|
Post by Retrovision on Apr 18, 2007 21:07:55 GMT -8
Here's a story from "Queen Charlotte Observer", re the implementation of photo-id requirement for some northern sailings. (it's somewhat security related, but mostly to get a more accurate manifest) www.qciobserver.com/articles.aspx?article=2629It was mentioned by crew aboard the Queen of Prince Rupert that this was to be at par with their counterparts at similar major ports in the 'States.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Apr 19, 2007 9:59:10 GMT -8
Photo id is reasonable. They should know who is on the longer trip ferries.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Apr 19, 2007 10:06:26 GMT -8
Ticketing just took my name and credit card number last time I sailed north. I didn't even have to be the one sailing I don't think. I bought a room and fares for two adults. I didn't give them the name of the second person sailing. The other person was ill so didn't come with me the last trip. I got a partial refund for his portion.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 6, 2007 18:05:23 GMT -8
www.qciobserver.com/articles.aspx?article=2647Check-in time changed ===================== BC Ferries has changed the check-in time on the Skidegate-Prince Rupert route to 90 minutes before sailing, from the previous 60 minutes, spokesperson Deborah Marshall confirmed this week. BC Ferries made the change when the Northern Adventure started serving the route April 1, she said. The recommended check-in time is two hours ahead of departure. Customers who show up later than 90 minutes before sailing risk losing their reservation. Ms Marshall said passengers are advised of the check-in time when they make their reservation. The cut-off won’t be changing back to 60 minutes even when the Queen of Prince Rupert returns to service, she said, because BC Ferries is going to start asking northern customers to provide ID, which will take extra time. Several islanders who travelled on the Northern Adventure in the past month told the Observer that ferry staff at the terminal in Prince Rupert asked them if they were from the Charlottes. If they answered yes, they received a loud lecture about how they should know better than to be late for check-in. Ms Marshall said BC Ferries does not have a policy of treating islanders differently than tourists. “Certainly not,” she said. “All customers are the same… On behalf of BC Ferries, I apologize if anyone feels they’ve been treated differently.” ===========================
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on May 7, 2007 15:22:26 GMT -8
I was there anyways when I checked into the Queen of the North because I wanted first choice of the staterooms as I was doing a round trip and sleeping on the ferry.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on May 10, 2007 9:23:34 GMT -8
Security Paranoia Again Float Planes Now Under the Microscope ---a report by a federal government Senate committee on national security and defence says that flight operations on the periphery of airport terminals present the same potential threats as passenger and cargo terminal operations. Two obvious examples are the seaplane and helicopter services at Vancouver Harbour and at Victoria Harbour. The report refers to "security neglect" involving a large variety of aircraft landing and taking off in the centre of major cities without any security searches of baggage or passengers. Airline industry officials immediately rejected the Senate recommendation, arguing that terrorists are not interested in small aircraft when they could inflict far more damage through other forms of transportation that do not screen passengers or their luggage. "You've got a B.C. ferry with 2,500 people on it," Greg McDougall, president of Richmond-based Harbour Air said in an interview. "You could drive a car bomb on the ferry and get off. You don't even have to die in the process. There is no security on the B.C. ferry boats." He went on to say that passengers on Harbour Air flights show identification, but are not screened for prohibited items. "No security and no security fee," he said. He argued that the level of security should match the risk, and that airlines shouldn't be single out. Quoted from www.yyznews.com/Apr.html
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on May 10, 2007 12:17:45 GMT -8
We say that all these threats have occured, yet I still question, is this to drive fear in people?
|
|
Kam
Voyager
Posts: 926
|
Post by Kam on May 10, 2007 12:32:02 GMT -8
. "You've got a B.C. ferry with 2,500 people on it," Greg McDougall, president of Richmond-based Harbour Air said in an interview. "You could drive a car bomb on the ferry and get off. You don't even have to die in the process. There is no security on the B.C. ferry boats." He went on to say that passengers on Harbour Air flights show identification, but are not screened for prohibited items. "No security and no security fee," he said. He argued that the level of security should match the risk, and that airlines shouldn't be single out. Quoted from www.yyznews.com/Apr.htmlMr. McDougall should check his facts... www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/04/04/bc-ferries.html
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on May 10, 2007 17:58:59 GMT -8
"I'm not a terrorist, but I play one on TV..." What's to stop someone from commandeering a C-172 from a flight school, dumping in a bladder of fuel and flying it into a fully loaded Spirit class boat? Or hijacking a float plane from HA and doing the same? Wouldn't have the same effect as say "blowing up the propane tank on a motorhome parked on a ferry" but it would sure still cause some carnage. Remember though, I didn't do it, BUT if I HAD done it, THIS is how I would have done it .......
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on May 14, 2007 21:21:07 GMT -8
It seems Departure Bay Terminal is not the only Nanaimo terminal to get the first wave of security improvements as has been reported. From the sounds of this article, Duke Point will get similar upgrades at the same time; though, from what I hear, Duke Point Terminal is the least in need of security improvements, so I wouldn't expect much to change there. ( From: www.nanaimobulletin.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=51&cat=23&id=982670&more=)
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Sept 13, 2008 9:35:55 GMT -8
During a recent trip to Tsawwassen, I couldn't help but notice the changing sights all around me. Tsawwassen terminal was once bordered by regular chain link fences that ranged from about 4' to 8' tall. At the berths, it looked like more cameras were being installed to keep watch on loading/unloading procedures. Some of you might have enjoyed walking up beside one of the berths and standing against the 4' tall fence to take a photo of the ferry arriving. That is now going to be difficult to to now, as those fences are now in the process of being replaced with taller chain link fences with barbed wire on the top. I guess it was only a matter of time before that would happen. It's really disheatening that we have to adjust to higher security levels because of the actions of various criminals out there in the world.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 14, 2008 5:01:27 GMT -8
...Some of you might have enjoyed walking up beside one of the berths and standing against the 4' tall fence to take a photo of the ferry arriving. That is now going to be difficult to to now, as those fences are now in the process of being replaced with taller chain link fences with barbed wire on the top. I guess it was only a matter of time before that would happen. It's really disheartening that we have to adjust to higher security levels because of the actions of various criminals out there in the world. .....and on a related note, how long will it be until this here forum has it's own "barbed-wire" higher security level access, because of the actions of various spammers out there in the world? Oops, that was off-topic; but that's what immediately came to mind when I read the above item. Let me try to reconcile this thought to the ferry-terminal new fence: From my experience moderating this forum, I can see the ferry-terminal point of view re the need for secured-access. There is a breaking-point that is reached where secured-access becomes more desirable than open-access. Terrorists, criminals and spammers, they probably have a couple of core-values/characteristics in common.......disregard for others being the top common-thread. Delusional thinking is another common-thread....... Yeah, a forum and it's user-access is a good metaphor for considering the ferry-terminal access issue.
|
|
|
Post by willow on Sept 14, 2008 6:42:56 GMT -8
I was told by someone who works for BC Ferries, that they are now going to be installing cameras directed out to the water at Tasawwassen terminal at all the boats in the vicinity, for security reasons.
|
|
|
Post by kerryssi on Sept 14, 2008 10:07:07 GMT -8
Those fences and cameras are only good for detecting vandals and trespassers. Real terrorists would simply buy a ticket and drive on to the ferry with a car load of explosives. The only real defence is good police work which stops them before they get to the terminals. I suppose they will eventually have explosive sniffing dogs going through the parking lot or stationed at the ticket booths.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 14, 2008 17:51:08 GMT -8
True, Kerry, but taking simple precautions such as fortifying the external perimeter is not a bad idea. Fencing is a capital cost that you only have to spend once, and having at least 8' with some razor wire atop it is NOT unreasonable. Sometimes even having the APPEARANCE of security is as good as having security. Target-hardening by making it less desirable is always a good thing. If you were a car thief, not saying you are, but which of the four cars described below would you break into - IF YOU WERE PLANNING ON STEALING THE CAR.... a) doors all locked, no club, but passenger window rolled down about 3-4"; b) doors all locked, no club, windows all rolled up; c) doors all locked, steering wheel club installed, windows all up; d) driver's door unlocked, steering wheel club installed, windows all up Would a simple blinking red/yellow light on the dashboard add a deterrent factor to any of the above? Make something look harder rather than easier and you WILL deter the casual "interlopers". There is an old saying that "locks are only for honest people" and as you state, a determined "evil do-er" will find a way to get something onboard. Wanna talk simple? How about a '02 Honda Accord coupe with 2 BBQ tanks of propane in the trunk? Manage to get yourself parked down on the MCD, say right next to the centre casing, about midships, and just manage to explode those 40lbs of propane. Want a bigger boom? How about a Budget/U-haul/Penske/Ryder 5-ton (24') moving van with 200 litres of diesel fuel and 1000# of nitrate-based fertilizer loaded in the cargo compartment (think OKC Murrow Federal Building.... and the huge smoking crater that left....) As you say, someone wanting to do something would NOT be very hard pressed to figure something out that would cause major chaos. Wanna add a measure of more chaos to the truck bomb thingy? Load in about 500# of NAILS packed around your little "package", make sure you are on a Rte-1 sailing with lots of tour buses, and detonate the thing IN PORT before the pax go upstairs; you'll end up taking out the terminal too, plus lots more casualties than at open sea ... BTW: just so that you guys know, I am NOT a terrorist, but I have taken part in "simulations" and strategies of ANTI-terrorism, where I have played the "red" team. Osama bin Hardy
|
|
|
Post by kerryssi on Sept 14, 2008 18:26:40 GMT -8
Which car would I steal? Hmmmm you don't say what they are. I would steal the one I liked best. You would be amazed at the number of people who lock their keys in their car on the ferry. I have yet to find one I could not get into. I don't think a fence would deter a terrorist. We had someone from the bomb squad give us a lecture one year. The bottom line was that you do not have a hope of finding a bomb. That has changed now with explosive sniffing dogs and detectors but you need the technology on site to be useful. If they get as far as the parking lot it is already too late.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 14, 2008 20:40:23 GMT -8
For the sake of the "demonstration", they were all identical cars, just different states of "target-hardening". You are correct though, by the time they are at the toll booth, it's too late. There are all manner of terrorist attack, ranging from an actual attack, to a financial one (fake bomb threat causing lost revenue etc), and of course the FEAR attack (again, fake threats work, or just making people be afraid of potential attacks, etc...).
Getting into a car and stealing one are different things. I agree that actually penetrating the "exterior" of a car/van/truck is not that difficult at all. Whether or not a fence would actually deter a terrorist or not is really a moot point, but as I say, at least the appearance of doing something is a step in the right direction and any visible deterrent is a good one, no matter how small. In addition, in order to qualify for certain types of insurance coverage, potential exemptions from future security requirements, complying with current transport laws etc, having a physically secured perimeter is mandatory. Monitored razor-topped fencing certainly qualifies for this.
(Kerry: I am not saying that it is the BEST solution or that it is the TOTAL answer, but it certainly is a step in the right direction)
|
|
|
Post by kerryssi on Sept 15, 2008 8:53:36 GMT -8
I agree, anything is better than nothing and that fence would probably give the passengers a sense of security. That is a good point about the insurance. On the rare occasion in the past people have tried to walk along the shore to bypass the ticket booth. They were easily spotted by the workers in the tower. P.S. I got it about the cars, I was just trying to inject a little levity. I'll take the black one.
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Sept 23, 2008 12:36:04 GMT -8
This is slightly off topic: At some point in the not to distant future Route#2 will need extra capacity even with the ramps that can be installed in the CR, is it possible to add any more marine structures at Horseshoe Bay or is the terminal totally built out?
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Sept 24, 2008 17:35:21 GMT -8
This is slightly off topic: At some point in the not to distant future Route#2 will need extra capacity even with the ramps that can be installed in the CR, is it possible to add any more marine structures at Horseshoe Bay or is the terminal totally built out? Well I think at Horseshoe Bay the only thing they can really do is just keep pushing the toll booths further and further back, since they can't really widen anything due to the natural structure of the area...
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 14, 2008 8:04:06 GMT -8
Here's a news story about dog-sniffing to be introduced in summer-09. Good news for some is that the dogs won't be sniffing for drugs, so that will help with Route-9 on-time performance, LOL ;D www.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=5bb0eee4-4db0-4823-ade5-844429c35a8c============== Bomb dogs will patrol ferry lines B.C. Ferries plans to boost security Paul Walton The Daily News Friday, November 14, 2008 Bomb-sniffing dogs will begin roving major B.C. Ferries terminals sometime next year. Under incoming Transport Canada regulations designed to beef up security on domestic coastal ferries, B.C. Ferries is going to introduce the K-9 security in time for the summer tourist season. "Under the new requirements of Transport Canada we will be implementing new security measures," said Mark Stefanson, spokesman for B.C. Ferries. Transport Canada cites domestic ferries operating on a regular schedules as "desirable targets for unlawful interference, including terrorism," states a Transport Canada document. Stefanson said that to meet those requirements they will have the dogs at the major terminals to sniff out possible explosives. "We will be adding in the dogs at a random basis up and down the line and in the baggage and foot passenger areas," said Stefanson. "We've already done some testing with K-9 security, so we're ready when the requirements come into place The dogs will not be sniffing for drugs, he said, and any such activity would be left to police as the dog handlers would be hired from private contractors. "Our people will not be peace officers," Stefanson. He said it is also too early to provide any more details about the dog service or how much it will cost. Nanaimo RCMP Const. Gary O'Brien said the idea is a good one. "We work closely with B.C. Ferries employees, they have an excellent security system. They support us and we support them. I think it's a great idea as long as you are respecting people's civil rights." The incoming security regulations, while for the most part known to B.C. Ferries, are expected to be released officially in the Canada Gazette, which publishes all new government regulations, on Jan. 1. Stefanson said the dogs are expected to go on duty by summer. Passengers at the Departure Bay terminal had little to say about the decision. "It's getting like the airport, that's a little daunting," said Irene Berkeveld. Marnie Larocque and her family, from Houston, B.C., laughed at the idea. "That's funny to us, we don't run into that sort of thing (in Houston)." © The Daily News (Nanaimo) 2008 =========================
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 14, 2008 17:40:55 GMT -8
Compare that story to this - funny how a story changes in a few hours. : www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5hfSLiESfGmAF5-ynCDTN1sd2YXjABC Ferries using bomb-sniffing dogs at major ferry terminals 1 hour ago VANCOUVER, B.C. — Passengers and vehicles boarding BC Ferries' vessels are being screened by bomb-sniffing dogs as the company increases security. BC Ferries has been using the dogs at its five major ferry terminals for the past six months, said spokeswoman Deborah Marshall. Marshall said the dogs are among several security measures the company has been implementing ahead of new Transport Canada requirements expected next year. "BC Ferries has already started making security enhancements in anticipation of the new regulations," said Marshall. Marshall said BC Ferries has contracted a private security firm to conduct screenings at Duke Point, Departure Bay and Swartz Bay on Vancouver Island, and Horseshoe Bay and Tsawwassen on the mainland. The dogs haven't found any explosives so far. Other new security measures include additional closed-circuit cameras, new employee identification cards and more restricted areas at BC Ferries facilities, said Marshall. She predicted customers will appreciate the heightened security. "Since 9-11, BC Ferries has been working with the RCMP as well as Transport Canada to step up our security procedures," said Marshall. "I think in the world we live in today, our customers are quite fine with any new security enhancements, and I think they appreciate them." Transport Canada is updating its regulations for ferry security, although spokeswoman Maryse Durette said bomb-sniffing dogs won't be specifically required. "The dogs are an initiative by BC Ferries," said Durette. "The ferry operators will themselves decide what they want to do. Transport Canada will come with a regulatory framework, and (ferry operators) will apply the framework and choose security measures that best fit their operations." Ottawa created a $115-million program in 2004 to improve security at marine facilities, including ferries. Operators can apply for funding for new surveillance equipment, more secure infrastructure, additional security training and better communications technology. Transport Canada announced in June of this year that all but $5 million had been handed out, and limited the remaining money to domestic ferry services. BC Ferries has already received several million dollars from the program, and has applied for more in the latest round of funding. In March 2007, the Senate's security and defence committee released a report that included a recommendation for airport-style security for Canadian ferries. John Thompson of the Toronto-based MacKenzie Institute said the potential threat to Canada's ferries must be taken seriously. "They are more vulnerable than people would like to admit," said Thompson. "We know that ferries have been of interest to terrorists elsewhere in the world. It is a way of killing a large number of people and causing a lot of economic damage. They will always be attractive targets." As for the bomb-sniffing dogs, Thompson said they'll be more effective as a deterrent than actually finding explosives. "It (a ferry) has to be accessible, you have to get a lot of traffic on and off in a hurry," he said. "The chance of a dog team finding someone with explosives is not that good. But what it is is a visible deterrent. If you were planning on bringing explosives on a ferry, it's something you'd have to work around." BC Ferries has seen a number of bomb threats in recent years, including at least two last year, which both turned out to he hoaxes. In June 2007, thousands of passengers were stranded for a day when a bomb threat prompted 21 sailings to be cancelled. Last December, service out of Tsawwassen south of Vancouver was shut down for three hours after a passenger overheard a man say he planned to detonate a bomb aboard the ferry. The company estimates that it transports more than 21 million passengers and 8.5 million vehicles each year. ========================== So Mark Stefanson says: Deborah Marshall says this: Did Nanaimo News run a 6 month old story...?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 14, 2008 18:26:50 GMT -8
Did Nanaimo News run a 6 month old story...? I just checked the print-edition of the Nanaimo Daily News, and it's the same story as was on the internet. It clearly says in it's opening paragraph that the bomb-sniffing starts "sometime next year". I'm not sure if dogs have sniffed already or not. But it is odd that Mark says that sniffing hasn't started yet, but that Deborah says that we are already in the age-of-sniffs. Who nose better?
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Nov 14, 2008 19:11:19 GMT -8
Well, I have spent a lot of time in the past 6 months or so at Swartz Bay. I have seen dogs from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans sniffing for illegal seafood harvesters, but I have never seen a "security dog". Also, according to a terminal staff member I know , they haven't started patrols yet.
|
|
rt1commuter
Chief Steward
JP - Overworked grad student
Posts: 167
|
Post by rt1commuter on Nov 14, 2008 20:41:15 GMT -8
Reminds me of that Simpson's episode with the Bear Patrol.....
|
|