Coast Guard tipping ships about searches:

[BoomerD]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060520/ts_nm/transport_coastguard_dc_1

"NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Coast Guard has been tipping off some large commercial ships about security searches that had formerly been conducted without warning, The New York Times reported on Saturday.

Citing high-ranking Coast Guard officials, the Times said that intense pressure from shipping companies concerned about the cost of delays had led commanders in some ports to provide up to 24 hours notice of searches, which began after the 9/11 attacks as part of the service's new anti-terrorism mission.

"We're trying to facilitate commerce and keep the port secure" and sometimes the two conflict," the Times quoted Capt. Paul Wiedenhoeft, who is in charge of the port complex at Los Angeles and Long Beach as saying. "When possible, we're trying to give shippers as much notice as we can," he told the paper.

The result has been considerable confusion and debate within the Coast Guard, the Times said, with commanders in some ports acknowledging that they provided up to 24 hours notice while others said the practice undermined the inspections. And there was even disagreement about the best approach within the command at some ports, it said.

For example, the port captain in San Francisco, Capt. William Uberti, said shippers and carriers were "not supposed to have a clue" about possible random boardings, but his security chief said the command gave companies notice, the Times reported.

Capt. Frank Sturm, a top policy official at headquarters in Washington, told the newspaper the national policy on the boardings was fluid, depending on suspicions which were based on what a ship reported it was carrying and the makeup of its crew. He did he not provide details of how many ships were given notice, in which ports or under what circumstances.

"In some cases," he said, "it would not surprise me to tell a captain of a ship in advance," he was quoted as saying. And another Coast Guard official in Washington, Paul Thorne, said the practice had not weakened security, saying threats were "being adeptly managed by local captains of the port."

A Coast Guard spokesman in New York, Mike Lutz, said nearly 1,000 boats a year were boarded for security reasons in the ports of New York and New Jersey and that all the inspections were a surprise. "If they're from a foreign port and trying to get into the United States, they should know they might get boarded" without warning," Lutz said.

A typical search involves checking the crew and cargo manifests against those filed with the ports, and sea marshals check identification cards against the faces of crew members, the Times said. Inspectors sometimes bring bomb-sniffing dogs and inspect for radiation. Reviews can last a half hour or a half day, it said. "

Sure seems like if an inspection is going to be effective, it needs to have an element of surprise to it, NOT be pre-warned...24 hours give a lot of time to hide anything that the Coast Guard might otherwise find, or give terrorists time to exit the vessel. Kind of like giving a drug dealer notice that you're coming to break down his doors...tomorrow...

 

[fitzov]

Sounds similar to DHS (border patrol) notifying Mexican officials of Minutemen locations.

It's all about the benjamins.

 

[techs]

We can't have large ships waiting to unload cargo while inspections are taking place.
After all whats more important? Money or the possibility of losing a city to a nuke?

 

[Jani]

I believe that large shipping companies aren't harbouring terrorist, they are transferring goods from place a to place b. Schedules are made really tight so 12 hours delays because of face checking is wasted money and it makes really difficult to catch that 12 hour delay later.

If ship comes from other continent ship's crew can't do anything exept hrow illegals over board if they receive information about possible searches 24 hours before harbour. There is a lot of paper work to do before entering port and also right after port entry so it's little easier to search all meaningful papers for USCG officials before everything else.

In my opinion US has tried everything to disturb normal seaman's life, it's more difficult than it was in the 80's to enter Soviet Union. Last summer we were carrying oil from Europe to Florida and seamen weren't allowed to leave shipto walk around in harbour area. That was only because that oil harbour wasn't "official port to enter states". Or before entering Great Lakes it's about 24 hours work without any breaks, after that waiting another 12 hours for some security checks (are they coming or not) is total useless.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: Jani
I believe that large shipping companies aren't harbouring terrorist, they are transferring goods from place a to place b. Schedules are made really tight so 12 hours delays because of face checking is wasted money and it makes really difficult to catch that 12 hour delay later.

If ship comes from other continent ship's crew can't do anything exept hrow illegals over board if they receive information about possible searches 24 hours before harbour. There is a lot of paper work to do before entering port and also right after port entry so it's little easier to search all meaningful papers for USCG officials before everything else.

In my opinion US has tried everything to disturb normal seaman's life, it's more difficult than it was in the 80's to enter Soviet Union. Last summer we were carrying oil from Europe to Florida and seamen weren't allowed to leave shipto walk around in harbour area. That was only because that oil harbour wasn't "official port to enter states". Or before entering Great Lakes it's about 24 hours work without any breaks, after that waiting another 12 hours for some security checks (are they coming or not) is total useless.

I have sailed on merchant ships for 24 years and I agree with Jani. The demands put on ship have steadily been increasing to the point where it becomes ridiculous at times. US has always had the most stringent requirements for ships. I recall a time when our ship came to New Orleans at 2.00 am in the morning and immigration insisted on me waking my 2 & 4 yr old children to bring them down to the ships office as immigration has to 'see' every one on board the ship. I even offered to take him up to my cabin to see the sleeping children but he insisted we bring them to him.

Bear in mind that the crew list of every ship is sent to the US authorities as soon as it leaves the foreign port as well as cargo manifests. This has been a requirement for at least 20 years than I can remember. US Coasy Guard has also inspected ships for that long or more. So it's not as if immigration/ / customs / USCG don't know what to expect before the ship arrives.

In all my years the 2 most difficult countries to deal with from a ships point of view were the Soviet Union and USA. We're not talking about a simple airport type security check.

What they really need to do is have the equipment to check the cargo after it has been unloaded on the dock - container scanners etc. That way the ships will not have to waste time - it costs about 50-70 K per day to run an average ship and someone has to pay for the cost. It's not surprising that shipping co's and shippers would put pressure to reduce the time.

Jani IMHO the ships that throw stowaways overboard are the exception rather than the rule. I know none of the ships I was on would do anything like that.

 

[AAjax]

Originally posted by: fitzov
Sounds similar to DHS (border patrol) notifying Mexican officials of Minutemen locations.

It's all about the benjamins.

My thoughts exactly, seems we are being sold out (big surprise)

 

[BoomerD]

While I understand that running a ship is costly, if we're going to be serious about security, then inconveniencing the ship owners and it's crew is bound to happen. Sorry about your kids, but with the enhanced terrorism scares, you should have been prepared for that.EVERY ship should be inspected before it hits US ports. Unfortunately, there's no way to inspect all cargos before they get into our ports, but, with container ships and such, that would be like looking for a needle in a haystack. To me, it six that someone could stick a nuke, bio-bomb, or dirty bomb in a container, and have it make it into a major US city undetected, just because we don't want to inconvenience a shipping company. As usual, the government rolls over and plays dead when someone waves a few $$$ in their faces...

 

[Jani]

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

Jani IMHO the ships that throw stowaways overboard are the exception rather than the rule. I know none of the ships I was on would do anything like that.

By illegals i meant illegal persons Throwing waste overboard... I believe real seamen don't act this way. Ships and seas are our workplaces and they are kept in good conditions.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
While I understand that running a ship is costly, if we're going to be serious about security, then inconveniencing the ship owners and it's crew is bound to happen. Sorry about your kids, but with the enhanced terrorism scares, you should have been prepared for that.EVERY ship should be inspected before it hits US ports. Unfortunately, there's no way to inspect all cargos before they get into our ports, but, with container ships and such, that would be like looking for a needle in a haystack. To me, it six that someone could stick a nuke, bio-bomb, or dirty bomb in a container, and have it make it into a major US city undetected, just because we don't want to inconvenience a shipping company. As usual, the government rolls over and plays dead when someone waves a few $$$ in their faces...

Pal, the incident with my kids was in 1988 - way before enhanced security was in operation. I was just pointing out how ridiculous they could get.

The costs of running a ship are only increasing. Just because our govt can't get it's act together is not sufficient reason to burden the ship owner with additional costs which in turn puts pressure on the crew to try & catch up with the delays. In response to the OP the coast guard does base their inspections on suspicions.

Boomer I disagree The techonology exists to chek every container arriving in the US. It's a matter of allocating resources. It's not like looking for a needlw in the haystack.

more later

 

[imported_Aelius]

In a different time in our history this would be bordering on treason. Today we barely give it a second thought.

sick...

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

Originally posted by: BoomerD
While I understand that running a ship is costly, if we're going to be serious about security, then inconveniencing the ship owners and it's crew is bound to happen. Sorry about your kids, but with the enhanced terrorism scares, you should have been prepared for that.EVERY ship should be inspected before it hits US ports. Unfortunately, there's no way to inspect all cargos before they get into our ports, but, with container ships and such, that would be like looking for a needle in a haystack. To me, it six that someone could stick a nuke, bio-bomb, or dirty bomb in a container, and have it make it into a major US city undetected, just because we don't want to inconvenience a shipping company. As usual, the government rolls over and plays dead when someone waves a few $$$ in their faces...

Pal, the incident with my kids was in 1988 - way before enhanced security was in operation. I was just pointing out how ridiculous they could get.
Well, we ARE talking about the US government...ridiculous is their middle name in 88, drug trafficing was the main concern of the Coast Guard. While I'm not an able seaman by trade, I have been so classified under the Jones Act because of my work on Crane and Derrick barges. I do understant how ridiculous they can be.


The costs of running a ship are only increasing. Just because our govt can't get it's act together is not sufficient reason to burden the ship owner with additional costs which in turn puts pressure on the crew to try & catch up with the delays. In response to the OP the coast guard does base their inspections on suspicions.

Boomer I disagree The techonology exists to chek every container arriving in the US. It's a matter of allocating resources. It's not like looking for a needlw in the haystack.

Does the technology exist t check each container while the ship is at sea, or after they've been unloaded? That I always presumed WAS available, but it slows things down enough, that the port authorities have resisted it to contain costs, and to keep cargo moving.


more later

 

[GroundedSailor]

Boomer I understand about the Jones Act. I work in marine construction now and deal with dcokbuilders, OE's crane barges - all come under Jones Act.

The definition of a vessel is:
Every kind of water and air craft or other contrivance used or capable of being used as a means of transportation on water, or on water and in the air, as well as any ship, boat, barge, or other water craft or any structure capable of floating on the water.

Crane and Derrick barges easily come under this definition of a vessel, and if you spend more than 30% of your time on such a vessel you qualify as a seaman for the purpose of Jones Act. Jones act is basically an workers compensation law which protects your rights if you are injured. You should be glad because it has far more protections for you than regular workers compensation. It has nothing to with your particular trade nor does it change your trade.

As far as drug trafficking, what does waking up a sleeping 2 year old in the middle of the night have to do with drug trafficking? It was just the stupidity of that particular individual who was hiding behind regulations to boost his self importance.

The benefits of security are shared by everyone and security is the duty of the Govt, so how is it fair to burden the shipowner with those costs? Because ships do not get any press coverage except negative coverage, the world at large is not aware of issues that industry faces. If we end up slowing down commerce and raising costs then the terrorists have won.

BTW Seamen are very concerned about security and ships take elaborate measures when transiting certain areas like Malacca Straits and certain African waters. Ships have followed basic measures for many many years, like searching the ship before leaving port. restricting access to people coming on board - before 9/11 - at least the better run ship did.

Yes the technology to check containers at sea does not exists but it does once the container is landed ashore. We should not be relying on other countries checking containers for our security. We should have sufficient machines here in the US to random check a certain percentage of containers. That way the whole ship is not delayed. A few containers delayed by a few hours will not have that much effect and can easily be catered for by consignees. Those machines exist and can be installed. But our money is wasted elsewhere which is why we have don't this most basic measure.

 

[Meuge]

I understand that it's inconvenient, but that's the world we live in. However, back to the OP, it doesn't really matter, since we know that anything can be brought over the Mexico border, so it makes no sense to check shipping anyway.