« Previous Story |
The Industry Report Home Page
| Next Story »
Border Crossings A Bust For Busted Boomers
By J.D. O'Connor
March 05, 2007
By J.D. O'Connor
The barred Yankees, some of whom are already lawyering up over this, are calling themselves "the Inadmissibles" - Canada's term for those with criminal convictions on their record attempting to enter the country.
"What's wrong, though," says one San Francisco resident en route for Whistler/Blackcomb who was recently stopped at the border. "Is that the 'offenses' can be as petty as stealing the clown head from the Jack n' The Box when you were in high school."
For many Americans trying to make it north for their favorite winter ski destinations, the first indication that something may be wrong comes when they are pulled out of a customs line and directed to a secondary "screening area," where pointed questions are asked about past transgressions - many of them long since forgotten.
Lake Tahoe resident Greg Felsch realized something was wrong when he joined a line of other Americans waiting to be questioned by Customs officials.
"There must have been 75 people in line," he told the San Francisco Chronicle. "We were there for three hours. One woman was in tears. A guy was sent back for having a medical marijuana card. I felt like a felon with an ankle bracelet.''
A couple flying to British Columbia for an eight-day ski vacation at the famed Whistler Chateau were surprised when they were approached by Canadian customs officer and the husband told he would have to report to "secondary'' immigration.
There, in a room he estimates was filled with 60 other concerned travelers, he was told he was "a person who was inadmissible to Canada.'' The problem? A 30-year-old conviction for marijuana possession.
The official line from both U.S. and Canadian Customs officials is that the stops are nothing new, but that enhanced intelligence sharing between the two countries post 9/11 and a recently tweaked computer database has caused an "upward trending" in the number of inadmissibles identified and stopped at the border.
None of this is lost on Northern ski destinations like Whistler, which has been enjoying a banner year of snowfall and visitation, but which is 'privately' concerned that well-heeled American boomers may stop coming once they find out Canada frowns on misdeeds committed in their youth.
"The news is just starting to spread," said one British Columbia ski resort manager. "We're only just now beginning to feel the impact this will have but some fear it can result in a 50 percent drop in visits from American guests."
Whether or not dope-smoking, clown-head-stealing Yanks get to ski on his country's slopes or not is of no apparent concern to Derek Mellon, spokesman for the Canadian Border Services Agency.
"I think it is important to understand that you are entering another country,'' Mellon says. "You are not crossing the street.''
Gulp. Sorry, officer. Any way around the law?
Attorneys say ski visitors with blemished records should apply for "a Minister's Approval of Rehabilitation" to wipe their record clear before coming. That applies to DUI convictions, shoplifting, reckless driving, assault - even if they occurred half a lifetime ago. If they're on your record, you won't get in. Period. And if you want to, be prepared to spend some time and money to make it happen.
« Previous Story |
The Industry Report Home Page
| Next Story » |
Email To A Friend
Comments
 |
Thanks for your story on Canadian immigration. What I don't understand is....why is our government sharing information on people with misdemeanors (i.e., non-felons) to begin with, and furthermore, if a person has done their time, isn't punishing them again for it a form of double jeopardy? Since when is the Canadian government in any position to determine if an American is "rehabilitated", and which other governments are we sharing this information with? Finally, why should Canada deny entry of an American convicted of marijuana possession years ago, when marijuana is de facto decriminalized in Canada?
|
| |
Posted by: TikiLoungeLizard | March 5, 2007 10:09 AM
|
|
My family and I just returned by Banff for a weeklong trip and while we didn't have any issues since we don't have a "past", I was a bit put off when the Customs agent got visibly "pissed off" that my 2 year old son was scared of his big black drug sniffing dog (and what 2 year old wouldn't be of an unfamilar dog almost twice his size) and tried to walk far away from him. Canada isn't doing itself any favors with American travelers. |
| |
Posted by: Lofton Spencer | March 5, 2007 10:25 AM
|
|
I think this is going to become a hugh problem in tourism. The problem has only just begun since passports were requiired as of the 1st of the year. We still have a hugh number of skiers traveling in March and April. I think it should be changed to only felonies in the past |
| |
Posted by: Denise Huffines Ski.com | March 5, 2007 10:33 AM
|
|
Thanks for all your responses, folks. I'd be interested in hearing from any Yanks out there who HAVE run into problems. The sovereignity of nations is an important factor and certainly security is up after the porous nature of U.S./Canadian/Mexican border lands has been pointed out. Still, it may be a case of the "relatively" innocent getting caught in the wide net. And if it continues to hurt our neighbors to the North, will we see changes in policy? Canadian viewpoint pro or con most welcome here.
JD |
| |
Posted by: J.D. | March 5, 2007 10:44 AM
|
|
I really think this is a pretty big story. It can have a pretty far ranging impact on the Canadian Resorts. What is the response of the resorts and Canadian Travel industry? Does anyone know how many vacationing guests were sent home and does travel insurance cover any of the spent dollars for the traveler? |
| |
Posted by: John Siewierski | March 5, 2007 10:45 AM
|
|
We agree, John. Love to hear from the Canadian resorts though most were in a "wait and see" mode when we contacted them. As for the latter portion of your post, it is my understanding that a traveler stopped at the border and barred from entry is elegible for coverage from his/her travel insurance. I defer to any of the travel industry pros who frequent these pages if they have a deeper knowledge of the situation as it stands.
JD |
| |
Posted by: J.D. Industry Report/OnTheSnow.com | March 5, 2007 10:59 AM
|
|
We have been involved in getting a "Minister's Approval of Rehabilitation" and be prepared to wait literally years to hear anything and it is very costly. It several calls to the Consulate General's Office to get results. |
| |
Posted by: Robert Horr | March 5, 2007 11:01 AM
|
|
I believe that Canada is trying to show the U.S. how silly it is to require passports at the border. Perhaps this will raise awareness. We are two countries that are supposed to be FRIENDLY to one another. Why not put a statute of limitations on the offenses, say, 10 years? |
| |
Posted by: dancingnow@ywave.com | March 23, 2007 10:58 PM
|
|
we should do the same thing here,in this country.to protect our selves |
| |
Posted by: wscott21@cfl.rr.com | March 29, 2007 03:01 PM
|
|
The American government is following the exact some procedures for Canadians entering the US with very minor criminal records. In order to obtain a Waiver it is very costly and the wait can be a couple of years for approval. The Waiver also only lasts for a maximum of five years before one has to reapply all over again. My tourism dollars are better spent elsewhere. |
| |
Posted by: northernlites | May 1, 2007 01:44 PM
|
|
All leaving USA soil should submit a form asking permission to leave the USA..stating where, reason and address and phone numbers, and a waiting period like waiting for a passport and a fee to cover the investigation. there will be no doubt who are the terrorist, we have to defend the home land from another 911.
|
| |
Posted by: patriot | May 7, 2008 02:31 PM
|
|
