|
"Much ado about little"...
As I actually live on Winter Harbor, I thought I'd chime in.
In addition to a huge part of the boating public out on the water, we experienced a perfect weekend that included very strong winds. The narrow part of Winter Harbor being discussed is very well protected from strong winds, so it would be a natural location for the public to anchor. This "crowding" issue may come up on occasion, but only on the weekends where weather is a factor. (A sudden storm is another matter). BTW: Family members were yelled at in the same location. They'd been picking blueberries from their boat along the shore—and at all times they were within "The People's Lake". (But I'm not defending their activities). :look: |
I don't think there is any question of this being a no rafting zone. I don't think the homeowners is wrong. It has always been known as a NRZ. Apparently something is wrong with the wording. Either maps have been changed since the law went into effect or it was never worded correctly in the first place and never noticed. Stranger things have happened. I have never known the area Bizer is pointing out to be a NRZ though, unless the Zone stretched through that whole area.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk |
Clarity
Well thanks to Bizer and Rich I think we can all be sure the MP will clarify and ambiguities in the area so, at least one positive will come out of this.
|
Quote:
The opposite is true. Most people who trailer in for the day have already loaded up on food, beer, ice, soft drinks etc in the town that they are coming from. They already have boating accessories and most have gassed up on the road where its cheaper. |
Its a balance... BUT
The tie goes to the boater....
I don't care what you paid for your property.. it does not matter. The lake (up to the high water mark) belongs to the People of NH and is in essence a State Park (although its not technically designated as such, the rules and regs for all of the lakes in NH essentially make them State parks without entrance fees). That being said, shoreline property owners do have what are called littoral rights to the lake... they can put up docks, moorings, swim lines etc... with State of NH approval and the proper ANNUAL permits. (this is key) As a boater, you cannot block their access to their dock or other permitted items they have off of their property. Of course if it is not permitted properly... So essentially, unless its a specifically designated area, you can anchor and enjoy the water and the property... up to the high water mark. You follow the rules of Saf-C-407 and should be anchored 150' offshore (there are exceptions to this, Braun Bay for example = 75' offshore) This should avoid any blockage of somebody's dock. Now it might be within your rights to swim in and plop a lawn chair down in 6" of water on someone's beach... but its obv not the socially accepted thing to do. But now we are debating the morality not rules and regs. The upside of this thread, no doubt there will be some clarification of that particular NRZ. The lake is a wonderful resource for us all to enjoy... wave and smile! It goes along way! Woodsy |
Quote:
|
+1
Quote:
|
Property Owner Support
Quote:
|
A friend had this information. It makes it a little clearer. The only lot ten I can find on Map 51 is the Condos in the Basin.
|
Its threads like this that make me happy I'm poor and live on a small lot in the Boonies.
|
Different Areas Described...
Quote:
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...psw7jasw0r.jpg The Navionics' NRZ shows a ratio of length to width being closer to 8:1. The Navionics' area outlined in red abuts a heavily-trafficked boating area, with active docking, surfing, skiing, wakeboarding, and tubing observable even yesterday—mid-week. Rafting is rarely seen along that shoreline—which is not to say that a NR zone could never have existed there. My wall-mounted 1993-1994 Duncan chart shows no NRZ in the area, although twenty-one years ago, Winter Harbor hadn't yet seen the explosion of water sports locally. Back then, rafters could choose any place to raft in any part of Winter Harbor. |
Quote:
Thanks for this info and bit of very relevant history, I'm sure it will help those trying to figure this out a lot. Reading this the 'history' section describes the 'problem' area fairly clearly, but as Bizer has pointed out, the 'ruling' section is very ambiguous, at least it is today. I wonder if back then, perhaps there wasn't more than one lot 20 on the maps that were referenced at the time? It seems to me that the wording of the written law needs to be corrected, or people could easily win fights against any tickets in this area in court. Also I wonder why they chose to reference two different maps when, if the intention is as some people believe, both lots mentioned are clearly on one map (63)? Last question: I don't understand your reference to lot ten as I don't see it mentioned anywhere. Did I miss something? |
Sorry I meant 20 not ten.
|
Makes sense now, thanks!
I just noticed to Bizer's point that NH State Law trumps the NH Marine Patrol rules, the NH MP web site says this at the top of their rules on their web page: Quote:
I wonder if the actual NH Law 'book' is correct and perhaps the reference to 'map 15' instead of 'map 51' is just a web page typo on the NH law web page? |
'Thought it Needed Attention...
:confused:
Not to put too much of a fine point on it, but... Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
If you look at my map in post #36, above, I show where all three lot #20s reside on tax map 51. Quote:
So, that eliminates any dispute as to whether it's tax map 15 or tax map 51, but problems #2, 3, and 4 in my post above still stand. However, Commissioner Flynn's ruling mentions "the towns of Wolfeboro and Tuftonboro", but does not say which town's tax maps are to be used. That is why I'd like to see the original petition submitted that initiated this issue. |
He has all the paper work for this issue.
|
It seems to me that the history section of the attached document in post #91 shows the original intent.
Perhaps all that is needed is that some official needs to review the original document to clarify the errors and update the law to remove the ambiguities, or I wonder if there will have to be a new hearing to correct something like this? Either way, it will be nice to clarify this and get it behind us. This event also allowed me to study up and refresh myself on many of the applicable laws. Things like anchoring, rafting, swimming lines, docks, and many of the other points discussed in this thread. Something new I learned is that I didn't know is that a land owner's swim raft must have the owners name and address clearly marked on the outside of it, as well as it must have 12 sq inches reflectors on each side of it. I can't say that I've ever noticed these on a raft before, but not owning a raft myself perhaps I wasn't paying attention. I wonder if this also applies to those inflatable rafts too? I guess yes. Bizer, thanks again for your clarity on this NRZ issue. |
Can someone quickly point me to NRZ/anchoring rules? There were some comments here that lead me to believe I'm not familiar enough with them.
Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk |
Read PART Saf-C 407 RAFTING RULES
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rule.../saf-c400.html But lots of good info here, anchoring and most things you need to know. But I find it helps to discuss things (even if it stirs up controversy) as it helps to cement it in your mind and you may have misunderstood something at first reading it. |
Dropping anchor in front of a house
Most boaters are courteous, when they drop anchor they stay a distance away from homes on the water. Some however, will drop anchor directly in front of your house a short distance from shore not realizing that everything they say and any noise they make gets somehow magnified by the water and carried to the homeowner. This is annoying and totally unnecessary. Using common sense and the amount of open space on the water should keep this from happening. The area Rich refers to is in fact a no rafting zone. It has been for the last 15 years. Unfortunately,for some reason this was only noted on the marine maps for the first few years. Consequently boaters coming in to the western most section of Winter Harbor are not aware that it is a no rafting zone. This is another cause of tension between homeowners and boaters and usually ends with the Marine Patrol coming to notify the boaters regarding no rafting. If Bizor would correct their map to show that there is a no rafting zone from The Winnimir Condominiums west to the Tuftonboro Neck road, there would be fewer issues.
brc |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Welcome to the forum brc. Can we assume you live in the "NRZ" and have had issues? If so, given the conflicting legal documents, what makes you so sure it's a NRZ in the first place?
Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk |
That was also my first thought, just joined and 1st post.
If that's the case I hope he comes back and gives us his side of the story. |
NRZ in Winter Harbor
I was part of a group of 30+ homeowners who petitioned to have the area in the western most section of Winter Harbor designated as a no rafting zone. We had sufficient reasons to support our petition and after a lengthy review the area was declared a NRZ. The Marine Patrol is not confused by where the NRZ is. Maybe those who are want to be. If Bizor has responsibility for printing the maps, they should also have the responsibility for getting the information correct even though it may be confusing.
brc |
Some folks are talking out against discourteous boaters, which there are certainly some. I add, however, that there are discourteous lake-front homeowners as well. I am both a boater and lakefront homeowner and I believe that both groups are generally courteous with obvious and glaring exceptions from both.
I do think it is flawed logic for a homeowner to think that the lake is large and boaters should anchor elsewhere. I choose not to anchor off someone’s dock. The lake is still public property, not an extension of their property. The homeowner, including myself, choose to buy property adjacent to what is essentially a seasonally active, crowded and noisy state park. One should not attempt to love the lake while hating all others enjoying it. Homeowners seeking NRZ's should also realize that many folks use the identified NRZ's as target destinations to go to because they must be nice places to anchor and spend the day. Many boats can still squeeze into NRZ's and anchoring attracts anchoring. |
Color me confused
I am a novice, both to the lake and boating in general, at this point we have not even used the anchor. Reading this entire thread has left me confused and I wanted to see if I understand the "rules" which may differ from common courtesy
The 10th post in this thread speaks to rafting rules. PART Saf-C 407 RAFTING RULES. If I read this correctly rafting and anchoring are different, and the rules around them are as well. As I continue through the thread what I am gathering is that it is (technically) legal to anchor (not overnight) anywhere on the lake as long as you are anchored at least 150ft from shore (not deck). If there are more than 2 of you anchored close to one another (less than 50 ft?) then you are considered a "raft" So that leaves me with it is "legal" (right is a different question) to anchor in a NRZ - as long as you maintain more than the min distance to another boat? Just asking |
Woodguy,
Not quite. If the area you are anchoring in is a designated "No Rafting Zone", then the NRZ rules apply, you can't be within 150 feet of shore, or within 25 feet of another boat, or 50 feet of a raft of boats. Note that there are some NRZ's that have exceptions to these rules. The confusing part is that in a NRZ two boats can tie up together, but not three or more. If two are tied up, then everyone must stay 50 feet away from them. I suppose NRZs try to prevent situations like this: http://www.coolestspringbreak.com/im...from-above.jpg If the area is not a legal NRZ, then you can legally anchor anywhere on the lake, and within 150 feet of shore, someone's home, etc. But it's prudent not to anchor in a busy channel, etc. You can also 'raft' with other boats, which generally means to tie up together. There are also no rules about how close you can anchor to someone else because you can actually tie up to another boat to form a 'raft'. Here's an extreme example of boats rafting together: http://i317.photobucket.com/albums/m...5jiOVhl_fs.jpg Some homeowners like to say "Go somewhere else, don't anchor in front of my home". Legally you can do so, but most of us agree that this wouldn't be very polite. In the area being discussed in this thread, the legal description of the NRZ is not clear and could be challenged in court if someone would like to do so as the legal definition of the area is as clear as the mud on the bottom of the lake. It's also a difficult cove in that it's very small and almost any boat in the area could drift within 150 ft of shore or of someone's home as the wind shifts the boat on their anchor rode. Hopefully I have all my facts straight. I know someone will correct me if I'm even the slightest bit wong! ;) |
Quote:
I ask again if you read BizEr's message regarding his chart? Here is is again... Quote:
|
But It's Someone's Back Yard...
Quote:
:rolleye1: The trend, however, is clear... Quote:
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...ps0mowz8s9.jpg |
Seasonally active: Summer to early fall
Crowded: On peak weekends Noisy: Maybe during some daylight, weekend hours when the GFBL boats are running, or some inconsiderate person is running their music too loud, or you consider the delight of kids playing in the water noisy, or during fireworks displays from about dark to about 1 AM. The rest of the time, the lake is very quiet and almost deserted. |
I had boaters anchor about 20-30 feet off my dock this weekend for maybe 3-5 hours. I waved and one gentleman swam over and asked if they were disturbing me. I told them no that's what the lakes for, to enjoy.
If you want to complain about every sight and sound during the weekends in a primarily tourist region then move to MA. Thought this state was live free or die? Now every old man who comes out disgruntled a boater must cater to do everything they say? There is a line between a boater being disrespectful and a landowner just being ridiculous all laws aside in my opinion. |
Quote:
If someone is anchored in front of your place not being obnoxious, give them a quick wave and a hello, then go about your normal activities. If they become obnoxious then say something. Starting out on the defensive usually doesn't get you anywhere. In the words of George Costsnza " You know we are living in a society! We're supposed to act in a civilized way" Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Just playing Devils advocate on this one:
Looking at his user name I'll assume he's on Winnisquam. There are parts of that lake where if you anchor you have no choice but to be within 20 or 30 feet of someone's dock or your blocking passage way for other boaters. North end of the lake and south end before the island for example. I have anchored at both places with no problems, but there's not too many million dollar plus homes on that lake. Some are at the north end, and I tend to go in that area, again no problems, but I hardly ever even turn on the radio. And most people up there usually just wave at you. |
Quote:
Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk |
Bigger houses and land tend to have larger dock space. Did not mean it as a reflection on money. The million plus houses on Winnisquam have bigger lots and larger dock/beach area. You can't be less than 30 feet from some of them with out blocking passage way.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:06 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.