Winnipesaukee Forum

Winnipesaukee Forum (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/index.php)
-   Boating (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Meredith NWZ Petition / Hearing (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21171)

thinkxingu 09-01-2016 05:24 AM

This is a total generalization based on my many hours anchoring in "quiet" coves: wakeboard boaters tend to be much less thoughtful than other crafts--I don't know what it is, but they always come closer to us and other anchored boats and the shore, and they always seem louder and more obnoxious.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

Dave R 09-01-2016 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chasedawg (Post 268515)
Absolutely agree Green Basin Girl. Camp Belknap went from a ski boat to a Wake Board Boat last year being leased from Melvin village Marina. The boat creates huge waves and is very loud especially at 6:30 AM. The point being they don't wake board. They use the boat just for tubing and occasionally water skiing. Melvin Village Marina leased the wrong boat for what they use it for. The neighbors are getting frustrated with the large waves it produces and the open exhaust. Yes complaints have been submitted to the Director. We love everything about one of the best YMCA camps in the country but it is the wake board boat we don't love.

What about the children?:D

Orion 09-01-2016 07:57 AM

a bad trend
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greene's Basin Girl (Post 268488)
The wake board boat's wakes are absolutely horrible. Our loon chicks have been separated from their parents by these waves.We lost one chick. Not sure if the wake was the culprit or not. One of these boats resides in a residence in Green's Basin and several came in over and over during the summer to wake board in the basin. A friend will not even paddle board when they are out there. ...........Another friend's boat was damaged. Let's not even mention the erosion to our shorelines. I have been on the lake for 60+ years and I have never seen anything like it! .......

Clearly Greens Basin is not an appropriate place to be using a wakeboard boat. The shoreline in that area and small bays/inlets is not conditioned naturally for large waves as other open areas of the lake are. Erosion will certainly be excessive in this area from these boats which should be relegated to the large open bays or the Broads. I'm not advocating more laws, but self-regulation by users of these boats will prevent petitioners from seeking same. It's all about common sense (I know, it's not common).

ITD 09-01-2016 08:58 AM

Rich people problems.

ApS 09-01-2016 09:03 AM

Coves and Bays—Meredith Isn't Alone...
 
Rich:

Quote:

Perhaps the problem isn't the "oversized boats", but it is the oversized homes that then install their own dock and its surrounding landscaping that is disturbing the natural forest that took years to grow and which surrounds the lake?

Fertilizer, road salt, dirt, loam, forest duff, moss, and (worse) silt, are not falling off the back of boats, but are the certainly the result of homes being built on the shores of the lake. Perhaps you should look in the mirror before casting stones from your glass house?

See, it can go both ways. ;)
We own an acre of lakefront property—with half fully forested. (No lawn :coolsm:).

The erosive effects of weekend boating with over-sized boats are clearly evident across both shorelines. On weekends, shoreline waters go from clear to turbid.


Quote:

I'm not promoting that everyone should be too loud, or too damaging, or too obnoxious
So...just how obnoxious should they be? :rolleye1:

TiltonBB:
Quote:

So, who gets to decide if there is such a thing as "over sized" for Winnipesaukee?

The market. Taxes and fees are used for incentive for change.

Who else will give the NHMP the resources to enforce the NWZ in Meredith? :rolleye1:


Who will determine what the maximum acceptable size is?

The market.

Why is it acceptable to financially penalize people who need enough room to stay overnight on their boat with their kids and want to enjoy Winnipesaukee?

Because they are a major part of the problem of oversized wakes? (And the cost is carried by others as a "second home" for income tax purposes—(This year!)

Perhaps you may want to adjust to the times and raise your dock by a foot or so.

As it is, sitting on my dock, my feet can't reach the gunwale of my canoe. Maybe I should practice jumping in from a foot higher? :rolleye2:

The lake has changed from what it was 30 or 40 years ago and it will always be changing.

A change needs to be made to keep Winnipesaukee's hillsides from sliding into the lake.

Weekends, shoreline waters go from clear to turbid. :(


It is predominantly a power boat lake with a very small percentage of sailboats.

Can you guess why that is? :rolleye1:

People who cannot accept the changes and think you should be able to kayak across the broads on the Fourth of July may be happier on a smaller lake that better fits with their needs and expectations.

• Perhaps because of "whitewater-kayaking", kayakers and sea-kayakers think they can handle anything thrown their way.

Some don't come back. :(

• What happened to "The Lake is for Everybody"? :confused:


I would not want to look out at the lake every day and have complaints about what I see. I enjoy seeing all of the different types and styles of boats go by.

Most enjoyable is watching the most eye catching of the towable watersports: slalom skiing, "sky-skiing" and tubing. Watching Moth-class sailboats, catamarans, windsurfers and ultralights is entertaining. Watching the wakeboarders and wakesurfing is boring—and sometimes—deafening!

Watching 75-MPH speedboats dodging all of them—not so much. :mad:

Not being able to hear my cellphone or radio at the dock isn't entertaining with over-sized wakes crashing ashore, and sometimes, even shaking my piling dock!

(I hadn't really bothered to make a note of this, until a family member—peaceably reading in the sun—and I looked up at each other when a wake shook the dock! As soon as I figure out a way to best videotape this mostly-weekend phenomenon, I'll take one). :cool:

The advent of pontoon boats, which leave a scant wake, is welcomed very much.

:look:
Quote:

Originally Posted by MAXUM (Post 268500)
Really? I don't see that in any of your pics. Just sayin...

All better? :look:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...ps5uqymdwd.jpg

The dry areas to the left and under the stairway aren't slippery with algae. The darkest areas, regularly soaked by oversized wakes, got "noticed" after my knee surgery!

Now, back to the wake problem elsewhere...:rolleye2:

.

MAXUM 09-01-2016 12:38 PM

Don't know I sort of just shake my head at the content of this entire thread. If things continue on the course they seem to be taking the lake is going to end up being chopped up, sliced and diced into areas where upon entering them you'll need to bring the check list of what is "allowable" and what speed is appropriate. Is it me or can anyone else see the insanity this represents?

For cripes sake there is enough laws, rules and regulations on the books, putting up more does nothing to solve the problem so long as the enforcement piece is not exercised.

There are already laws on the books for loud exhaust, liability for any damage done by the wake you leave behind, 150 passage rule, disturbing the peace, reckless operation, we even now have a speed limit and on and on. That pretty much covers every gripe about wakes, noise, speed etc.. yet that still is not enough. Does this not illustrate that laws are useless if they are not readily enforced. Simply put unless you all want a fleet of MP around every corner busting people for every little nit picky thing they do nothing is going to make you happy, or let me guess the sight of all the MP boats, the fact they may need to speed to catch somebody, or you have to listen to sirens blairing at all hours of the day is also unacceptable as well. It's a no win situation.

SIKSUKR 09-02-2016 01:54 PM

1 Attachment(s)
My 2 cents. The huge NW zone there is part of the problem. First, its so far across it really is missed by most except regular users. Second, its so large and far from ones destination that many "push it" as far as they can. Third, since it was created that far out it seems boats re producing bigger wakes in the MYC area. I thought this ridiculously large area was setup to with MYC in mind and is why its that far down Meredith Bay in the first place. Fourth, I have not been there in a few years but this years Bizer chart shows scattered markers that, in a straight line would go way past M Marine but stop quite a ways offshore from there. I guess looking at a Bizer chart I'd be confused where one would start headway speed if you were on the MM side. Fifth, to APS, is a 35 year old dock still supposed to be algae free? What?

neckdweller 09-02-2016 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApS (Post 268428)
This photo-disguised boat (below) is not the largest one we saw this weekend towing tubes, but it should give pause to those who think "over-sized" boats are free of this recent anathema to peaceable boaters and shorelines.
http://winnipesaukee.com/forums/atta...1&d=1472640765

I could be wrong but looking at this picture the big fast boat is creating less wake than the other boat (can't tell if big or small) that appears to be plowing through the water at less than planing speed.

radiocontester 09-02-2016 02:52 PM

NWZ advocates: What are you afraid of?
 
This?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePcUA2pln8Q

upthesaukee 09-02-2016 03:28 PM

We went to Meredith today. I think it took me right around 9 mins to come from just out the NWZ (middle right area of the buoys) to docked at the sidewalk end of the first dock area. Nice little putt putt in, easy to keep track of whose going where, and little wake action at the docks. If it takes me a few extra minutes to come in or go out, so be it. A little more quality time on the lake is fine.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using Tapatalk

Rusty 09-02-2016 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApS (Post 268428)
Huge wakes are being produced all over the lake—even Winter Harbor is suffering, as it has become a mecca for every type of boating.

I'll bet that you have to wear a life vest while sitting in you living room at your camp because of the "Huge wakes" that some of these boats leave.

Hillcountry 09-02-2016 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by upthesaukee (Post 268616)
We went to Meredith today. I think it took me right around 9 mins to come from just out the NWZ (middle right area of the buoys) to docked at the sidewalk end of the first dock area. Nice little putt putt in, easy to keep track of whose going where, and little wake action at the docks. If it takes me a few extra minutes to come in or go out, so be it. A little more quality time on the lake is fine.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using Tapatalk

Lol...I did the same thing today. Previously, I had said "there's no way it takes 10 minutes to putt in to the docks...I did take almost 10 minutes...but i still maintain "what's the rush?" I'm not on the lake to be in any hurry to do anything...

bigpatsfan 09-03-2016 09:05 AM

To me the issue is not how much time it takes to pass thru a NWV as I am not sure if adding ten minutes to my travel is acceptable and if it is acceptable, how about adding twenty minutes or thirty minutes.

in another thread, it is reported that the Town of Wolfeboro looking to do the same thing.

If Meredith does extend the length of the NWV, should we expect Alton, Gilford, and all the other Towns on the Lake look to extend the length of their current NWV?

For example, I can see the same rational being used to extend the Meredith NWV being used to extend the NWV in Alton to past Sandy Point.

We also have Towns instituting no rafting zones.

To me, the issue is Towns on the Lake having this power in the first place.

I am not sure having four of five folks on a Town Board making rules that effect life on the Lake is a smart idea in the first place?

Would it make sense to have some sort of State involvement? What is the current role of the State in this process? It was the State that instituted the speed limit not the Towns... Does the Town have to have State approval to reduce the speed limit in their portion of the Lake?

Hillcountry 09-03-2016 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigpatsfan (Post 268651)
To me the issue is not how much time it takes to pass thru a NWV as I am not sure if adding ten minutes to my travel is acceptable and if it is acceptable, how about adding twenty minutes or thirty minutes.

in another thread, it is reported that the Town of Wolfeboro looking to do the same thing.

If Meredith does extend the length of the NWV, should we expect Alton, Gilford, and all the other Towns on the Lake look to extend the length of their current NWV?

For example, I can see the same rational being used to extend the Meredith NWV being used to extend the NWV in Alton to past Sandy Point.

We also have Towns instituting no rafting zones.

To me, the issue is Towns on the Lake having this power in the first place.

I am not sure having four of five folks on a Town Board making rules that effect life on the Lake is a smart idea in the first place?

Would it make sense to have some sort of State involvement? What is the current role of the State in this process? It was the State that instituted the speed limit not the Towns... Does the Town have to have State approval to reduce the speed limit in their portion of the Lake?

The state has one big role in all this...it is their responsibility to ENFORCE the zones. To me, it doesn't look like this is happening to any great degree. So what we get is scofflaws that ruin it for the majority.

bigpatsfan 09-03-2016 11:22 AM

So the Town enacts a rule and expects someone else to enforce it?

upthesaukee 09-03-2016 12:22 PM

The town cannot create or change a NWZ. It must be petitioned, and go through a hearing process. The process includes public comment.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using Tapatalk

bigpatsfan 09-03-2016 12:57 PM

thanks for clarifying the process (I am bad for not fully reading the letters contained in the link)

BroadHopper 09-04-2016 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigpatsfan (Post 268662)
So the Town enacts a rule and expects someone else to enforce it?

I don't think it is the town partitioning the rule, it is a particular businessman capitalizing on SUP, kayaks and such. Originally someone wanted to teach water skiing and reduce the NWZ. Guess that did not go well and canned the thought. Greed my friend is a root of evil.

noreast 09-04-2016 08:09 AM

my guess is the paddle board rentals, May be the same company?

BroadHopper 09-04-2016 08:46 AM

http://www.citizen.com/news/2016-09-...redith_Ba.html

Please attend the meeting and voice your opinion.
The way I see it the lake and boating was here first before the marina and the bayshore residents. They should know that boat traffic can be a problem and build to see fit. Instead they created the NWZ. Thus the boats are speeding up or slowing down in that spot. A fault of their own. Now they want to move the problem down the bay and pissed off their neighbors! A vicious cycle.
Akwa Marina and Bayside Marina knew this when they built their slips. Instead of partitioning a NWZ out front and irritate boaters, they built wave barriers and they were very effective! Why can't Meredith Marina and Bayside Marina do the same?

noreast 09-04-2016 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroadHopper (Post 268717)
http://www.citizen.com/news/2016-09-...redith_Ba.html

Whenever a new development, marina etc. build on the shore, they decide to blame the boats for the waves etc. The boat traffic was there first and they should know better. But instead they decide to ticked people off for their own benefits.

They should do the same that Akwa Marina and the marina in front of T-bones, build a wave barrier around the docks!

Right, They act surprised by the situation when the plan all along is to buy, Then have the rules changed for there benefit. A little upfront spending on a barrier would go along way for community relations. I wouldn't spend a penny on any one who pulled that crap.

Hillcountry 09-18-2016 12:58 PM

Had a lousy, experience yesterday coming in to the Meredith marina gas dock. The east wind had kicked up in the afternoon and was pushing rollers right into the docks...add to that some Yahoo coming in for gas who added to it with his own wake and it was all I could do to hold my boat, which is a tritoon, from being battered against the dock.
I stayed with it until it calmed down a bit and then walked in and made arrangements to have my boat valeted out for the day.
Definitely the worst conditions I have experienced at Meredith to date and every time I am in the bay ( which is every time I take my boat out ) I see blatant disregard or ignorance of the no wake areas there and all over the lake. :(

kawishiwi 09-18-2016 02:36 PM

One particular A-Hole
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by thinkxingu (Post 268518)
This is a total generalization based on my many hours anchoring in "quiet" coves: wakeboard boaters tend to be much less thoughtful than other crafts--I don't know what it is, but they always come closer to us and other anchored boats and the shore, and they always seem louder and more obnoxious.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

So...I am fishing maybe 300 ft from shore along a dropoff just outside Morrison cove east of the L.I. bridge when a family decided they needed to disregard thousands of open acres of water to wakeboard in circles around my little tin fishing boat. They had to run periously close to shallow rock water to accomplish this. Totally legal. They were just "having fun", "enjoying the lake", "exercising freedom",...to be the biggest A-holes I've encountered in N.H. since I moved here in '93. Could not be bothered to spend .50c of gas to go a little bit further into the large bay so they could burn $10+ of gas circling me within shouting distance of their dock just east of the mouth of Morrison cove. If you recognize yourself from this description you should be very proud of yourself. You are a "man", and I use that term loosely, of great distinction. You do what you do, I'll do what I do. No harm, no foul.

But...for all of you that have, or will, defend this kind of behavior, "'cus FREEDOM", should really think hard if that is the way you would raise children or expect them to behave once grown. And if you don't, why would you defend the "right" of others to be recklessly obnoxious just because it's Saturday on the lake?

meredith weekender 10-05-2016 09:25 PM

so did anyone on the forum go to this hearing and what was the outcome????

Thanks in advance.

Rich 11-22-2016 02:22 PM

FYI: Looks like this was granted:

https://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/...-bay-order.pdf

ishoot308 11-22-2016 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich (Post 272035)

I must say that I am very surprised this passed! All they did was move the problem in front of some other house or business...

Dan

AC2717 11-22-2016 04:48 PM

from what I read it appears there was more opposition to this than those that were for it, even going as far as to mention that if anything the opposition would like it moved back to original location.

with this point, one wonders how it passed
now the next row of people will complain and before we know it all the way to Spindle point will be a NWZ

I guess these people do not understand that wake waves travel and are produced when getting on plane and off plane; and would be better suited for it to be past them further in the bay then before them

Wolfeboro great example of how a smaller NWZ helps out the bay

Rich 11-22-2016 04:55 PM

It goes to show you, don't sit here online and try to say what makes sense, get to the hearings and voice your concerns. If you can't make it to the hearing, then at least write in your opinion.

If the deadline hasn't passed, you could appeal the decision, get working on this and gather support.

But debating it here does nothing. :)

It's going to be a long winter, how long until ice-out? :)

BroadHopper 11-23-2016 07:18 AM

There was talk at Tavern 27
 
Grouse Point and Long Bay\South Down Farm residents are already thinking about a No wake proposal in front of their docks. It won't be long!

Rich 11-23-2016 09:56 AM

Maybe I should have said that debating it here after the fact doesn't help, but instead gather support or opposition and then get a crew to go to the hearing and speak, or get s bunch of people to send in a written petition.

It seems we've made a difference before, so it can be done again!

AC2717 11-23-2016 10:32 AM

as usual these hearings take place while most of us are not around and not during the summer.

and letters don't see to have much weight anymore, in person the only way to go but at same time expecting to take a day off from work and drive X amount of hours for a cause is sometimes too much - with all the other battles in your life


I for one have done this on multiple occasions and has worked and sometimes hasn't
I will tell you this though, I will be on the look out for the SDS one and that will make a point because it will redirect travel routes in Pagus Bay and force more traffic into an already crowded area that has tough navigation on weekends.

I see it like people moving to a nuisance and then trying to change it, the travel lanes in Paugus Bay and Meredith Bay wake issues always there, not till after someone moves in and then wants to change things, - Much like the Ames Farm issue some years back

joey2665 11-23-2016 10:49 AM

SDS No Wake Zone?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AC2717 (Post 272059)
as usual these hearings take place while most of us are not around and not during the summer.

and letters don't see to have much weight anymore, in person the only way to go but at same time expecting to take a day off from work and drive X amount of hours for a cause is sometimes too much - with all the other battles in your life


I for one have done this on multiple occasions and has worked and sometimes hasn't
I will tell you this though, I will be on the look out for the SDS one and that will make a point because it will redirect travel routes in Pagus Bay and force more traffic into an already crowded area that has tough navigation on weekends.

I see it like people moving to a nuisance and then trying to change it, the travel lanes in Paugus Bay and Meredith Bay wake issues always there, not till after someone moves in and then wants to change things, - Much like the Ames Farm issue some years back

I am in the SDS boat club and have been for 10 years. I DO NOT want a NWZ there. You are correct it will just push traffic to the other side of Little Island and then Margate will apply for a NWZ. This is going to have a huge domino effect.

HellRaZoR004 11-23-2016 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AC2717 (Post 272059)
as usual these hearings take place while most of us are not around and not during the summer.

and letters don't see to have much weight anymore, in person the only way to go but at same time expecting to take a day off from work and drive X amount of hours for a cause is sometimes too much - with all the other battles in your life


I for one have done this on multiple occasions and has worked and sometimes hasn't
I will tell you this though, I will be on the look out for the SDS one and that will make a point because it will redirect travel routes in Pagus Bay and force more traffic into an already crowded area that has tough navigation on weekends.

I see it like people moving to a nuisance and then trying to change it, the travel lanes in Paugus Bay and Meredith Bay wake issues always there, not till after someone moves in and then wants to change things, - Much like the Ames Farm issue some years back

Not true. The Springfield Cove NRZ petition was denied solely based on opposition in the form of mostly letters. http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...2&d=1472598937

The problem here is the petitioners provided ample evidence of damage ($ and bodily) while the group that wanted it thrown out didn't provide sufficient evidence to turn it down.

Part of the problem lies with when these hearings are scheduled and the availability of those both in favor and against. I would have liked to provide video evidence that the NWZ wasn't the issue assuming the laws (as previously written) were sufficiently enforced, but due to timing I was either out of the country and the short notice with the end of the season approaching.

AC2717 11-23-2016 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HellRaZoR004 (Post 272061)

The problem here is the petitioners provided ample evidence of damage ($ and bodily) while the group that wanted it thrown out didn't provide sufficient evidence to turn it down.

.

I agree with you in this case, I did not notice if they actually provided evidence or just word of mouth. I do not recall seeing proof of repairs or evidence, at the same time though, it could be reasoned that these damages could have been a result of a boater not following the rules, or they just simply not tying their boat up correct or any of the other major factors, I can certainly understand damage to property on the land whichever the case may be. I have also fallen off my boat when buttoning it up while wakes/waves were coming in on the bay, it happens, my mistake for not paying more attention, also my wife has fallen getting onto the dock from wakes coming in or the wind generating waves sometimes can't tell which is which

IMHO what I saw in this case was a lack of common sense on the committee's part to make a decision based lake operation/navigation as a whole. personally I wont mind the longer enjoyment of the lake to get to the town docks, but its not going to change the results of the previous NWZ - again wakes and waves travel and only have a chance to build up the longer they travel

Descant 11-23-2016 03:07 PM

Process
 
I think the original petition process allowed for hearings year round. That was changed to July, August, September to benefit "summer folk" For many, if it is on a weekday, it is still difficult to attend, no matter where you live.

In some minds, the 25 signatures is a low threshold. Maybe it should be 25 UNRELATED signers?

Let's face it. Petitioners will generally be more enthusiastic for their cause, and better organized than the opposition. That gives therm the advantage, as well as the element of surprise. Many people don't find out about these changes until they come in the spring and see the MP install a new marker.

Perhaps the legislature should review the entire process? I think, far back, when a lake wanted to prohibit motorized craft or set an entire lake speed limit, it had to go through the legislature, not the Department of Safety. The petition process is easier for most, but is it too easy?

BroadHopper 04-01-2017 08:56 AM

Meredith land owners get their wish!
 
https://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/...-bay-order.pdf

Rumors abuzz that abutters on the other side of the NWZ wants to further the zone! Especially Grouse Point!

HellRaZoR004 04-01-2017 10:08 AM

Not surprised one bit. This whole thing is ridiculous, and this summer is going to test a lot of people with how busy the lake is projected to be.

elbie 04-01-2017 10:40 AM

Solution to the problem
 
Just looked at the calendar and would suggest a solution to the problem has been right in front of us, all along! SPEED BUMPS!

Hillcountry 04-01-2017 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elbie (Post 276526)
Just looked at the calendar and would suggest a solution to the problem has been right in front of us, all along! SPEED BUMPS!

Unless you have never experienced one that's exactly what a large wake is...a rolling speed bump...

ITD 04-01-2017 02:26 PM

And so the bay becomes a no wake zone, 200 feet at a time. Talk about unintended consequences.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.