# Delos in the Bahamas



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

1


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

not good if true... kinda dumb


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

At one time i think there were a few boats on route from pto rico to florida that pulled safe harbor at the ragged islands..but that was a while back. That storm has passed...

Yep, head down
Trackers off
Publish zippo


----------



## mbianka (Sep 19, 2014)

I was also wondering about the Riley on LaVagabonde. Seems he is crazy about spearfishing too. I thought spear guns were not permitted in the Bahamas? Yet he seemed to be doing it quite often when they were in the region too. At some point the locals may say enough and cruising through the area may become more restrictive.


----------



## MacBlaze (Jan 18, 2016)

Wow that article had very little to do with reality. Other than the lobster thing which the rest of the fast and loose facts makes me a tad reluctant to believe. I mean seriously, it implies they just hopped over from Florida to escape covid rather than getting there via an atlantic loop (let alone going all the way around the world).

Still, it possible they are breaking a few immigration laws—but then again who isn't if they are world travellers. The big issue for them is that Karin is not a U.S. citizen and they had some doubt she would be allowed to enter the U.S. And with a new baby they weren't keen to risk separation. Their eventual plan is to head north to the Baltics.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

1


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

mbianka said:


> I was also wondering about the Riley on LaVagabonde. Seems he is crazy about spearfishing too. I thought spear guns were not permitted in the Bahamas? Yet he seemed to be doing it quite often when they were in the region too. At some point the locals may say enough and cruising through the area may become more restrictive.


Spearfishing is allowed in the Bahamas, except spear guns are illegal, as is using scuba. Pole spears and Hawaiian slings free diving are fine. The locals are fine with cruisers fishing within the laws. The commercial fisheries exist outside of any areas most cruisers could physically fish in. If he was using a spear gun, then that is simply unacceptable, and it is something the cruising community should rightfully call out.

People who break laws spoil it for everyone.

Mark


----------



## MacBlaze (Jan 18, 2016)

colemj said:


> So you agree that they were doing illegal fishing, breaking a country's lockdown laws, and breaking a country's immigration laws. What part of the article didn't have to do with reality? Which part of their actions do you excuse, and would you excuse a Mexican citizen illegally in the US doing the same?
> 
> Mark


No I don't agree they were doing illegal fishing. I actually expressed scepticism.

I can cite dozens of travellers in countries who are locked down way past their original visa expiry dates.

The article implies they came from the US. They didn't. It implies they are American citizens. They aren't. It implies the RBDF "immediately" reacted to reports. The video they are talking about is weeks old.

Frankly not being American I don't have the same "fear" of illegal immigrants you do, so no, I wouldn't have an issue with a Mexican sheltering here in Canada.

But I really don't want to get into an argument about it. I just said it was playing fast and loose with the truth. We can all there fore choose believe the version of reality that suits our own prejudices (and yes, I include myself in that.)


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

1


----------



## MacBlaze (Jan 18, 2016)

colemj said:


> That is not the case here. They have not made contact with immigration, and were intentionally hiding. They were also mixing with inter-island transports bringing supplies to Ragged, which was against the law. Their need to feed the video and marketing machine was stupid on their part.
> 
> This type of self-centered behavior spoils the road for everyone else.
> 
> Mark


Holy crapoli.... I am not one to decry "fake news" but you got all those "facts" from one poorly written article?

But ok. you have your opinion and I have mine and we can call a truce. Carry on y'all (he says in American, just trying to fit in :wink)...


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

1


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Didn't we see this BBC article posted on SN recently? Most of the footage was considered to be reposts from prior videos of all the youtubers. 

All this article says is they're looking into it, rather than condemn. Until there are more facts, we just don't know. I don't understand the rush to judgement.

Having seen many of their vids that explicitly show them clearing in and out of countries around the world, it would surprise me if they just skipped it. I would not surprise me, if they out stayed their visa. A concept, if the USA comparison is being invoked, is very trendy here. There are understood to be millions of people in the USA that have done that, most of which are highly protected, even granted government benefits and school for their kids in some places.

Given the evolving virus lock downs everywhere, I'd claim a maritime law safe haven. 

The reporting is clearly bad, given the crew has been on a circumnavigation, not a jaunt over from FL and Karen is not a US citizen. Hard to get facts from an "abandon island".


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

Minnewaska said:


> The reporting is clearly bad, given the crew has been on a circumnavigation, not a jaunt over from FL and Karen is not a US citizen. Hard to get facts from an "abandon island".


Where does the article say that they came 'on a jaunt over from FL"? Where does it mention Karen's citizenship?


----------



## MacBlaze (Jan 18, 2016)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Where does the article say that they came 'on a jaunt over from FL"? Where does it mention Karen's citizenship?


That's teh problem. It doesn't "say" anything but implies a lot:



> Some people insisted the story romanticized the couple opting to *flee* from the coronavirus outbreak in *their* country, noting that given their length of stay, they had ample time to return *home*.


----------



## dwedeking (Jan 28, 2007)

The rebuttal: https://ewnews.com/sailing-vloggers...r-8BJ5I59QMmUvE5waSD-6Z4Dzua_Y_JwzST85etVv_zI

"In an interview with Eyewitness News today, Trautman insisted that these misconceptions were not true.
"We did in fact legally clear into the Bahamas through Customs and Immigration and were provided a cruising permit for our boat and fishing permit, as well as paid all our fees required for checking in," he said.
"Since the lockdown order came into place we have observed the notices by sheltering in place.
"We are very passionate about conservation and following the laws and guidelines set out by The Bahamas government, and go out of our way to support marine conservation initiatives. "

He further explained that the content for their videos is filmed weeks in advance, so the footage shown during the interview was filmed in February and March prior to the lobster season-ending.

Trautman noted that it is understandable how easy it is to mistake that everything filmed is current, however, he sought to assure that they are not breaking or flaunting The Bahamas' rules while the rest of the country is on lockdown."


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

MacBlaze said:


> That's teh problem. It doesn't "say" anything but implies a lot:


Let me get this straight: the article does NOT say something that has been claimed it did, and THAT is 'the problem' with the article?

So, you are making your own interpretation of something that was never said in the article but "implied" (by you), and then you complain about "fake news."

This is what you said:
"Holy crapoli.... I am not one to decry "fake news" but you got all those "facts" from one poorly written article?"

How about just sticking to the facts?


----------



## MacBlaze (Jan 18, 2016)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Let me get this straight: the article does NOT say something that has been claimed it did, and THAT is 'the problem' with the article?
> 
> So, you are making your own interpretation of something that was never said in the article but "implied" (by you), and then you complain about "fake news."
> 
> ...


If that's your idea of media literacy then we aren't just not going to see eye to eye.

And I wasn't the one stating facts. Go back and reread it. I used the word "implied" over and over again.

Mark was the one who stated "That is not the case here. They have not made contact with immigration, and were intentionally hiding. They were also mixing with inter-island transports bringing supplies to Ragged, which was against the law. Their need to feed the video and marketing machine was stupid on their part." While he might be right or he might be wrong, my opinion is that none of those things stated were facts, certainly not based on the article we were all referencing.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

MacBlaze said:


> If that's your idea of media literacy then we aren't just not going to see eye to eye.
> 
> And I wasn't the one stating facts. Go back and reread it. I used the word "implied" over and over again.
> 
> Mark was the one who stated "That is not the case here. They have not made contact with immigration, and were intentionally hiding. They were also mixing with inter-island transports bringing supplies to Ragged, which was against the law. Their need to feed the video and marketing machine was stupid on their part." While he might be right or he might be wrong, my opinion is that none of those things stated were facts, certainly not based on the article we were all referencing.


My post was in response to another post in which it was stated that "The reporting is clearly bad, given the crew has been on a circumnavigation, not a jaunt over from FL and Karen is not a US citizen." I asked for where this was stated in the article, when you came in and gave your interpretation of what was 'implied' in the article and said that it was a problem that this was NOT said.

Go back and read (to use your congenial phrase)

I cannot speak for Mark. He says he has background knowledge, I don't.


----------



## MacBlaze (Jan 18, 2016)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> My post was in response to another post in which it was stated that "The reporting is clearly bad, given the crew has been on a circumnavigation, not a jaunt over from FL and Karen is not a US citizen." I asked for where this was stated in the article, when you came in and gave your interpretation of what was 'implied' in the article and said that it was a problem that this was NOT said.
> 
> Go back and read (to use your congenial phrase)
> 
> I cannot speak for Mark. He says he has background knowledge, I don't.


So you don't think journalism by innuendo is a problem? I imagine you actually do but somehow are managing to misread the dialog that is occurring.

Minnie was using the two facts stated above to make the point. He did not claim that the article stated those facts but rather used them of proof to support his claim "The reporting is clearly bad,..." In my opinion the article's (erroneous) implications invalidated the value of the reporting.

So we can disagree about about the "validity" of the article if you want (although the followup article seems to speak to that), but I still maintain it's pretty crappy journalism. If a "news outlet" implies that a set of facts are true to sensationalize that's a problem to me. If people are mislead by it, I think it's an even bigger problem.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

MacBlaze said:


> So you don't think journalism by innuendo is a problem? I imagine you actually do but somehow are managing to misread the dialog that is occurring.
> 
> Minnie was using the two facts stated above to make the point. He did not claim that the article stated those facts but rather used them of proof to support his claim "The reporting is clearly bad,..." In my opinion the article's (erroneous) implications invalidated the value of the reporting.
> 
> So we can disagree about about the "validity" of the article if you want (although the followup article seems to speak to that), but I still maintain it's pretty crappy journalism. If a "news outlet" implies that a set of facts are true to sensationalize that's a problem to me. If people are mislead by it, I think it's an even bigger problem.


"Journalism by innuendo" can be a problem. But I don't see this here, apparently you do. So this is a question of interpretation. What is not a question of interpretation, and a much bigger problem, is if facts are mis-stated. I believe we all agree this is not the case here.

The 'follow-up article' is a rebuttal by Delos. Its veracity has been doubted in some of the commentaries by Bahamians. Based on the voice-over (made by Delos) they claim that the videos were taken during the closed fishing/lobstering season, and not months ago, as Delos claims. They ask that Delos shows that this is not the case. Again, I have no way to know what is correct or not correct but I believe this is not an unreasonable request.

BTW, why do you put "news outlet" in quotation marks?


----------



## MacBlaze (Jan 18, 2016)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> BTW, why do you put "news outlet" in quotation marks?


Mostly because I couldn't be arsed to investigate the source and the quality of the reporting made me lean towards not-all-that-authoritative. In matters of little-to-no importance, first impressions tend to stick. But as you say, the whole thing is just a matter of interpretation.

Hopefully in the end it won't cause a big furor since I imagine east-coast cruisers would be a bit peeved if their relationship with the Bahamas gets run down.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Where does the article say that they came 'on a jaunt over from FL"? Where does it mention Karen's citizenship?


When did I say it did? Thanks to others for explaining it to you. You seem to have a running problem with my posts. Shove off........

As to the bad reporting, that stands. Especially, given Delos reply. Innocent until proven guilty never seems to apply to media criticism and they provided no support for the accusations, they only report the sensational possibility.

This is a quote from the bad reporting.....



> The BBC story garnered some criticism by those who questioned whether the couple was in Bahamian waters legally and whether they could be considered poachers.


No mention of who "those who questioned" actually are, no support for why they'd question. In fact, it's normal for YouTube videos to be months old. The educated default assumption would be the video is dated. If they had facts from the "uninhabited island" they should have substantiated them and revealed why they were credible. Otherwise, it simply reads a sensational story.

I hope they didn't fail to clear into the Bahama's, but that's easily settled, prior to smearing someone in the news. If they obtained a cruising permit, as they say they did, I believe they are good for more than the 100 days declared in the news article.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

Minnewaska said:


> When did I say it did? Thanks to others for explaining it to you. You seem to have a running problem with my posts. Shove off........
> 
> Actually, I don't have a problem with (most of) your posts. I consider you as one of the more level-headed and rational posters on SN. And I agree (after MacB made me read it again more carefully) that you did not explicitly say that the article said that.
> 
> ...


I think we should wait until the Bahamian authorities investigate. Then we will see who has egg on their face, Delos or the newspaper


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> I think we should wait until the Bahamian authorities investigate. Then we will see who has egg on their face, Delos or the newspaper


Fair enough, I simply had a problem with drawing a conclusion, based upon the flawed news article.

I noticed the OP deleted the link to the news article, which I thought to go back and check to see how it's published date compares to Delos last video. I'm attaching it again, so others that read the thread have some idea what we're talking about.

https://ewnews.com/rbdf-probing-reports-of-couple-isolating-on-uninhabited-bahamian-island

The article was published on May 26. On May 22, Delos published a video of their passage from months earlier, showing them departing San Juan and claims they were headed to Inagua, Bahamas. Inagua is a port of entry, so we'll see. That doesn't prove they cleared in, but they could not have edited it, after the fact, to make it look good.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Sorry, I didn't mean to remove the original link - only my posts. The reason for that is I am taking attack outside this forum, and I have enough going on right now to not care about this, so simply removed the cause.

Mark


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Wait are we questioning whether video bloggers sailing and cruising stories aren't just like real life? You mean it isn't all pretty beaches, sundowners, and young pretty shirtless women?

I agree that flaunting the rules causes problems for all of us. The reason people do it is they they don't get called on it and get away with it and that plays well into some people's sense of entitlement. In the end I am in the camp of "if they broke the rules I hope they get in trouble for it".

2


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

If they failed to clear into a foreign country, they should be in trouble.

If they outstayed a visa, as the pandemic evolved, I don't think so. Doubt this was the issue anyway.

If they ate a few lobsters, off an uninhabited island, while waiting out a pandemic, to feed a family of three, not commercially or excessively harvest....... that's going to be a judgement call. There's nothing that proves they did this and it's not right to do. However, I find it be jay walking, in the backdrop of a pandemic shutdown, and a hand slap would be pushing the boundaries of cruel and unusual.


----------



## 227702 (Oct 23, 2013)

You people argue like a bunch of old hens.


----------



## MacBlaze (Jan 18, 2016)

bajasurfer said:


> You people argue like a bunch of old hens.


You've met the internet before , right?

:laugh


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

I saw an article today about the original posting story. Sounds as the officials are aware of the whole thing and have/are looking nto and there isnt a problem.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Don L said:


> I saw an article today about the original posting story. Sounds as the officials are aware of the whole thing and have/are looking nto and there isnt a problem.


If that's true, and I expect it is, I hope the original media source prints that conclusion. I was not able to find they did and most don't.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

Latest vid shows them checking in at matthew town
Original article simply reinforces need to believe...nothing..:grin


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Yup. Just watched. At this point, I’m sure they were intentional to publish actual footage of clearing in.

Haters gonna hate. Media sells news, it doesn’t report news.


----------



## mbianka (Sep 19, 2014)

Minnewaska said:


> Yup. Just watched. At this point, I'm sure they were intentional to publish actual footage of clearing in.
> 
> Haters gonna hate. Media sells news, it doesn't report news.


They are anchored out in the the Bahamas Ragged Islands. Looks like a sweet spot to hang out for a few months as long as the generator and Washing Machine holds up to clean the diapers.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

The video shows they checked in on Inagua, which they clearly document, including video of the customs officer and building. It then says they left immediately for the Ragged Islands, which would predate the lockdown. That is harder to prove, but the media's burden should be to prove, or at least have some evidence, otherwise, not just spread rumors to sell advertising. 

They've spent more time off the grid before, in the Indian Ocean, as I recall.


----------



## mbianka (Sep 19, 2014)

Minnewaska said:


> The video shows they checked in on Inagua, which they clearly document, including video of the customs officer and building. It then says they left immediately for the Ragged Islands, which would predate the lockdown. That is harder to prove, but the media's burden should be to prove, or at least have some evidence, otherwise, not just spread rumors to sell advertising.
> 
> They've spent more time off the grid before, in the Indian Ocean, as I recall.


Their passage was a little tougher than previous ones and is reminder on how different each can be. Not having additional crew and a baby limited their sleep compared when they had ample crew on previous trips and had plenty of rest. I pretty much sail alone these days and would sometimes envy them when they were able to get so much stuff done with the extra hands on board. On the other hand their provisions will last much longer without seven mouths to feed. But, their dive compressor may start to rust as they will no longer be able to do the diving they use to do when they had several divers on board and no baby. Reminded me is no right way or wrong way to cruise just different ways. Each has it's own advantages and disadvantages.


----------

