Domestic Port Security as it relates to visiting mariners remains nothing more than a charade, intended to make the general public feel a little bit better. Reader response to my first column tells how and why.
My last MarPro entry garnered more than a little attention with multiple posts to the web site from readers and a raft of E-mails. The original piece involved a look at a recent GAO report that examined, among other things, “Risks Posed by Seafarers.” To say that the report was an eye-opener in terms of misguided priorities would not be overstating the case. As a minimum, it gives you a hint as to why someone might not want to go to sea in 2012. Most readers seemed to agree that the situation was indeed getting worse. And, while my focus went towards the full breadth of what sends potential mariners fleeing for land, the issue of shore leave (or lack thereof) is clearly a sore point – maybe THE point – for many.
One E-mail came from an old friend who is still at sea. He wrote to me this week, “Here's a little story about Seafarer's and Shore Leave: I arrived by (US flag) tug and barge at a refinery on the U.S. East Coast. We wanted to get to the store to pick up some fresh produce and a couple gallons of milk. Two of us walked from our dock about a quarter-mile through the refinery, past storage tanks, under pipelines and along a pier where a VLCC was discharging. We got to the main gate where the security guard told us that to get through the gate we would have to have a security escort. Knowing full well what the office would say about hiring an outside contractor to escort us one giant step round-trip, we tried to convince the security guard that we were harmless and just wanted to make a quick trip to the grocery store. He was steadfast and refused to allow us to pass. So, we retraced our steps through the terminal past the storage tanks, under the pipelines and by the VLCC, completely unchallenged and unescorted and returned to the tug empty-handed. I really felt secure knowing that a hard-working and diligent person was manning the gate to keep us safe.”
It’s a sad story but one that resonates across dozens of ports nationwide. The bottom line is that if the effort is to keep seamen from going ashore – our own mariners, for crying out loud (all of whom possess TWIC cards that deem them safe, right?) – then the real emphasis should be on protecting the facility first. In the case depicted above, it is clear that no one is being protected from anybody. Along the way, the rights of seafarers are being abridged under a broken rule that is haphazardly applied in an uneven manner. It doesn’t have to be this way. Let me explain why:
In another “Joe Keefe” sea story, I was sailing on the U.S. West coast in the summer of 1979 on a VLCC running back and forth from Valdez, AK to various stops in Washington and California. Just a cadet at the time, I didn’t have a whole lot of responsibility and I often tried to get ashore when we were in port. On our first voyage up to Valdez, I decided to go for a run. Descending the gangway, I broke into a trot and headed out on that quarter-mile jetty so familiar to the myriad mariners who have berthed there 1,000 times. At the end of the pier, I turned right into the tank farm area and looked to continue my run. Or so I thought.
Within 90 seconds, I was cut off by a speeding SUV with flashing lights and two very unfriendly security guards. One of them asked brusquely, “Where do you think you are going?” I paused, caught my breath and said, “Um, running?” In way of response, the big one snarled, “Get in the car.” I didn’t need to be told twice. Brought all the way back to the ship, I was told not to come ashore again without the requisite escort – which could be had by a simple radio call to the dock. Later, I did just that and they drove me to the front gate and then even called me a cab. That’s how to do security.
At the Valdez crude oil terminal, back then, the real concern was that clueless cadets made tasty snacks for the bears which could plainly be seen via binoculars (from the safety of the ship) playing in the massive tank farm on the hill. Sure, security for the number one source of domestic crude oil (at that time) was a factor, too. Unlike our present day Mate on the east coast, no doubt I was also under video surveillance from the nanosecond that I started my lazy jog down the pier.
The point is easy to see: if the world’s merchant seafarers pose such an ominous threat to U.S. infrastructure, then do the security job properly or not at all. The restrictions in place at the moment represent no more than a paper tiger; a charade to make the general public feel a little better while making life miserable for the very folks who largely comprise the vehicle to make the American way of life possible. A little more of this kind of treatment is bound to give those who still go to sea plenty of cause to question that decision. – MarPro.
* * *
Joseph Keefe is the lead commentator of MaritimeProfessional.com. Additionally, he is Editor of both Maritime Professional and MarineNews print magazines. He can be reached at jkeefe@maritimeprofessional.com or at Keefe@marinelink.com. MaritimeProfessional.com is the largest business networking site devoted to the marine industry. Each day thousands of industry professionals around the world log on to network, connect, and communicate.