Since I posted the article by "Fine Tolerance" and have, in the past, mentioned "Cloud Nine" and NW passage, I'd like to comment. Bob Austin questions the wisdom of making these trips and other posters have suggested a "rescue deposit". Rick Redfern characterized the crew of Fine Tolerance as ill-informed, ill-equipped and ill-prepared. To answer Rick first, I think your comment is ill advised, ill informed and unfortunate. I don't personally know the boat or crew of "Fine Tolerance" , but have followed their voyage on http://www.bruceroberts.com.au/northwest/index.htm?http://www.bruceroberts.com.au/northwest/newsletters.htm it appears to me that they are very well equipped and prepared. (Google fine tolerance if you are interested and the above link doesn't work). As to my friends aboard "Cloud Nine" the skipper/owner has twice circumnavigated, been awarded the Blue Water Metal from the CCA in 2000, has made previous voyages to both the Artic and Antarctic. Having been aboard the boat, I can confirm they are well informed, well equipped and well prepared. Bob Austin's point is more difficult to answer and deserves serious discussion. At the outset, I should disclose that I have been involved in single-handed sailing and twice completed the single-handed Transpac, which seems to equally stir passions when the issue of "proper watch" comes up. Now, of course, I do single-handed trawlering :>) One could, of course, make a case that all non-commercial (e.g. for fun/adventure etc.) offshore voyage should be forbidden, or a bond had to be posted in case rescue was needed. I think most of us would agree that would be silly. Rick seem to feel that crossing an ocean in a 40' powerboat is a great adventure and loves reading about it (so do I), but stuff happens and they may require a tow or rescue. Should they pay for it? How about the Wind Surfers in San Francisco bay who periodically have to get rescued by the CG as they get swept out the Golden Gate. Should they pay for their rescue. It has been my observation that often my adventure is OK but your adventure is unsafe and should be controlled. I'm sure with some thought we could all come up with examples. I'm not sure what the best approach to the rescue issue and cost. I know, for example, if some type of insurance bond was required for the Single-handed Transpac, it would kill the race. I think a better solution would be qualification requirements and equipment certification (paid for by the skipper). I believe that Europeans are required to have certification (e.g. Yachtmaster) to cross the English Channel. I think it is entirely reasonable to restrict the NW passage to those who truly understand the difficulty and have the equipment (and experience). As to costs, I submit that we all pay taxes that sometimes go to pay of others adventures or misadventures. I started reading sailing adventures when I was quite young growing up in Michigan. These books kindled my imagination, gave me focus (a little anyway) and were very important to my life. It has been a privilege to have personal friends who have sailed across the Atlantic in 4 days, single-handed around the world, sailed to the Artic and Antarctic etc. etc. I hope that as a society that we don't become so concerned about safety or money that we forget the human spirit needs adventure -- if not by doing, at least reading about it. Regards, Robby