").

The Canadian government then reversed that and told Peter Smith six days after he left Nome, that he was not going to be allowed to transit the NW Passage ( https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/new-zealand-yacht-cambridge-bay-nunavut-1.5698347 ).

Six days after leaving Nome would have put Peter a fair ways into the NW Passage (which is generally considered to start in the Bering Strait, between Alaska and Russia), somewhere along the north coast of Alaska.

From a position off the north coast of Alaska, to be told by a country that has just reversed it's decision, on allowing transit through waters that may or may not be part of that country, should one abort and head for Panama?   

Would the Panama Canal be open by the time one got there, or could it have locked down for Covid?
Would it be better to sail nonstop (in case Chile locked down) for Cape Horn instead?
Or, as a foreigner on a foreign yacht, to ask the USA for permission to stay in Alaska until Covid was over?

Again, I absolutely do agree that cruisers should respect the laws and customs of the countries they visit and 'leave a clean wake', but I think in this case, there were extenuating circumstances.  

Hi Richard and all, 
There sound to be extenuating circumstances in what you describe. My only knowledge was the recent posts and the details included there.
As with many of my comments, I respond to Forum posts sometimes specifically or sometimes to make broader and more general observations when I feel that my comments apply and might be of benefit/interest to our wider cruising community.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy

+x

 

Bill Balme - 7 Jul 2021

Is the NW Passage Canadian or International waters?
If the latter as is claimed by Peter, it seems to me the Canadians had no right to close it.
If Canadian, then by all means, they should be free to keep everyone out.

Whether the Northwest Passage (or parts of it) is in Canadian waters seems the crux of the issue, and the answer is that it's disputed (the Lawfare link in Daria's original post explains this well).

So it's not clear that Canada can legally control transits of the NW Passage.

While I agree that cruisers absolutely should respect the laws and customs of the places they visit, I think Peter Smith was put in a difficult situation.  
He had been in contact with the Canadian government, which had initially said that non-stop transits were acceptable ("Foreign pleasure craft exercising the right of innocent passage").

The Canadian government then reversed that and told Peter Smith six days after he left Nome, that he was not going to be allowed to transit the NW Passage ( https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/new-zealand-yacht-cambridge-bay-nunavut-1.5698347 ).

Six days after leaving Nome would have put Peter a fair ways into the NW Passage (which is generally considered to start in the Bering Strait, between Alaska and Russia), somewhere along the north coast of Alaska.

From a position off the north coast of Alaska, to be told by a country that has just reversed it's decision, on allowing transit through waters that may or may not be part of that country, should one abort and head for Panama?   

Would the Panama Canal be open by the time one got there, or could it have locked down for Covid?
Would it be better to sail nonstop (in case Chile locked down) for Cape Horn instead?
Or, as a foreigner on a foreign yacht, to ask the USA for permission to stay in Alaska until Covid was over?

Again, I absolutely do agree that cruisers should respect the laws and customs of the countries they visit and 'leave a clean wake', but I think in this case, there were extenuating circumstances.  

+x

 

Bill Balme - 7 Jul 2021

Is the NW Passage Canadian or International waters?
If the latter as is claimed by Peter, it seems to me the Canadians had no right to close it.
If Canadian, then by all means, they should be free to keep everyone out.

Hi Bill,
You bring up legal/colregs issues which, in the end, certainly apply. I do not know the legalities. I am focused more on judgment and what is in the best interests of the cruising community. It may have been perfectly “legal” to have transited the NW Passage, but I wish the skipper had swallowed his disappointment, and respected Canada’s wishes. And I wish all in our cruising community to keep in mind that we are pleasure vessels and guests: the rules and regs may not strictly apply to us, but we need to respect them none-the-less.
I relish the freedom that our sport benefits from and very much want to keep this freedom from outside regulation. Skippers who are undisciplined or dis-respectful invite regulation/limits-to-freedom in just the way Jon described in the previous post. Once regs and rules are devised, they take on a life of their own.
An example: there little in the way of regulations applying to pleasure vessels in polar waters while there is a whole set of regs for commercial vessels in polar waters. There has been an uptick in recreational vessels needing assistance in polar waters: notably in the NW Passage from Canadian CG (many times the boat was poorly prepared and/or the skipper/crew had little ice experience and, sometimes bad luck). And there is an uptick in worry that rules and regs may be required for pleasure vessels. In the interests if forestalling outside regulation, a group of high latitude recreational sailors have worked up guidelines for pleasure vessels in polar waters: the Polar Yacht Guide (discussed elsewhere in the Forum).
More to the point:
It is covid time and countries are allowed to be skittish. It is Canadian villages that border the route and would be sought for bail-outs if the vessel/crew was unlucky. It would be vulnerable Canadian village people who would get covid if bad luck prevailed (say a villager rowed out to sell some fish to the transiting vessel). The villagers are vulnerable in a number of ways, but particularly vulnerable to covid because of the often-higher-tech treatment demands.
For the above, that is enough for me to give permission for Canada to close the NW passage.
In addition, it is Canadian CG vessels that patrol it. I am pretty sure also that it is Canadian ice breakers that keep it clear and that occasionally clear the way for stuck pleasure boats.
Finally, you bring up the legalities (territorial limits): I would suggest, as pleasure vessels, that we pay strict attention to the legalities, but that we also recognize that most were written with commercial vessels in mind. If we, as cruisers, absolutely need a harbour of refuge or a right of innocent passage, then go for it, but when it is a choice which flaunts a country’s stated wishes, then I would wish a cruiser to, perhaps disagree, but to respect and abide by the country’s wishes.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy  

Is the NW Passage Canadian or International waters?
If the latter as is claimed by Peter, it seems to me the Canadians had no right to close it.
If Canadian, then by all means, they should be free to keep everyone out.


Bill Balme

+x

 

Dick - 23 Jun 2021

+x

 

Daria Blackwell - 23 Jun 2021

Attached is a list of completed transits of the NW Passage as of 2019.  As far as I know, there was only one completed transit by a pleasure craft in 2020, the year of the pandemic when Canada closed its borders, which was by Peter Smith.  He not only transited the Passage, Kiwi Roa challenged Canadian restrictions to innocent passage rights.

"His successful transit marks the first time that a vessel invoked innocent passage and navigated through the Northwest Passage in defiance of explicit Canadian disapproval. Canada’s claim of effective control will now always have the Kiwi Roa asterisk hanging over it."

I was following Peter the entire way last year and wrote about it in my blog. He did it without ever going ashore and sailing much more of the distance than most.

Meanwhile, in February, Canada announced a one-year ban on pleasure craft transiting the NW Passage.

What a long strange year it's been.

Hi Daria,
I would like to push the position that, we, as cruisers, are wise to be good guests in the countries we visit. Whether we agree with positions taken by the countries where we are a visitor or not, I would urge respect and adherence. Had the vessel in question gotten in any sort of trouble, it would have been Canada and its shore-lined communities who would have had to deal with it: this in a time of stress and uncertainty with the pandemic.
So, I am not surprised that Canada has closed the NW passage for the coming season. I hope no cruising/pleasure vessel attempts to flaunt their wishes. I do not know whether the behavior of the skipper/vessel you described played any part with Canada’s decision, but it certainly could not have helped.
I do know that there are consequences when cruisers do not leave a clean wake. Not only are bad feelings left behind, but the next cruisers to come along will not have the benefit of easy acceptance which normally comes our way.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy

Dick -- I fully agree. The dirty wake affects us all. The number of cruisers who are ignoring closed borders and just showing up places expecting (and sometimes demanding) to be allowed entry is troublesome. Those that declare fake emergencies to gain safe harbor when told they otherwise may not enter also tarnish the community's reputation. It will all make yacht entries more complicated even after COVID-19 measures are withdrawn. We should all remember to be good guests outside our own homes.

Cruising with pets quarantined aboard in the Galapagos was ruined by one cruiser who had to take their dog out on a paddle board. There will be many more reactionary restrictions placed on us all due to the actions of a few. 

Jon