whatever strokes your boat....
 

Simple.

Because folks still have a right to choose how they spend their discretionary income, and are free within reason to pursue pastimes that they enjoy. A very good friend of mine has just purchased a 38' Egg Harbor Cruiser, and is actually excited at the prospect of filling the two 150 gallon diesel tanks tonight in anticipation of us sailing her down from her current berth in Portland to our marina in Dover later this week.

It's a dream he has pursued and saved for, for many years.

Maybe someday you'll take a class that explains one of these basic traits of human behavior???? :rolleye2:

All these limits! Who does this lake belong to anyway? We keep saying "the state of NH". Who is that? It is us!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do we have no right to keep using the lake we own and pay for without all kind of restrictions that a vocal few want?

Only 9% of New Hampshire voters were opposed to a speed limit. The "vocal few" only brought the problem to the legislature, the people of New Hampshire supported it and passed it. Please remember that BOTH candidates for Governor, Democrat and Republican, supported it.

The arguments against the big cruisers are actually better than the arguments for a speed limit. The damage done by their large wakes is well documented and almost undeniable. The lake is a municipal water supply. Erosion is a serious problem.

I can't see that the tourism issue will help the cruisers. Not many people are trailering in their Carvers for a Winnipesaukee vacation.

Ya know, you guys are going to insult me no matter what I post in this forum. I was attempting to add to the humor in Coastal Laker's post. I thought that was fairly obvious.

Skip, I understand human behavior just fine and have taken classes on it - after all, I am a Poly-Sci major. Dreams are great, but that doesn't mean you can't be somewhat flexible with your dreams. When times change and situations change, you have to learn to adapt. We all have to make concessions in life. I've certainly had to give up my own share of dreams.

In the history of Lake Winnipesaukee, the only speeding charge that could ever be written.....is for a fatal collision of 6+ mph.

Most collision fatalities are well beyond 6 mph, but remain unproven, untested, undocumented and uncorroborated for exact speed by the Marine Patrol because there's no other speeding STATUTE to support a speeding CHARGE!!!

Who here has seen a written speeding charge of 6+ mph in a fatal Winni collision?

Skip, I understand human behavior just fine and have taken classes on it - after all, I am a Poly-Sci major. Dreams are great, but that doesn't mean you can't be somewhat flexible with your dreams. When times change and situations change, you have to learn to adapt. We all have to make concessions in life. I've certainly had to give up my own share of dreams.[/QUOTE]

So if you are comfortable in a large cruiser, and you can afford a large cruiser, and you and your family and friends enjoy your days on the lake or at the dock......Why not?
No need to "adapt" No need to "make concessions" You are comfortable right where you are!
Enjoy life and the benefits you have earned by working hard and being financially secure! (Watch out for the little people in the kayaks as you use the lake like it was meant to be used.)
We don't need to revert to the stone age to keep a small minority happy. Soon enough they will find out that the speed limit makes no safety difference on the lake and only increases wakes and shore line erosion. It will actually make he lake less safe for people in small boats (and kayaks) less than 23 feet.
It is a totally "feel good" liberal left wing type of law.

Are you dreaming!!

Where did you get this data?

More spin and embelishment. Looks to me like you folks are on to step two in your plan. Watch out cruiser owners!

R2B

The anti-speed limit crowd keeps stating that the speed limit is something that "a small minority" wanted, yet no one ever offers any proof for that statement. Whereas polls actually show that a large majority of NH residents were in favor of the speed limit bill. And most residents that I've talked with personally are in support of speed limit.

I supported the lake speed limit totally because of safety concerns - which I have personally experienced. But I have never been a supporter of forcing any type of boat off the lake. I've kayaked on Squam for years - it is the 2nd largest lake in NH and it has a 40 mph speed limit. The wakes on Squam are not any bigger than the wakes on Winni - in fact I've experienced larger wakes on Winni. And I do not feel unsafe in my 16 foot sea kayak on Squam.

It's the same poll we have been talking about in this forum for a couple of years. I'm surprised you have not heard about it.


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Nancy Christie,
NH Lakes Association
(603) 226-0299


NEW STATEWIDE POLL INDICATES STRONG SUPPORT FOR 45 MPH DAYTIME /25 MPH
NIGHTTIME SPEED LIMITS ON STATE’S PUBLIC WATERS

Concord, NH (February 16, 2006) – According to a recent poll of New Hampshire
registered voters, 63 percent favor a state law that would place a 45 mph
daytime and a 25 mph nighttime speed limit on all inland public waters – lakes,
ponds and rivers. Only 9% opposed the idea. The study was commissioned by
the New Hampshire Lakes Association, a statewide, non-profit organization whose
mission is to protect the Public Trust, and conducted by the American Research
Group of Manchester, NH...

That ARG poll was a sham
 

I thought this was the ARG poll that was full of biased wording and only polled people in Manchester that were basically asked if they thought "safe boating" was a good idea.

More than once, myself and several others have pointed out the huge flaws in this "purchased" poll.

I am very surprised that you bring it up, again. This poll was clearly a sham and this has been pointed out too many times. Pro-speed limit crowd designed it and paid for it. It was clearly a slanted poll and anyone with any sense knows it.

R2B

If you know about the poll, then why did you call my 9% reference dreaming, spin and embellishment? Seems like you were the one with the spin going.

So is there a poll that has different results?

The boating industry has deep pockets and could easily have sponsored their own poll to counter this one.

Isn't it possible that the boating industry did do their own poll, but decided to keep the results under wraps?

There's some really good deals on big boats right now. Even with the price of gas costing people an extra $50-$150 a weekend compared to two years ago, it's a vastly cheaper way to get a "weekend place" at the lake than buying a lake house. They don't use much gas at the dock or at anchor, and there's plenty of dock space available too. Honestly, I can't think of a better time to buy a big cruiser, if you've got the means. If I didn't mind being stuck on one lake, I'd consider getting a big cruiser. I can't say Manitou did not catch my eye...

Anyone that paid for lake real estate, not to mention the taxes, might understand the financial attraction. Heck, I thought of buying Ron's Glastron mini cruiser just for that purpose. I'd keep a boat over on Winni just for weekend wave making :laugh::laugh::laugh:

What does it matter what an opinion poll says.

If you were to ask people if lowering the speed limit on highways would save lives I am sure the answer would be “yes”. But the real answer is “no”.

The role of the government is to see past perceptions and see the truth for what it is. They failed us here.

Bear Islander you and the other speed limit supporters never looked at the true results of your actions.

As stated many times, the speed limit law will do nothing to improve boating safety and in fact there is a very good argument that the increased number of boats that will be boating on “Family Friendly” Lake Winnipesaukee will actually reduce boating safety.

The makeup of people moving to Lake Winnipesaukee is changing. Do you really believe that the people building a $3M home, paying $40k in real estate taxes care about the cost of gas or the size of their boat Given the wealth of these people we can expect them to have influence on our elected officials. So I don’t see any additional laws limiting boating. What I do see are more boats on the lake and as a result of these mansions being built I am sure we will see more and more larger boats on the Lake which is a trend started 30 years ago. (compare the average boat size in 1978 and the average boat size in 2008)

I enjoying kayaking on the Lake and I miss the good old days but I do realize that you cannot turn the clock back. And what has me most upset is that the pro-speed limit people can not see is that their actions will dramatically increase the trends of the past thirty years…. More and more boats and larger and larger boats.

Boating surely has changed. I've seen GFBL boaters looking at cruisers, pontoon boats have sold better than anything else. If I wanted to reside on a quiet lake, do the nature and small camp thing, fish, I'd not do it on a big lake. Smaller boats on big lakes have issues. As I told my dad over twenty years ago, there's a reason that Winni boaters were trending towards bigger boats. Self-defense and big wakes. Sure there's the more room bit, plus trying to take a twenty mile cruise on a busy lake in a 20' boat can be quite slow, and very bumpy. That's how the GF crowd got started on Winni in the first place.

There are plenty of lakes here in Vermont to do the small boat thing, many are very quiet, offer great fishing, perfect for kayaking, rowing, canoes, even 12' aluminum boats do quite well. If I had any of those boats, I'd rarely, if ever, venture out into Lake Champlain. On a very congested lake like Winni, I'd never do it. I don't think you can turn a larger lake into a smaller one, which is a vision some folks have in mind.

Actually there's data that supports both that it does and it doesn't. It's just not conclusive. One area where the data seems to be conclusive is that the difference in speeds between vehicles has a direct relationship between the number of accidents. That, to me, is one of the main arguments for enacting a lake speed limit.

The truth (as I see it) is that allowing boats to travel at unlimited speeds on NH lakes is very dangerous. The legislature did not fail NH residents in enacting this law.

And how do you know that? I've posted many times that I kayak a great deal on Squam. Squam has had a 40 mph speed limit for years, yet the wakes are not larger on Squam and the boats are not bigger on Squam.

With all else being equal, the fact is that slower is safer - so your statement is wrong. And I've never seen any evidence that a speed limit increases the number of boats on a lake.

No, but you can draw the line on how fast boats are allowed to travel. Again, there's no evidence that what you state will happen. And, even if it does happen - that is a separate issue, and as such, can be dealt with through specific regulations.

Winni and Squam
 

Apples and oranges.

I've posted many times that I kayak a great deal on Squam. Squam has had a 40 mph speed limit for years, yet the wakes are not larger on Squam and the boats are not bigger on Squam.

That's because they've made it so hard to get on Squam. One furiously fought public boat launch with lousy parking hardly compares to the veritable cornucopia of public launches on Winni. If you don't own there, they don't want you there. Where some of the new money is concerned, they don't want them there, either.

Speed limits don't keep boats off of Squam. The SLA keeps boats off of Squam.

When the speed limit was first proposed many people thought it had zero chance of ever being enacted. Many members here were vocal that it would never, never pass. I am hearing the exact same thing now about big cruisers.

There will be no dramatic increase in the number of big cruisers, because there is no place to dock them. There are slips available now because of the economy, but when they are gone, that is it.

Winnipesaukee marinas have far more slips than the law allows at this time. They can keep them because they are grandfathered. They can't rebuild the docks for larger boats or increase the number of slips.

You can't rent or lease a mooring, so the only way to add a cruiser slip is to buy or rent private property.

I travel to work by boat early morning (7:30 am or so) and park my boat in one of the marinas in Saunder's Cove. On several occasions the water has been flat calm, no other boats, not many distractions. Also on several occasions, I've not seen kayaks until I'm within about 100 yards or so. I train my eye now to look at the shoreline when entering Saunder's Bay to look for something moving. Again, this is a weekday, early morning, no other traffic. Are these kayakers nuts or what? They have dull, earth tone kayaks, they sit low in the water and provide nothing at all that gives them additional visibility to boaters. Oh, by the way, I travel at around 27 MPH, so I'm not going fast. In addition, I have 20/20 eyesight, so that's not a problem. The problem is that these kayakers seem to think that they are invincible and that they have inalienable rights to be on the lake, any place at any time. Now I have no problem with them out in Saunder's Bay early morning weekdays, but these kayakers that think they should be out in mid-day, heavy traffic on the weekends, need their heads examined. With heavy boat traffic and boat chop it's nearly impossible to see these kayakers. We should enact some kind of law that 1) mandates some device or color that enhances their visibility to other boaters, and 2) restrict the time and location where these kayaks can operate. In my opinion, the simple fact that any of these kayakers choose to operate in congested areas during heavy traffic, tells me they are only there to cause trouble. Time to call our state reps that are so concerned about everyone's safety and have them address this real safety issue. I'm sending a letter to the Governor about this today or tomorrow.

They do have an inalienable right to be on the lake, any place, any time.

If you think you will ever get a law passed that will limit kayaks to keep them out of the way of power boats, then you are dreaming. If boats and kayaks can't co-exist on Saunders Bay then perhaps a NWZ is needed.

A regulation requiring them to have flags or some other conspicuity device is a good idea. Personally I think wearing a navy blue life jacket in a navy blue kayak is insane.

"any time" requires navigation lights..
 

Their inalienable rights require proper navigation lights between 1/2 hour before sunset to 1/2 hour after sunrise, if I recall correctly. I have never seen a kayak so equipped, but I suppose they could be installed. At this time of year that's between ~8p and 6a..

The legislation being written will allow for a long period before full enactment and/or grandfather status for boats already on lake Winnipesaukee.

So there will be no big impact to marinas or businesses. In fact very little will change except the number of big cruisers will not increase. Over time they will go away through attrition.

I have no idea why you would think we need a sales and income tax before we can have a horsepower limit.:laugh: Apples and orange juice. Anyway 500 HP is more than enough on a this lake.

They do????? Where is this spelled out?

I'm gonna make history here, and side strongly with Bear Islander on this one. :eek:

Kayaks have the exact same rights as any other type of boat. NH law makes it very clear that the public is to have unrestricted access to the larger lakes, and does not differentiate between paddle craft, sail boats, or motor boats in that right to access.

Though considering how many snapped off Navaids I've seen lately :rolleye1:, if I owned a dull collored kayak and wanted to use it on Winni I'd for sure grab a can of dayglo orange spray paint and take care of business before going out!

Silver Duck

A kayak falls under the definition of both "boat" and "vessel" in NH law:

So kayaks have the exact same rights to be on any part of NH lakes as any boat - at any time of day (as long as they meet the non-daylight lighting regulations).

Boat color is up to the owner. When I bought my kayak I bought the brightest color available - and I bought paddles that had bright orange blades. Paddle blades are often the first thing you see, since they extend higher than anything else and because they are generally in motion.

Because I live in a busy section of Ossipee Lake and I let my 8 year old paddle alone I bought him a day glow orange kayak for the visibility and his life jacket is yellow. I have to say I see way to many dark blue or green kayaks in the evening and they are far too hard to see even at slow speeds

It is really quite simple. Not all of us are consumed by the price of fuel. Sure I would rather pay 1.50 a gallon. I am sure that those in Europe are wishing that they could have our fuel prices even what they are today. When fuel was 1.50 a gallon I could not afford to fill up my boat. Today with fuel at over 4.00 a gallon I have no problem paying to fill up my boat. The problem that I have is finding the time to not be working and use the thing. Last I checked fuel is STILL the cheapest part of owning a boat.

Did I miss something again? Is there more legislation coming?

So 500HP is more than enough but 502HP is not. So if I have two or three engines do I combined their HP to see if it is too much power. Also, where do I measure this HP, at the prop, the outdrive, at the crankshaft??? Drawing a line and saying anything under this line is okay but anything over this line is not okay is very disturbing.

As for where are the big boats going to dock…you have got to be kidding me. Do you travel the lake at all? Big boats go with big homes which by the way seem to have two to three boats each. There is plenty of undeveloped land still available on this lake and given what has been going in I do not see the State limiting how many docks they can build (Have you not seen the home that the French President stayed at last year… many docks and a huge three berth boathouse). If the market demands it then, marinas will add dock space to accommodate larger boats This is a free market society, which makes it difficult for a State to limit business ability to make money. So they keep the same number of docks but put bigger boats in them and move the smaller boats to an in/out service.

Kayakers and power boaters have co-existed for longer than all of us have been alive so why the kayakers want to make this an us versus them or a David vs. Golith just doesn’t make sense.

Give me a reason why you believe that now with the lake being safer, why the total number of boats on the lake will diminish?? If the total number of boats do not diminish then by enacting a speed limit you actually lost. If the total number of boats on the lake does diminish then you won… don’t see that happening.. family friendly means more boats.

Oh yea, know one knows how many boats are on the lake… there is no easy way to determine this as people register their boats throughout the State not just in Laconia. So this talk about grandfathering…. Just a bunch of

Horsepower limits are in place and working on lakes and ponds across New Hampshire and across the country.

Where is all this undeveloped shore front you are talking about? The are a few undeveloped lots here and there. But those long stretches of undeveloped shore you see from your boat are conservation land. They can't be developed.

The State ALREADY limits how many slips you can have on private land based on a frontage formula.

Marinas WILL NOT be adding any docks. The State allows a marina to have only one slip for every 25 feet of lake frontage. Virtually all marinas have more than that and depend on their grandfather status. Therefore a marina can not add a slip or change their dock space. Not even by one inch.

not so bigpatsfan... you have to look at the impact of different kinds of boats on the lake and those who use it. Clearly the 500 plus horsepower boat roaring loudly around the lake at 70 MPH driven by an owner who feels Winnipesaukee is his private speedway has a much greater impact than the Boston Whaler with a family boating to Wolfeboro to get an ice cream cone. I'd take 100 of the latter over 1 of the former. Now a few months ago there were vehement arguments by the no limits crowd that HB 847 would negatively impact or even destroy the lake's region economy. Now we're hearing the "you won but you lost argument" that there will be more boats on the lake. Make up your mind!

Really? You would rather see 100 "family" boats than 1 boat that you feel is too fast? WOW! You must not spend that much time on the lake then...because that is exactly how it is right now.

Love this logic.100 times more boats will have less impact?Wow,now there is clear thinking!

More docks at some "marinas"
 

What about Mt. View Yacht Club? That place has been digging back into the wetlands and adding docks as long as I can remember. When it was Gilford Marina, back in the 60's it was about 1/3 the size it is today. Since the time I rented a dock about 10 years ago, they have added another two or three rows of docks. Granted, they are not extending their waterfront dockage, but digging back and creating your own bay seems to be unrestricted, or at least it was a few years ago.

Plus, the largest concentration of the largest boats on the lake can be found here and at the neighboring marina.

So, more boats to come.

Have you heard of the term "Carbon Footprint?"

Well, this is similar - only it is what I call your "Lake Footprint."

This is based on your boat's size X your average speed on the water X your length of time on the water.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to grasp the idea that (over the same time period) a large, fast moving boat is using more of the lake surface area than a small, slow moving boat.

More legislation
 

VSteve, See the reply I posted earlier. They want Winnipesaukee to have the same restrictions as lake Massibesic.

I still disagree Chip and Siksukr. 100 of the latter boats can go by me and they're barely noticable, then comes the roaring GFBL and all conversation stops(literally, because you can no longer hear a conversation). And you still havn't answered the question, will there be more boats on this newer family friendly lake or is the NH lake's region economy going to go down the toilet because the GFBLs "feel unwelcome"?

So wait....
 

1 GFBL boat = 100 family boaters? So a 30 foot GFBL boat uses up much more lake than 100 20-25 foot family boats? How?

A family on a boston Whaler? Now that is asking for trouble. I can see that when a storm comes up on the Broads. No common sense.

The same way you were dreaming when you conjured up the phony need for a speed limit? Dreams do come true, you know. I have a dream...If safety was really the agenda, then it would seem to me that the state reps and senators would jump at the chance to legislate more laws to ensure the safety of kayakers, by way of restricting where they can travel on the lake and what addtional safety/visibility devices that they must have. I hear complaints about safety flags impeding the kayaker's ability to recover from an overturned kayak. It would seem to me that a simple release handle would free the flag from the kayak, thereby removing any problems. The flag would just float and the kayaker would just pick it up and re-attach it to the kayak. Why are kayaker's so opposed to increasing their visibility to powerboats? Why should kayaks take priority over powerboats? On what basis? Why aren't bicycles allowed on Route 93? If bikes and cars can't co-exist on Route 93, then perhaps a 10mph speed limit on Route 93 is in order. Bikes are restricted from certain roads and kayaks should be restricted from certain parts of the lake at certain times. Same analogy in my opinion, and the foundation on which a case should be made to the Legislature and Governor.