The Jones Act may have had dire consequences for large vessels, but overall it has likely helped US shipyards, especially in terms of under 500 GT vessel construction. The easy verification is by comparing the US to Canada, countries which both once had strong local boatbuilding industries, but the latter of which did not take a protectionist stand with shipbuilding. Virtually all US-flag fishing vessels, tugboats, OSV's, ferries, etc must comply with the Jones Act, which means there are a number of shipyards, especially on the Gulf Coast, which specialize in smaller vessels that are delivered to all parts of the country. In contrast, when I look at ship owners across the border in Vancouver, BC, recent tugboat deliveries have come out of Turkey, while the newest ferries are coming from eastern Europe. (Fishing vessel new-builds have been nonexistent, but that has more to due with British Columbia's fisheries policies than anything.)
However, what I see overall is a shipbuilding industry that has been virtually killed off or reduced to maintenance yards, while just across the border in Washington state, a handful of shipbuilding yards are still getting commercial and government orders, even with strong competition from cheaper builders in the American South.

Well Lappino, the Jones Act does not really benefit the US shipyards as new ships are seldom build as there is no reason for owners to build new. What is actually more updated and renewed in US-yards are those ATB,s and the barges amd regular tugs. US sailors are assigned by the Unions to the ships (that the way a Mississippi Pilot explained it to me) So it benefits in one way the sailors by having VERY HIGH paying jobs, but prevents innovation and/or new ships as it should and does not create more jobs for them as only old units are replaced or old units are kept. The US-shipping industry has no competition and therefore degenerating into a 2nd rate industry. Avondale ship yard on the Mississippi River, closed 2-3 years ago after the delivery of the last Navy ship. And it goes on and on like that. You ask US sailors they like the Jones Act as the jobs are high paid, but it destroys also their base as owners tend not to renew the fleet.

A bit late answer to your question, Roland, I see it as mostly benefiting the US shipbuilding (as there are not so many seafarers' jobs). Some years ago, when a delegation from one of US shipyards was visiting our yard in Croatia, I enquired about the prices of US built tankers - they were almost an order of magnitude higher than ours, and we were not cheap to start with...

Cheers

Vlad

This may be a stupid question, but what are the good aspects of the Jones Act, jobs for US seafarers perhaps ? On the other hand a lot of old ships many of which with most likely a lot of deficiencies and outdated equipement like opened lifeboats for instance. Roland

Yes, Capt. Ted, I am well aware of the Jones Act and consider it dangerous for the lives of the American mariners, even if it gives us the insight into this commercial shipping archaeology...

Cheers

Vlad

Lappino, You see them only in certain areas, and those are also out the door. The main reason why those ships are still existing is the Jones Act. Ships trading between US ports have to be build/flagged and crewed by US yards/sailors. Which means there is no competition and therefore no incentive at all to renew the fleet as cost do not matter that much as in other trades. The Jones Act is to a certain degree good, but it destroyed the US shipbuilding companies and also the US shipping. It,s on the end a political thing and as everybody knows, never mind where,,when politics are involved Doomsday is in the making !!!

Thanks, Roy. This is one one of those things why I would like to visit USA more often, to see more of these "golden oldies"... :)

Cheers

Vlad

Nice one Vlad,
You don't see them that often on shipspotting.
Cheers,
Roy