**A nation that cannot regulate, monitor, and fairly charge for the use of its territory, land or sea, is not exercising sovereignty; it is surrendering it.**

The FDCC and AIS requirements represent a rational, internationally aligned step toward protecting Bahamian interests while continuing to welcome legitimate visitors who respect the jurisdiction they enjoy. Regulation is not exclusion. It is the lawful assertion of control over national space, resources, and responsibility.

Those who benefit most from The Bahamas should, at a minimum, contribute to its protection, management, and sustainability. For decades, this balance has been skewed against the Bahamian people. Our goodwill, geography, and restraint have too often been treated as entitlements rather than privileges.

We have been repeatedly leveraged and sidelined by powerful external and internal actors alike. Some Residence of and exclusive residential enclaves, in the west, operate as though national rules are optional. The cruise industry extracts billions in value while resisting proportional contribution. Foreign aviation authorities dictate airspace behavior that affects Bahamian sovereignty. International shipping uses Bahamian waters as a free shortcut to feed the United States and Europe, imposing environmental and security risks without commensurate compensation.

Our seas are among the most productive fishing grounds in the Atlantic, yet species such as Atlantic mackerel and yellowfin tuna are harvested to supply global markets with limited benefit returning to the country whose ecosystem sustains them. Marine exploration proceeds under the banner of “research,” while value, scientific, commercial, and pharmaceutical, is exported abroad. Even sand theft and seabed exploitation persist as under-enforced realities.

A current example underscores the stakes. Rare Bahamian marine sediments yielded the discovery of Bahamaolide A, a complex polyketide molecule with potential applications in treating disease and infection. The breakthrough, published after five years of intensive research, demonstrates that The Bahamas is not merely a backdrop for global science, but a source of irreplaceable biological and chemical value. Yet without firm regulatory control, such discoveries risk becoming another chapter in the long history of extraction without equitable return.

This is the broader context in which maritime fees, AIS monitoring, and structured access must be understood. These measures are not punitive, reactionary, or anti-visitor. They are corrective. They reflect a nation moving, belatedly but necessarily, from passive tolerance to active stewardship.

Sovereignty is not rhetoric. It is exercised through law, enforcement, data, and fair contribution. Any party that genuinely respects The Bahamas must also respect its right to govern, protect, and benefit from what is indisputably its own.

**A nation that cannot regulate, monitor, and fairly charge for the use of its territory, land or sea, is not exercising sovereignty; it is surrendering it.**

The FDCC and AIS requirements represent a rational, internationally aligned step toward protecting Bahamian interests while continuing to welcome legitimate visitors who respect the jurisdiction they enjoy. Regulation is not exclusion. It is the lawful assertion of control over national space, resources, and responsibility.

Those who benefit most from The Bahamas should, at a minimum, contribute to its protection, management, and sustainability. For decades, this balance has been skewed against the Bahamian people. Our goodwill, geography, and restraint have too often been treated as entitlements rather than privileges.

We have been repeatedly leveraged and sidelined by powerful external and internal actors alike. Some Residence of and exclusive residential enclaves, in the west, operate as though national rules are optional. The cruise industry extracts billions in value while resisting proportional contribution. Foreign aviation authorities dictate airspace behavior that affects Bahamian sovereignty. International shipping uses Bahamian waters as a free shortcut to feed the United States and Europe, imposing environmental and security risks without commensurate compensation.

Our seas are among the most productive fishing grounds in the Atlantic, yet species such as Atlantic mackerel and yellowfin tuna are harvested to supply global markets with limited benefit returning to the country whose ecosystem sustains them. Marine exploration proceeds under the banner of “research,” while value, scientific, commercial, and pharmaceutical, is exported abroad. Even sand theft and seabed exploitation persist as under-enforced realities.

A current example underscores the stakes. Rare Bahamian marine sediments yielded the discovery of Bahamaolide A, a complex polyketide molecule with potential applications in treating disease and infection. The breakthrough, published after five years of intensive research, demonstrates that The Bahamas is not merely a backdrop for global science, but a source of irreplaceable biological and chemical value. Yet without firm regulatory control, such discoveries risk becoming another chapter in the long history of extraction without equitable return.

This is the broader context in which maritime fees, AIS monitoring, and structured access must be understood. These measures are not punitive, reactionary, or anti-visitor. They are corrective. They reflect a nation moving, belatedly but necessarily, from passive tolerance to active stewardship.

Sovereignty is not rhetoric. It is exercised through law, enforcement, data, and fair contribution. Any party that genuinely respects The Bahamas must also respect its right to govern, protect, and benefit from what is indisputably its own.

Here is what Peter Maury is not saying:

-

AIS (Automated Identification System) Is Now Required - Everywhere

The biggest universal change? All vessels above 50 ft must have their AIS (Automated Identification System) on at all times while in Bahamian waters. That includes when you’re docked, underway, or just passing through. Miss this requirement and you could be looking at a $1,000 fine. So, double-check that your AIS is installed, working, and transmitting before you enter Bahamian territory. Owners without AIS equipment will have to retrofit vessels to comply.

Cruise the Bahamas Often? The New FDCC Might Be for You
Regulation 89B has been inserted into the principal regulations in the new bill, stating that the comptroller may issue a Frequent Digital Cruising Card (FDCC) when an application is submitted and processed under regulations 90, 91(3), (5) and (6), 91B and 92. Think of it as a fast pass for pleasure vessels. Once approved, the FDCC allows unlimited entries over a two-year period. You’ll still need to report to Customs on arrival, but you’ll be issued a Pleasure Craft Request (PCR) number to streamline future visits.

-

FDCC Fees (valid for 2 years from issuance date):

* Boats not exceeding 50 feet: $1,500
* Boats exceeding 50 feet but not exceeding 100 feet: $2,500
* Exceeding 100 feet: $8,000

This does not cover payable custom fees such as Attendance & Travel Expenses or overtime and travel with regard to the attendance of an Immigration Officer.

-

*** Fuel Cost Comparison (Mid-Size Yacht Benchmark) ***

Assume a 55–65 ft motor yacht, average burn 60–80 gallons/hour at cruise.

Bahamas (Miami → Bimini round trip)

Time: ~4 hours total

Fuel burned: ~240–320 gallons

Fuel cost (@ $5.50/gal): $1,300–$1,760

US Virgin Islands (Miami → St. Thomas one way)

Time: ~44 hours

Fuel burned: ~2,600–3,500 gallons

Fuel cost: $14,300–$19,250 (one way)

This is not close. The fuel delta alone dwarfs any Bahamas permit fee.

-
People like Peter Maury came up in the '80s drug running days' so a AIS (Automated Identification System) would be see as "cumbersome regulatory processes" - so Chester should be mindful of what is motivating Peter's advocacy. ;)

*Watch Da Road*

…a classic moron’s remark, uninformed, shallow, and parroting clichés without the slightest grasp of Chinese history, governance, or the distinctions between a government apparatus and an entire people. Your generalisation exposes your intellectual limits ... do better, man.

..."ChiComs" - offensive, and disparaging slang - and it's not your first time using this 'insensitive' reference to the Chinese People.

…yes, just another example of a wandering soul, the poet who fancied himself a leader, the writer who imagined he could command a crowd, yet never mastered the weight of his own shadow. He dreamed of thrones but tripped over truths, rehearsed greatness but could never live it. A legend in his diary… and nowhere else.

While 99.9% of readers will agree with your clear dissection of what has become of the place we call home, we must remember this - despite its failings, this Bahamas remains our most precious possession. We may relocate, adapt, and enjoy the comforts of other lands, but those are only pauses in the journey. The Bahamas, with all its scars and beauty, is the soil that shaped us. However far we go, it will always be home. Please, never forget that.

While I understand your point, there’s a deeper truth for those of us who remain and the many who are now returning after the shifting reality of uncertainty of life in America, especially under the new policies of Donald Trump - makes it more urgent than ever for us, as a people, to save our own country from further decay. We shouldn’t just send our children abroad to study; we must send them with the understanding that this is home. Their education should not be an escape route, but preparation for return, ready to lead, ready to rebuild. The call to return and take up leadership has never been clearer or more necessary than it is now.

…the sad part is, the hopeless alternative is just as bad, perhaps even worse. What we need are not more men chasing opportunities under the guise of “politicians,” but a new generation of genuine leaders - ones willing, for once, to put the Bahamian people first.

> Your vote does not only create MPs; it
> sustains the entire chain of people
> who believe their first duty is to
> shield politicians from embarrassment,
> even at the expense of patients,
> staff, and the truth.

When a nurse of 44 years is treated like a criminal for exposing conditions in the nation’s main hospital, that is not “procedure”; that is fear and political loyalty masquerading as policy.

***The law of this country protects whistleblowers for speaking in the public interest. Section 47 of the Freedom of Information Act, 2017—brought into force on 1 March 2018—exists for exactly this scenario. It is intended to shield public servants from being disciplined, harassed, or disadvantaged for disclosing wrongdoing, mismanagement, or threats to health and safety when done in good faith and in the public interest.***

A leaking public hospital, rodent infestation, supply shortages, and unsafe conditions are not “politics”; they are straight public safety and governance failures. No “social media policy” or internal memo can sit above an Act of Parliament. If her suspension is based on an outdated or unlawful policy, it is bad lawyering and reads as victimisation for protected disclosure—not legitimate discipline.

This is the sickness on display that has killed this country: senior officials acting as political enforcers, gating keeping, instead of being guardians of the public interest as they are paid to do.

> *'Watch Da Road' - That Time Coming*