OK, enough guessing what I meant! Nice try to make it sound like I support HB162
 

No need to PM me. My point was, that given the question and the people that probably answered, you can see how they got those results. But I don't find the results relevant.

If a random survey called me and asked me:

Would our roadways be safer is we prevented people over 70 from driving. I would answer YES. And I bet a high percentage would as well.

However, what's the reality of passing a bill that terminate the rights of people over 70 from driving. I think many would call that discriminatory, why, because there are many responsible drivers over 70. And there are actually statistics that show the elderly are the #2 demographic that causes accidents behind teenagers.

And the same goes with my Tractor Trailer driver question.

So for the record, I don't suppport HB162, I don't think the poll holds the weight supporters feel it should and I don't think the results of such a law justifies the reasoning for it.

So, nobody wanted to take my poll I see. What, are the supporters afraid of the outcome? Lets try this, as a "below average intelligence" NH voter, maybe someone can explain to me exactly how the speed limit will make me safer should I venture out on the lake in a boat. Am I less likely to be slammed into by another boat? Will the water be less choppy by reducing speeds? I guess I just don’t get it.:confused:

The culture of fear
 

An interesting article came across my desk, and while reading it, I sensed a strong parallel between the culture shift in the US and the fear induced speed limit law project we have been following. Its a bit off-topic, and a bit 'heady', but a good read never the less and puts things in perspective.
Title: Culture of Fear: Dealing with cultural panic attacks by Ronald Bailey

http://www.reason.com/rb/rb021706.shtml

Good find. Doubt it'll change anyone's mind though.

I guess the truth hurts. My "insulting comments" were entirely true. I'm also a NH resident and I don't want the opinions of NH residents to cloud the judgent of my elected leaders. Public opinion is a silly method to set a speed limit, or enact any other safety regulation. One should really pay attention to physics and statistics in this sort of calculation, not opinion polls. Would you prefer the general public decide things like construction, plumbing, fire prevention and wiring requirements or would you rather have an expert do so?

Are you unable or unwilling to use your kayak on the lake due to the presence of boats going more than 45 MPH? If so, the problem may be your own. I see lots of kayaks out there with fast boats alos present and everyone appears to be having fun. I don't think you've lots any rights at all.

Proponents for this law seem to forget that it's considered bad form, at the least, (and is quite likely already against the law) to actually hit another boat, regardless of speed. Most boaters avoid hitting other boaters. Statistically, you are really quite unlikley to get run over by a power boat out there and are much more likely to die from something like an act of God or bad judgement.

Any "boat" can be unsafe!
 

From today's Manchester Union Leader:

Fatal Ice Boat Collision, Lake Sunapee

Not Safer
 

Weis Guy,
The Lake will not be safer. I know the size my wake at slow speed (before getting on plane) and the size it is after getting on plane. Big difference.
If this bill passes we should all go PLOWING around the Lake at 15mph and show the elite liberals the trouble they caused.You won't be able to ge out on that water in any thing less than a 28footer. Just a protesting thought....
Anyone been within a 1/4 mile of the Mail Boats? The size of that wake is downright dangerous! Getting back to my Quote from Franklin.... I think it's an Essential Liberty to be left alone when out on the water! Keep all your restrictive laws to yourself and leave us alone!!!! We go out on the water to get away from all that nonsense

All the Best,
The breeze
Make sure to wave cause I'll Wave Back

...nobody knows....nobody!
 

Oh, nobody knows how our 24 Senators will vote.
Nobody knows, not even the Senators themselves.

One day, they wake up and think about that marina campaign contribution that they got last election.

Another day, they wake up and think about Lake Winnipesaukee and its speedy reputation and whether that's good or bad for the tourist biz of the state.

Another day they wake up and remember that boat ride in a constituant's big fast boat and what fun that was.

Another day they wake up and feel bad for all the smaller boats getting bullied by the big bad go fast-be loud boats.

Another day, they wake up and say to themselves "I wonder what I think today, who knows?"

24 Senators: 16 Repubs w/ one lady Senator, 8 Dems w/ 4 lady Senators and it is just too close to call. A vote taken today would probably be different than a vote taken on the next day. Even if the Transportation Committee recommends one way, the overall Senate is not bound by that and could vote the other way.

So, n-o-b-o-d-y k-n-o-w-s.........

You know I have heard complaints about kayakers and the speed limit. Perhaps if you would paddle half as fast as Willie Coyete runs, then you too could go 45 mph.:emb:

Equal rights? For who?
 

Nobody is telling you that you cannot enjoy your sport on Winni, it is you that chooses not to. Yet you are supporting a bill that FORCES powerboaters to slow down and cut the enjoyment of the sport which they prefer, who is forcing who??? You already have an equal right yet are trying to limit others. Please show me where in the law books you are being limited in your use of Winni. Your post is just plain rubbish.

If you do not feel confident that your skills are good enough to survive on the lake maybe you should go elsewhere. Nobody has hit you or anyone else in a kayak that I have heard of in NH, if this is not the case please show facts to prove.

Or perhaps this well trained , skilled , prepared and talented kayaker is not as good as they would have us believe:rolleye1:
In those infamaous words of "Captain Ron" , "If somethings going to go wrong , it will go wrong out there".:emb:

From the Union Leader..."Among those registering at the hearing yesterday, 150 opposed the bill and 59 favored it."

http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...6-2958d5d7d427

What's missing in this picture below? :rolleye2:

Our avid, "let nature provide the thrills" kayaker with the sea kayak, that's who.

And shame on all those GFBL boats that are easily seen in the picture, preventing our avid, "let nature provide the thrills" kayaker from enjoying the Lake :D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/photopo...0076-1024w.jpg

I do admit,that as a NH native,that I am below average intelligence.But,somehow it annoys me when people that do not live here profess to know more about how to run our state than we do.
Vermont is a good example of a state that was overun with well meaning tourists from NY,Conn. and Mass. Now you can't even mow your lawn there without a permit.

The uneducated boater is a much greater threat to kayakers and canoes than a 100 mph educated boater. I passed plenty of canoes and kayakers last year. I always slow down, keep my distance and wave a friendly hello just like most other boaters do.

If this was really about safety I think the people in favor of HB 162 would be pushing for eveyone who registers a boat in NH or rents one , to have a boating certificate. You should not be able to register your boat without first having a certificate..

This would make the lakes instantly safer and cost almost nothing compared to a useless speed limit. The uneducated boater is the danger on our lakes not speed. This bill does nothing to address safety IMO.

About the poll results. When HB 162 was first brought up I too thought it was a good idea. A speed limit should make things safer right? If I was polled then I would have answered yes to HB 162.
I then started reading and slowly realized this bill puts too many restriction out there with very little results. I just don't believe it is about safety anymore. Poll 600 people in NH with boating certificates instead. The people polled should be educated boaters or I would call it a bogus poll.

My wife has been listening to me talk about this. Yesterday she finally said "Maybe the speed limit will make the lake safer hun".

I got on my soap box:) First I asked"We have been boating for over 10 years. Have we ever had an incident with a fast boat?" Her answer"no". "Have we ever had an experience with a uneducated boater?" Her answer "yes several times" . With one very close call.

Finally I asked" Do you think a educated boater with a fast boat should be limited to 45 mph on a huge empty lake during the middle of the week?" "of course not" she said. I told her that this law would make that happen. She felt that was totally wrong and why can't they just have a weekend and holiday speed limit , like alot of NH lakes do.

She realized this was an incredible infringement on our NH liberties even though our boat barely goes 50mph.

I would even agree with a weekend speed limit because that is a compromise at least(and I only go boating on weekends).It seems there is no compromise though, If the proponents really want safer lakes they should push for stricter boater education IMO. Again this bill does nothing for safety on our lakes IMO.

Don't twist polls or words
 

NOT ALL VOTERS were polled first of all. Educate yourself on how polls are done and how things are worded.

And your point is?
 

GWC: I don't see any fish in your picture either, so does that also mean that there are no fish in Winni?

I fail to see your point, and don't enjoy being laughed at, just because I prefer kayaks over powerboats. And I have actually kayaked on lakes in larger waves than what your picture shows. I've also done Class III white water.

Notice how the waves in your photo are biggest closer to the shore (breakers), which is why hugging the shore is not always the best thing to do.

Here's a typical sea kayak shot, to give you a better idea of what sea kayaks are actually made for:

I think there is plenty of room on Lake Winnipesaukee for everybody.

However, the only boating related fatality we had last year was the darwin award contender who thought it was a good idea to go kayaking during the flooding in Alstead.

Woodsy

Exactly what does your comment about kayaking in a flood have to do with making NH lakes safer? You guys should really be focusing on the topic of this thread rather than picking on kayakers.

You'll notice that the sea kayakers in my photo are wearing PFDs.

And, as I posted earlier, from the years 1996 though 2002, only 1% of fatalities associated with canoes and kayaks involved sea kayaks.

(from: CRITICAL JUDGMENT II - Understanding and Preventing Canoe and Kayak Fatalities 1996-2002 by the American Canoe Association)

Evenstar...

It really doesn't matter to me what type of kayak you happen to use. So your sea kayak is the GFBL of kayaks? So what? It is still a kayak, and it still has a greater potential for a fatality than a hi-performance boat. In any case, I was pointing out the flawed judgement that kayaker used. In fact when I was pulling my boat out of the water in December I witnessed 2 people in a sea kayaks go out for a paddle... no PFD, just a dry suit! On a snowy December day! Yet another case of poor judgment. The MP had closed Glendale at that point, if something bad happened they were out of luck. Statistically you are more likely die in a kayak or a canoe than you are on any other type of craft.

You want to restrict my personal freedoms yet you want no restrictions on your personal freedom! You already have access to every public body of water in the State of NH, and thats not good enough for you. You want to limit my personal freedom not because you can't kayak on Lake Winnipesaukee, but just because YOU want to feel safe. How is that fair? Especially when all of the statistics point to Lake Winnipesaukee being a VERY SAFE place for all to enjoy.

Woodsy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy Evenstar...It really doesn't matter to me what type of kayak you happen to use. So your sea kayak is the GFBL of kayaks? So what? It is still a kayak, and it still has a greater potential for a fatality than a hi-performance boat.

I’ve explained over and over the difference between a sea kayak and a recreational kayak – if you still don’t get it, that’s not my fault. Your statement is like saying that any boat with a motor is equally safe out in the middle of the lake, in all conditions. The fact is that sea kayaks are much safer on large lakes than recreation kayaks, mostly because they are designed for large bodies of water.

GFBL kayak??? 5 to 6 mph is fast? And my kayak is hardly loud!

Where’s the data to back up your statement that a sea kayak “has a greater potential for a fatality than a hi-performance boat”? The USCG data gives that there were 98 “canoe/kayak” fatalities in 2004. If sea kayakers are only 1% of all canoe/kayak fatalities, then that’s only 1 person. So are you saying that no one died in a hi-performance boat in 2004?

Quote:

In any case, I was pointing out the flawed judgement that kayaker used. In fact when I was pulling my boat out of the water in December I witnessed 2 people in a sea kayaks go out for a paddle... no PFD, just a dry suit! On a snowy December day! Yet another case of poor judgment. The MP had closed Glendale at that point, if something bad happened they were out of luck.

Again that person was not on a NH lake, so that doesn’t belong in this thread. Are you suggesting that no one in a hi-performance boat has ever made a mistake, or suffered from “flawed judgment”?

Are you positive that those drysuits were not PFD rated? Some are – some are inflatable. Or that they weren’t being worn over a PFD, as some people prefer? Whatever, I never said that every sea kayaker always makes the best decisions.

Quote:

Statistically you are more likely die in a kayak or a canoe than you are on any other type of craft.

But this tread is about safety on NH lakes, so can you show me some real data to back that statement up, as it applies to NH lakes. How many canoe and kayak fatalities occurred only on NH lakes? How many canoes and kayaks uses are in NH? And what are the paddling hours per year for these paddlers on NH lakes?

Quote:

You want to restrict my personal freedoms yet you want no restrictions on your personal freedom! You already have access to every public body of water in the State of NH, and thats not good enough for you. You want to limit my personal freedom not because you can't kayak on Lake Winnipesaukee, but just because YOU want to feel safe. How is that fair? Especially when all of the statistics point to Lake Winnipesaukee being a VERY SAFE place for all to enjoy.

I’m supporting a bill that would require you to slow down. Personally I don’t feel that you or anyone else has the right to put others in danger, just because you enjoy going fast. Most hi-performance boaters are not willing to admit it, but there is a relationship between higher speeds and the number of vessel collisions. So there is some documented basis for my fear.
I don’t consider Winni to be a very safe place – 222 boating accidents in 6 years on just one lake isn’t what I call safe! (And that number doesn’t even include accidents with less than $2000 damage):

New Hampshire Boating Accidents – Data for years 1999 – 2004:
Lake Winnipesaukee: 222
Lake Winnisquam: 28
Ossipee Lake: 15
Atlantic Ocean: 14
Lake Sunapee: 14
Squam Lake: 10
Merrimack River: 8
Hampton River: 6

“Coast Guard boating records for 1999-2004 list up to three causes for each boating accident. The causes cited in New Hampshire were operator inexperience, a cause of 61 accidents; operator inattention, 59; hazardous waters, 55; no proper lookout, 39; excessive speed, 35; weather, 28; careless/reckless operation, 24; machinery or equipment failure, 23.”
From: http://nh.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060204/OUTDOOR/60203002
[Source: Telegraph analysis of Coast Guard Recreational Boat Accidents Database, 1999-2004]

Evenstar, this just isn't true, think about it if it were then there would be many more accidents on high speed highways than city streets. The documentation you show is one man's opinion and I think it is a misstatement.

Once again how does this prove the need for a speed limit, it doesn't. Excessive speed quoted above could be speed well below the speed limit. The number of accidents on Winni. needs to be looked at in relationship to the number of boats and time the boats are used. If I were you, looking at the data the way you seem to look at it, I would not kayak on Winni. even with the speed limit.....

Raw numbers without context are meaningless
 

If you consider the safe passage law, by definition, any boats that collide at speeds greater than 6 MPH are using "excessive" speed. Some of the Coast Guard stats that break this down into more detail show that speeds in excess of 40 MPH are responsible for very few accidents and deaths compared to accidents and deaths occuring at speeds below 40 MPH. Why? Probably because there are a LOT of people traveling at slow speeds and few traveling at 40 plus. What does this mean? To me, it means that there are no clear statistics that show high speed is a major contributor to boating accidents on NH lakes. In general, the statistics that are available indicate that high speed is not a disproportionate contributor to accidents and fatalities. Would more detailed information show a disproportionate high speed link to accidents? Personally I don't believe it would but the reality is that we do not have this information.

As to the number of accidents on Winni, there are many factors that must be considered to place these numbers in context. For example, Winni is about 10 times larger than Winnisquam. If you multiply Winnisquam's 28 accidents by 10 you get 280, significantly more per acre than Winni (222). You would also need to ask how many boats are using these lakes. Because of the variety of entertainments availble on Winni I would guess that many more boats are in use on Winni than on other NH lakes. I have 0 boating accidents in my swimming pool. Does that allow me to compare it to Winni in terms of safety? A meaningful statistic would be the number of accidents per boating hour in use. I don't think we'll get that since boaters don't clock in and out when using their boats. I would like to get better information so that we can make informed choices in the future. IS education working? Are boaters aware of the current laws on the lake? Are people getting into accidents new boaters? new to the lake?

The clear statistics that ARE available show that with increasing boat registrations in NH the number of reported accidents are decreasing. That is surely a good thing. However, no one disputes that the lake is more congested, especially on some summer weekends. This congestion amplifies any problems that may have already been happening. People are ruder when crammed together and stupid behavior seems to peak when people become impatient. These are real problems that we need to think about, and they can be hard to fix. People need to be made aware of the problems and taught how to avoid them and we need tough enforcement of existing laws to reign in the boneheads.

Speed Limit on lakes
 

I have been boating on Lake Winnipesaukee since 1976, and in those years have seen many foolish and dangerous acts committed by boaters. In my opinion, the question regarding the speed limit SHOULD BE: "What do you think the best method would be to increase safety of boaters on the lakes?"
I believe the answer to this is required safe boating programs. In my 30 years of boating on the lake, ALL of the dangerous acts that I have witnessed have one thing in common - ignorance of the rules of the "road" and ignorance regarding the operation of a vessel. Lowering the maximun speed on the lake, will not make the boaters any safer. I have yet to witness any dangerous acts which were speed related. (If you are curious - I do NOT have a performance boat.)
In closing, I truly hope this law does not pass because it will adversely affect the boating enjoyment and many of the lakeside businesses around the lake.

Focus on being heard on the Lake (blaster horn); not on this forum. ;)

http://www.orionsignals.com/Marine/P...d-signals.html


P.S.- Having difficulty seeing you and your sea kayak in this picture enjoying Mother Nature's thrills...

That's interesting, but what you quoted was a sidebox from the article. As you well know the article contained the following two paragraphs:
and by this quote that you made:
You totally ignore the fact the boating accidents have declined by 68 percent since 1999, going from a high of 109 in 1999 to 35 in 2004. Every year there was a Decrease in the number of accidents. That fact was also included in the article that you quote but chose to ignore in your post:
So how does that compare to the rest of the nation? Well the next paragraph in the article that you forgot to quote gives us a clue!
You might also note that WEATHER is blamed for nearly as many accidents as excessive speed....so, no boating in bad weather!!!! :laugh:

So, to recap. Boating accidents since 1999 have DECREASED by 68%. BOATER EDUCATION IS WORKING! So let it work!!!

If you're going to quote me, please keep my quotes in the context that I wrote them. You are twisting what I actually wrote.:(

FYI: I made that thrill comment ONCE. In this post: http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=26984&postcount=3
My comment was in response to Cal’s comment: “... If you find the little safe ponds and streams so boring , you must LIKE the thrill that comes with the big lake. So now you wish to make it boring too?”
My reply was: “Speeding boats do not make a lake more exciting for kayaks - We count on Mother Nature to do that.”

I don’t see any power boats in your photo either.

You guys act like I’m some kind of irresponsible thrill junkie – just because I made one comment about Mother Nature providing enough thrills for us sea kayakers. I don’t go out in conditions that are beyond what I can handle and I do turn back when conditions start to get a bit too challenging. Did I ever say that Winni, or any other large lakes were NEVER too rough for me? All I’ve said is that sea kayaks are made for large bodies of water, so they (with an experienced paddler) are safe to use in much rougher conditions than what open canoes and recreational kayaks would be safe in.

See my post on whistles (and air horns): http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=28538&postcount=57

If a boat is going too fast to see me – it’s likely too noisy for the operator to hear an air horn – assuming that I even have time to use one. Besides, it does take both hands to paddle a kayak.

GWC..there are MANY on this forum who express their opinions/ideas and espcially about this certain topic. There are certain posts I don't even bother to read just because of the name of the poster and their long winded, boring rhetoric. To single out Evenstar and tell him to concentrate on being heard in the lake and NOT on this forum is so ignorant!! Why would you post such a thing. Evenstar has just as much right to post and be "heard" as the next person as long as he's posting within the rules set up by the moderator. I can't understand why you would single him out like that. The avatar at the end of the face winking doesn't excuse you either. Sorry for the rant I just feel that was so mean spirited!!

Thanks!
 

Thanks Konachick, I really appreciate your post!

But I just wanted to point out that I'm a she. :)

My face is red I must admit...I'm feeling dumb, a real big twit..Evenstar is a woman no doubt...I'll say it from the hilltops, I'll even shout!! Sorry Ms. Evenstar! :)

Evenstar...

My comment as to your kayak being the GFBL of kayaks was in reference to the statement you made about sea kayaks being a high performance version (longer, & faster & generally more seaworthy) than a regular kayak. It wasn't meant to be a slam in any way. Sorry if you didn't get it.

What most people seem to forget when discussing speed on the water is VISIBILITY. In most instances on Lake Winnipesaukee visibility is 360 degrees and measured in MILES! Not hundreds of feet. A prime example is that you can see FL4 from FL3. The distance between the two is approximately 2.25 miles. A boat traveling at 45 MPH is covering 66 FPS. A boat traveling at 70MPH is covering 103 FPS. Its only traveling 37 FPS faster than a boat traveling 45 MPH. When you can see objects 1+ miles away, there is plenty of time to correct your course to avoid a collision.

Your other point, as to the 222 boating accidents on Lake Winnipesaukee over a 4 year period needs some clarification. Given the amount of people who are using the Lake, 222 accidents over a 4 year period is pretty low. Especially when you consider how many of the 222 accidents were related to excessive speed.... 35! So in 4 years of data collection, thousands and thousands of boats using Lake Winnipesaukee and the accident rate for excessive speed is 35! I wonder how many of those 35 accidents were at speeds over 45MPH during the day or 25MPH at night? I would also like to know how many were collisions with other boats or watercraft?

If Fear is the issue, and you fear getting run over by a boat, the statistic I would be most concerned with is collisions. Where are the collision accident stats for Lake Winnipesaukee or NH that justify that fear?

I really don't think an airhorn is all that attention grabbing... but for some strange reason a couple of short sharp blast on a police whislte seems to quickly gather a persons attention!

Woodsy

NH's statistics aren't very good.
 

But visibility IS an issue when high speed boaters don’t see smaller boats. Several on this forum have admitted that they have trouble spotting kayaks on the lake. I’ve had some powerboats come closer than they should have, because they obviously didn’t see me sooner. This has only happened with fast moving powerboats. So apparently there is a connection between the speed of the boat and the operator’s ability to see smaller vessels. That’s one of my main concerns.

The 150 foot rule does me no good at all when a vessel is traveling fast and the operator doesn’t see me. That ADDITIONAL 37 FPS could very well be the difference between my kayak being hit or not.

First of all, there were a lot more than 222 boating accidents on Winn during that time period. Those are just the 222 accidents that were recorded. If there’s less than $2000 damage, and injuries that don’t require more than first aid treatment, the accident isn’t part of the USCG accident statistics.

But 222 for a single lake in a 4 year period is still a great deal of accidents! According to the USCG 2004 Boating Statistics, during the 5 year period (2000-2004) the entire state of Massachusetts had 266 boating accidents, the entire state of Maine had 286 accidents, and the entire state of Vermont had 28 accidents.

The other thing is that I am entitled to my opinion – even when it is different than yours. My statement was, “I don’t consider Winni to be a very safe place.” If you’re in a large powerboat, you might consider Winni to be safe – but try to see it from my perspective – my kayak is only 23 inches wide and I’m actually sitting below the waterline. Since I’m much more vulnerable than you are, isn’t it likely that I might also feel less safe?

I think that the main reason that there aren’t more collisions on Winni is that there are relatively few paddlers on the lake (for a lake this size). And most of the paddlers stay in the coves or hug the shore - because they’re afraid of being run over by powerboats.

Flogging Will Continue Until Morale Improves—Department
 

Most accidents occur on bright, sunny days with calm water conditions.

Check those numbers again.

1) Why did accidents drop by nearly half in 1996—then double?
2) Why were accidents so low in 2004?
3) Why were fatalities at a record low in 2004?
4) Why are other states with mandatory Boater Education seeing higher accident rates?

For New Hampshire in 1996 and 2004, the answer is...unprecedented rainfall in 1996, and a very soggy 2004 season! Nobody is going to drive up to Winnipesaukee and put their boat in the water if the forecast is for rain, rain, and more rain.

Boating accidents in nearby Connecticut and New Jersey have spiked.

Both states have required Boater Education much longer than New Hampshire. Their "education" programs are keeping accidents down, all right—but only when there's bad weather!!!

New Jersey went for a NEW!!!—AND—IMPROVED!!! BOATER EDUCATION course this year when their accident rate went from 85 to 124.

It couldn't be their unlimited boating speeds, of course. :rolleye1: (Last year's Barnegat Bay speed limit initiative in New Jersey got scuttled with help from the $peedboat industry lobbyist$).

The peaks and valleys associated with New Hampshire accident numbers are "statistically insignificant"; i.e., as a small state, we have too few numbers to determine a trend attributable to the educated boater. There is a closer correlation to clouds than to education!

The only trend your numbers support are the very same numbers that are decreasing across the country anyway.

When you are sitting with your head no more than 3' above the water level, in the middle of the broads with waves all around, there is no way you can tell if a boat approaching you is doing 25MPH, 45MPH or 70MPH. It is physically impossible for you to tell if the boat is traveling an extra 37FPS. I have no doubt your a safe paddler, I think most kayakers are. The new flag requirement will help boaters see you, regardless of how fast the boat is traveling.

There should be no issues with visibility at all on Lake Winnipesaukee. Visibility is measured in miles. If the operator of the boat didn't see you it was because he wasn't paying attention, not because you weren't visible in your bright yellow kayak. While I have no doubt some bonehead has come too close to you on occasion, certainly well within your comfort zone, a speed limit is not going to affect that behavior.


I understand your vulnerablity and that the FEAR of being run over by a powerboat is very real for you. The FEAR however, is completely unfounded. Getting hit by a speeding boat in your kayak is of course possible, but its statistically highly unlikely. Statistically you have a better chance at getting in an automobile accident on your way to the boat launch. To your point that there may be other unreported accidents... I am sure there are a few. If the accident doesn't cause any personal injury, its not reportable. So if there were lots of people getting hurt we would know about it. Certainly if a kayaks and canoes were getting run over by powerboats people would be getting hurt and it would be documented.

The main reason there aren't more collisions between any of the different types of watercraft on Lake Winnipesaukee is because of the 150' safe passage rule. To date there have been ZERO collisions between a speeding powerboat and a kayak on Lake Winnipesaukee.

Woodsy

Great post Woodsy, I just wanted to point out that statistically Evenstar should be much more afraid of drowning, that is if she believes ACTUAL statistics.

I can certainly tell the difference betweent 45 and 70mph, when a boat is reasonably close to me! But that isn't even my point. The faster the speed of other boats, the greater the chance of me being hit.

I've addressed the flag on sea kayaks problem before - flags make these kayaks very unsafe - especally in rough weather.
FYI: The type of flag mentioned in this bill is a distress flag - for emergency use. If this becomes law, I would need to have a distress flag OR a whistle (which I already use) with me.

You guys just love to skip over any facts that support our concerns, by trying to divert these post off in other directions.

Actually Evenstar you are flat wrong on this. You cannot tell the approaching speed of a boat heading straight towards you on a Zero (0) bearing. Nodody can! Your only reference to boat speed would be the noise the boat is making.

The distance you are able to see within a 360 degree arc is also limited by the height of your head above the water and wave action. The higher your head above the surface of the water, the greater distance you can see. If your head is only 3' above the waters surface while kayaking and you are playing in 2' waves, your 360 degree visibility is extremely limited. On my boat, while standing in the bolsters, my head is approximately 10' above the surface of the water, allowing for much greater range of visibility. I think you can see concord from the bridge of some of those big cruisers!

A small flag similar to that of one used on a childs bicycle will not make your craft unstable. It will allow for much greater visibility, and the more visible you are, the safer you will be, regardless of boat speed.

I do agree with you that paddles are the most easily seen because they are in motion. The human eye is very sensitive to motion. Thats why a small (emphasis on small) triangular flag bobbing back & forth on a whip will greatly aid in visibility.

Your chances of getting run over while playing in the Broads are nil. Too much room and plenty of visibility. Your chances of getting run over in the Weirs increases exponentially as the number of boats increases and they are confined to a small area. You won't get run over by a boat going faster than 45 MPH in the Weirs... its just too congested.

Woodsy

A boat can be approching me, without being on a zero bearing - which is what I was talking about.

Two foot waves go up and down. My visibility is just fine in waves. If my visibility is so limited, how come I NEVER have trouble spotting other kayaks even when they are a mile or more away, yet many powerboaters say that they have trouble seeing us? I think that visibility is much more of an issue as speed increases - due to many factors.

Well, you are "flat wrong" about this. I'd love to see someone try to roll a kayak that has a flag on a pole attached to it! Self rescues whould be nearly impossible to perform. Do you have any idea of what it's like to paddlle a 23" wide sea kayak in windy conditions? You control these boats by balance and by putting them on edge - which would be virtually impossible in any cross winds, if there was any kind of flag attached to a long pole, which is attached to the kayak. Don't you know anything about leverage? If you can't see my bright red kayak, or my 2 foot square red pfd, or the bright orange blades of my paddles, you're certainly not going to see a little flag. Even the blades of my paddles are bigger than the flag you mentioned.

So collisions have never happened in open areas of a large lake? Powerboats traveling at high speeds on an open lake have run into each other. How does that happen? One would think that they could spot each other miles away - yet these kinds of accidents still happen. Maybe powerboats should have large flags on a long pole attached to them.

Does this mean that you are against using a small bicycle type flag on your kayak, even it would make you more visible and reduces the risk of not being seen and becoming a speed-bump? :eek:

For someone with as must fear as you profess to having with regards to boating on the Lake, you need to find a safer, more stable kayak that will afford you the luxury of being seen more readily by being able to display a small bicycle type flag on your kayak.

Perhaps something akin to what one sees in Hawaii being paddled, the boat with the outrigger for stability.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canoe-Stabilizer...ayphotohosting



Talk about stability and being seen: :D

http://www.sailboatstogo.com/catalog...gory=KAYAK_RIG



GFBL Kayak :eek: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: