Clyde that's really great info. Man, this is complicated, huh, guys?
It doesn't seem at all right or necessary that packages from lower 48 destined for AK (or opposite direction) would have to go through Canadian customs, but I wonder if it's actually so. Are there "transfer centers" or "hubs" within Canada itself like we have such that carriers would unload packages from one truck and put on another (on Canadian soil, that is)...
Originally I was thinking: "Stays on same truck all the way across Canada" but then I realized that's highly unlikely as that's just not how the trucking industry works.
BUT I don't know if the
US Postal Service might work that way, for their purposes..
For
purely commercial transportation, NAFTA's intended to facilitate exactly the kind of scenario Clyde described.
BUT when we consider the US Postal Service delivering to Europe or Australia, for example, anything going into those countries is still subject to customs laws, right? (IF I recall some of the anecdotal evidence presented by members correctly).
So the US/Canada situation is somwhht unique due to NAFTA and what I'm
guessing is the likelihood that Canada has no reason to intentionally hamper such transport, while understandably desiring to maintain its right to control entry of illegal items of any nature.
Wouldn't this constitute a right/need for customs to be involved?
I can see a mutual agreement between the two countries that as long as a truck remains sealed between 2 "Duty Free" hubs or "Bonded warehouse" scenario that Clyde describes it would be considered to be still be under control of US laws, and not yet subject to Customs inspection.
Isn't that analogous to my taking my family across town to the airport in Vancouver after the cruise ship to the airport? Same question regarding Mexico.
NO because A: you're transiting Cnadian soil as an individual, as opposed to perhaps simply changing planes in the airport and never technically "entering" Canada, and
B: The rules for individuals entering the given countries are different than the rules set up under NAFTA to facilitate the transit of cargo.
Interestingly I note that an "instrument certificate" is only valid for personal carriage, seems analogous to the difference between individual with a passport nad freight with a BIll of Lading and Custom Declarations.the Passport
I'm continuing the "theoretical" discussion here, but there's no question in my mind that actual practice is far less onerous, particularly when we're talking CITES and US <-> US destinations... US <-> Europe, or even Europe <-> Europe... That's another story.
Agreed.
Particularly when considering the issue of "National Sovereignty" vs "Treaty Obligations" as Frono described.
But I do find it telling that the Fish And Wildlife Service links directly to the CITES listings to show readers what they will define as
potentially illegal woods requiring proof of legal harvesting or other exemption..
