And why ?
 

But that (better than nothing) doesn't make it the thing to advocate. So let me ask, if you were King what would the law be ? and why ?

Why a HP limit since HP doesn't regulate speed as can be evidenced by PWCs.

My choices are HB847 or nothing, I choose HB847. It's like when you vote for president next November. We will only have two choices.

A horsepower limit does more to address pollution, water quality, and erosion.

I posted this last summer.

If I had the power to set a "limit" it would preclude boats over 300 hp that where manufactured after 2008. But nobody is asking me.

To prove a point(or at least try)how rediculous 25/45 is in my own opinion. Ever been out on a moonless night. I did one night from Weirs Beach to the Naswa. Not bad till I passed Naswa then it was like a black hole , 25 mph would be ludicrous. I turned around and headed back to the Naswa were I was staying. So people who want 45 limit on a clear Wednesday afternoon would be willing to allow 25 in pitch darkness:laugh::laugh:. Sounds to me like they have their head somewhere awfully dark or they're just out there where the bus doesn't stop anymore.
I'd be willing to give 10 mph at night for 60 mph in daylight. There you go , I give 15...you give 15...even trade;)
And this , Bear Islander , may have saved your friend in the Wellcraft that fateful night two and a half years ago , regardless of how much alcohol was ingested.
:yawn:Good night folks:yawn:

What a high speed boat looks like on the water has everything to do with the speed limit bill. That was the best video that I could find of a boat traveling at 70mph - if you know of a better on, please post it.

Visibility has never been much of a problem for me with slower boats, but it has been a major factor as boats travel at higher speeds. This is because high speed boats are closing the distance between other boats on the lake in less time - and it takes a faster boat longer to stop or the avoid another boat. Those are all facts, and are not hype or exaggeration. Boats have violated my 150 foot zone because they were traveling too fast and didn't see me in time. That's a real issue and one that I feel a speed limit will improve.

My statement that the anti-speedlimit group argues that they have a right to go really fast - even when their actions have a negative impact on many other boaters is totally accurate. I was at last year's hearing and their "right to go fast" was their main argument. They also repeated refused to believe that the safey concerns voiced by other boaters were legitimate.

Anyone with any common sense knows that it becomes more dangerous as speeds increase. You now have some boats that are traveling at speeds that are 15 times (or more) faster than other boats on the lake - I (and many others) see this as being very dangerous. You don't.

As I've stated many times, I just want boats to slow down - I'm not part of a conspiracy to ban any type of boat from any part of the lake.

Common Sense
 

Just some thoughts.
Most weekends you can't go over 45 without beating yourself and your boat to death.
If you look at the way hiway speed is enforced I would guess you can probably go 60 without a ticket.if the speed limit were 45.
If you go out early you can probably go as fast as you want no one is around.
I know everyone here is a careful boater who always uses common sense,but Go though Eagle anytime on a weekend.Or take ride up past Arey's on
a weekend morning or afternoon when the crowd is going out or coming in, and if you are honest you will admit that most people are too stupid or lazy to follow he rules.If two boats passing each other slow down the third will go right between them.The bigger the boat the less inclined people are to slow down.
None of these people are going any near 45 and are dangerous enough.Now people on this forum want to make sure you can go 60 down Meredith bay on SAT afternoon or up Between Bear and Meredith Neck.Sixty would be legal now as long as you are 150' from another boat.Is it safe?I know none of you guys would do this but some one will,they do now.You are all talking a lot about Kayaks,what about small fishing boats,kids in whalers there are lots of small boats on the lake.
I don't want to see a speed limit on the Lake but more and more people keep coming,just like you have to slow down in a town on the road you are going to have to slow down on the lake.If people only went fast out in the Broads with no one around this would not be an issue.Like some one once said."Common sense aren't too common"

Safety and enjoyment of the Lake is the Issue
 

While I have only owned a place on Bear Island for a year, I have been coming to the lake for almost 40 years. Not much has changed except there are a lot more people. Boat owners have been building more powerful and faster boats since the days of the steam ships, and that will continue. Fishermen and others will still be in smaller boats for enjoyment of the more secluded and shallow areas. Someone will want to see how fast they can go down the broads in a speed boat.
While I am not an advocate of government involvement in any part of my life, a seed limit on some parts of the lake may be a good idea, along with a ban on kayaks canoes and other small boats on other parts of the lake.
Small non power boats should be restricted to 150' from shore period. They have no ability to avoid a collision and are in danger any time the leave the shoreline. Face it, lake Winnipesaukee is a big lake and is not paddler friendly which is why it is not a favorite of paddlers. There is nothing fun about kayaking in the broads or in the middle of the area between Bear and Browns yet we see this happening.
I could go on about the night I came back at 10:30PM from Brown"s to find a canoe passing in front of my boat house with no lights to other stories. In summary my proposal.
1 Speed limits on entire lake except the broads from Becky's Garden to Rattlesnake.
2. Ban non motorized vessels from all areas other than within 150 feet of shore.

Most of the lake will be speed limited, paddlers will be safe. and go fasts can get their thrills! Every interest involved gives up something and gets something. A winner for all! O yea you all should be nicer to each other some of these post are getting a little personal!!!

First, welcome to Bear Island!

Second, you need to think about your idea some more. Do you realize your idea restricts sailboats to 150' from shore? And if a buy another canoe, how do I get it to the island?

If you are going to restrict small boats shouldn't you also restrict swimmers to 150' from shore, they have even less visibility and capability to get out of the way.

Plus it seems obvious to me that if powered boats and unpowered boats can't co-exist in an area, it is the powered boat that needs to go.

And have you considered the impact of your idea on children's camps?

I left out sail boats as I consider them powered and highly visible.. Children's camps should be restricted to 150 ft from shore or have a larger defined area around their water front. Had to rescue a kid from 3 mile clinging to a overturned sunfish over by Pine. As we came apon the kid there was another life jacket floating by the boat. Don't know where the adults were but this was very scary thinking someone was in that jacket. Add no wake zones to the area non power boats are allowed and we can get to bear from y-landing. Bear Islander the point really is that the speed limit is only addressing part of the problem. Kayaker"s are often in places that they should not be. We see it all the time on Barnegat bay here in New Jersey not to mention in inlets to the ocean where 50 foot Hattaras's come in at 20 knots just so they can handle the waves and tide action and there's that kayak right in the way!!.

Just as one would expect in a family discussion... ;)

After all, this is a family oriented Forum. :D

Well I guess everyone is entitled to an opinion. I will content myself with the belief that your idea has no chance becoming law.

Kayaks are very maneuverable and have all sorts of ability to avoid a collision; the only danger for me is the powerboats. If the operator of a powerboat is paying attention and is going slow enough to stay 150 feet from us, we are in no danger of a collision.

Just like others on this forum, you’re lumping all paddle boats and paddlers together. That’s like saying that all boats with a motor are equally sea worthy. A sea kayak is very different from a recreational kayak – they are long and narrow, with a very small cockpit, with thigh braces. You sit in a recreational kayak, but you wear a sea kayak. Sea kayaks are designed for large bodies of water, and most sea kayakers have no trouble handling fairly large waves. My sea kayak even has a rudder, which I steer with my feet. And I happen to enjoy paddling in large waves and swells. Believe it or not, my sea kayak can handle conditions that would be too rough for many small powerboats.

And my sea kayak is powered – by me. What happens when a power boat’s motor dies? I even carry an extra paddle. And I can do self rescues. I also carry a bilge pump, and use a spray skirt in rough weather. I don’t kayak at night, but if a paddler is out on the water at night their boat is required by law to have a 360 degree light.

Just because you can’t see the fun in paddling out on the main lake, doesn’t mean that we don’t enjoy it – I enjoy paddling out in the middle of a lake way more than I do huggin the shore . You guys keep representing Winnipesaukee as such a huge lake. It is large, but it has so many islands that there’s only about 2 square miles of the entire lake where you are ever more than 1 mile from shore. Under normal conditions, I can paddle 1 mile in 10 to 12 minutes. I don’t consider being 12 minutes off shore all that far. I can paddle 20 miles in an afternoon, so I need a large lake, or I’m just going around in circles. The only reason that Winni is not a favorite with paddlers is not because of its size, but because of its reputation for high speed boats.

You can't tell this to some kayakers because theirs is a Sea kayak and it's made for big water and can withstand 4' waves and they have every right to go where ever the want to , regardless:rolleye2:

I've seen the inlet deal you mentioned also. Kinda like riding a bike on an interstate , but then again there are restrictions for than:rolleye1:

Your analogy of a bike on the interstate is exactly my point. It would be stupid unsafe and illegal for me to power boat around Minge cove at 30 mph. It is also stupid, unsafe and should be illegal to be in a Kayak in big parts of the lake. Maybe Bear Islander showed what is really behind the speed limit since it is not going to make it safer for Kayaker's, and that is "the power boats should go." First a speed limit, then when it is still unsafe to be in the middle of the lake in a 12' x 18" boat with 6" of sideboard we ban the power boat all together. It seems there is more than enough shore line to explore and many smaller lakes in the area to paddle. My proposal involves a speed limit and a limit on areas of safe operation of smaller vessels. Down here the coast guard or marine police catch you in a channel or boat way in a kayak you get a ticket for unsafe operation of a vessel.

What about me and my fleet of dirt cheap, little, fixer-upper boats? For prices like $100, 300, 250, 550, 150, 100 & 700 , I have a collection of three kayaks, one rowboat, one canoe, and two sailboats, and none even need to be registered, and are covered by the standard deluxe homeowners insurance as long as there's no engine or motor.

In the past ten years, there's been a big increase in the number of kayaks on Lake Winnipesaukee. Used to be I'd see an occaisional canoe with two paddlers. Now, it is very common to see kayakers crossing from Timber Island and across the three miles of open water to Horse Island enroute to either the Cattle Landing public dock and parking lot, or enroute to Lovejoy Sand's public parking lot & dock or on up to Center Harbor, somewhere. I'm seeing trains of kayaks out in the middle of the area between buoy 3 and Governor's Island pretty often, where in the past, this was a very rare occurance.

Probably, the kayak's popularity is due to its' low cost, inherent safety & stability as compared to a canoe, ease of use, light weight ease to cartop, no need for a trailer, no need for a registration, aerobic paddling exercise, and all-around fun to use. Also, no expensive gasoline needed.

Kayaks are truly a boat for everyone and can be purchased at some pretty low prices, at garage sales & stuff. Last October, I got myself a ten year old, 16' Aqua Terra made out of polypropelene for the low low, end-of-season, garage sale price of just $250, and am looking forward to paddling it over to the Naswa for an adult beverage. Does the Naswa NazBar still have a one dollar/drink, happy hour.....like in the the olde daze?

Having seen plenty of overweight "go-fast, bolster boys" climb out of their well-padded and very expensive go-fasts over at the Meredith Town Docks, it's obvious that lots of you guys could benefit from the physical exercise of paddling a kayak. Maybe you want to give a kayak a try. :D:coolsm::laugh:


Lose the fat, paddle a kayak, get a wicked sunburn, and pack along some granola, too!:banana::liplick::liplick:

All this talk about the Kayaks makes me wounder ?? I'm ask in a serious manner here

Why do kayaks need or want to be out beyond the 150 feet we are talking about...I don't kayak but when I think about it I think about going up small rivers and into back coves where there are less people and quiet... or hanging close to shore ( again Not alot of boats there) watching people waveing to the guy cooking something on the grill or saying hi to the family laying on the dock catching a few rays or looking into there yards to see things I wouldn't see in my bayline cruzing around..... A kayak is a stealth mode of transportation less intrucive than any other boats.....

That being said I don't think anyone wants to see a 24 foot plus boat of any type trolling less than 150 feet from shore..but yet it's funny how nobody seems to bother or mind the guy in his GFBL bass boat when he's trolling around on his electric trolling motor stealing fish from under the dock or from around the boat house......

I have seen the light we all need electric boats!!!!

It makes me laugh out-loud when it's suggested that I support speed limits because I hate speed or powerboats. I hate powerboats so much I moved to an island. I have owned several. I ride PWC's in a way that makes my neighbors question my sanity. I rent them now instead of owning because I keep breaking them.

I hate speed so much that last Tuesday I rode a centrifuge up to 6 gravities, an incredible ride! I did that as part of my training to ride a rocket at 3,000 miles per hour. Yeah... I hate speed!

I own and use a kayak but never father than 100 ft from shore. It's just to dangerous with power boats around at greater than headway speed. But I think you have hit on why a speed limit has come up as Kayaks are everywhere now. Again I pose the question. Is a speed limit the prelude to banning power boats on the lake? There has to be more to this for people to support a law that will not, no as the marine police have already demonstrated CAN NOT BE ENFORCED.

You are correct when you say I am lumping all kayaks together when they are out in open water. I do not know your equipment or ability but i do know that you are very hard to see in the open water even if my boat is going 25. I am concerned for you and other paddlers putting yourself in a bad situation with or without a speed limit. With the number of kayaks now on the lake, many being piloted by children, I believe some restrictions are necessary. A speed limit will not make you safe. It will make me in my power boat safer as overtaking speeds of visible boats will be reduced. The reduction in speed ratio between a power boat going 65 or 45 and a kayak going 4mph will have little or no impact as you are to small on open water to see from any great distance. Remember that when you post a speed limit, you are lumping all boaters together with Capt. Bonehead.

2 miles x 1 mile = 2 sq miles

(2 miles + 1 + 1) x (1 mile + 1 + 1) = 12 sq miles

What happened to the other 60 sq miles of the Lake?

Not good enough for you?

Great! Then there is no need for a speed limit on the 60 sq miles of the Lake that you prefer not to use.

Here’s what I posted just yesterday:
In good weather conditions I can spot most other kayaks as far as a mile away. The most visible part of a kayak are the blades of the paddles – because they are moving up and down. The blades of my paddle are bright orange. Since my friend has a dark paddle, she has attached white reflective tape to hers, which makes them very visible. It has been my experience that anyone who is paying attention and is traveling at a reasonable speed seems to be able to spot us pretty easily and does not seem to have any trouble keeping out of our 150 foot zone. Unless your eyesight is really poor, you would not have any trouble spotting us at 25mph. (When visibility is low, due to the weather, we try to stay near the shore.)

Speed has a major impact – here’s why: A boat going 45mph covers 66 feet every second. At 70mph it covers 102.7 feet per second. If a boat is 300 feet away from me and heading directly at me, it takes the 45mph boat 4.6 seconds to reach me. At 70 mph, the boat will reach me in just 2.8 seconds. At a speed of 45 mph, the operator will have nearly twice the amount of time to see and avoid me - and I have nearly twice as much time to try to paddle out of the way.

We need a speed limit for several reasons. Boats on the lake have been steadily increasing is size and speed - and even PWC are getting faster every year. In my opinion, a 45/25 speed limit is too fast – I would rather see a 40/15 limit, but 45/25 will be safer than what we have now, and seems like a fair compromise.

4.6 - 2.8 = 1.8 seconds, as in one Mississippi, two Mississippi, splat!!!

So, besides soil yourself, what exactly do you plan to do in 1.8 seconds to save your life, that is?

Problem-Boaters with Problem Boats IV
 

Sometimes, "pretty easily" isn't attention-enough:

http://www.jacksonkayak.com/images08...-kidseries.jpg

Hey...something I can agree with! :laugh: :eek: ;)

However, one violator that I reported to the MPs was going somewhere between double and triple that number. The [strike] captain [/strike] driver turned out to be a VERY wealthy Tuftonboro neighbor.

Another [strike] captain[/strike] driver makes gas trips two/three times a day and goes past me at about 60-MPH.

He's really easy to spot because he always trails his stern docking line—and leaves his boarding ladder down! :laugh: :look: :rolleye2: :confused:

...is irrelevent: everybody on Interstates is going in the same direction.

With the ocean only an hour away? :confused:

You're not being treated "like family"? :confused: ;) :emb:

As one who has had to paddle from a speedboat myself, that seems like enough time to leave about half a kayak behind, say, in Moultonboro's moonlit waters.

First, consider the Lake's static and dynamic environment:

Static:
Red-pencil the Graveyard, the Witches, Middle Ground Shoals, all other shoal waters: add No-Wake-Zones, a 150' border around all mainland shorelines, a 150' border around all 253 islands, and the lake shrinks—a lot.

Dynamic:
Subtract each speeder's Acres/Second coefficient and "Safe Passage" margins, and there's not much left of the lake to enable reckless speeds.

Include me: my avocation for 24 years is in-car racecar driving instructor.

"Bolster Boys"? Sounds better than "Cowboys". :laugh:

For real physical exercise, try breaking the night speed limit with one of these:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...ayak/flyak.jpg

Even recreational kayaks can handle conditions too rough for speedboats:
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...ds-KayakII.jpg

GWC making fun of this is not helping reach a solution. You would actually have the whole 4.6 seconds to respond. The point is though that the boater does not see the kayaker. Since neither have esp any correction the Kayaker makes may be matched by the boater or the boater may stay on course and a near miss takes place. Accidents are almost a comic (if they don't result in trajedy) collection of events that occur. This is true of car accidents, boats or industrial accidents. I spent 18 years in a corporate safety department and believe me in most accident investigations you would say that those involved were the most unluckey people. However, as in this case of small vessel vs large vessel, slow speed vs. high speed, certain things are in place to make the accident likely to happen once all the other bad karma comes together. Reducing speed does help reduce the likelyhood of an accident but does not prevent it. Reducing speed will now give the kayaker in this example 2.6 seconds to dip their paddle in the water. The other 2 seconds will go to their brain processing the situation and reacting. The idea of restricting small boats along with a speed limit is getting some traction with lawmakers. At least I have only received positive responses to the email I sent to them all. My hope is to see an amendment or more study into the total problem so all are satisfied and safe.

If you rely on your blades for us to see you please be sure to go in circles so we can see you from every direction. Also, please never stop paddling as we won't see your blades at rest on the water surface.

Bright paddles do make you more visible but probably should be only part of your visibility strategy. We want to see you. It makes our experience much more enjoyable and safe as well.

Wait a minute, could it be that Less' screen name is a stratagem????? After all, one fat guy would not point out another's fatness.

Maybe his true screen name would be svelt assiduous rich :D

(yes I used a dictionary)

Time for some real figures:

The rule is called the 150’ rule!

70 mph = (70 x 5280’) = 369600’ in 1 hour = 102.67’ per second

45 mph = (45 x 5280’) = 237600’ in 1 hour = 66’ per second

150’ / 102.67’ per second = 1.46 seconds (70 mph)

150’ / 66’ per second = 2.27 seconds (45 mph)

2.27 – 1.46 = .81 seconds (safety factor difference between 70 mph and 45 mph vessel at 150’)

If 2 seconds are necessary mental time for avoidance decision, kayaker has .27 of a second (2.27 - 2) to paddle if approaching vessel is traveling at 45 mph.

This is the safety factor provided by the proposed speed limit.

5280’ (1 mile) in 10 to 12 minutes = 528’ in 60 seconds (1 minute) = 8.8’ per second

8.8’ x .27 seconds = 2.38’ (represents distance in straight line from time mind determines it is necessary for evasive action on current heading and does not allow any time to change course)

GWC, it is bad enough that you feel that you have to attack every thing that I post, but you totally lost me on this one! What are you talking about? What is the 12 square miles supposed to represent?

First of all, I do know what 2 square miles is. My point (since you obviously didn’t get it) was that, even though Winnipesaukee is a large lake, there’s only a very small part of it where you can ever be more than a mile from shore.

I never said (or even implied) that the only part suitable for sea kayaks was the portion that was over a mile from shore – my point was exactly the opposite – that the lake is very suitable for kayaks, since 98% of it is within a mile of shore (where I’m never more than 12 minutes from shore). The only portion that I would personally consider to be “off-shore” is the part that is more than a mile from shore (which is less than 2 square miles). Here’s a link to an image, where I’ve marked this “off-shore” portion of the lake: http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/9...lelimitkw1.jpg

Now please get off my case!

You guys really need to go kayaking with me, because then perhaps you would be able to understand what I’m posting. When I’m out kayaking, I’m not just sitting there! I’m paddling 90% of the time, which means that I’m moving at about 5mph (which is my normal cruising speed). I’m also paying close attention to any powerboat that is headed in my direction. So, in my example, it would not take me 2.6 seconds to dip my paddle into the water, nor would it take me another 2 seconds to react. I would have reacted before the powerboat was 300 feet away.

I only used 300 feet, as that’s roughly when I would feel that a boat that is still heading directly at me doesn’t see me. (Although some idiots think that heading directly at a kayak at is funny.) Since my maximum speed is 6mph, that addition 1.8 seconds means that I’ll be able to paddle an additional 16 feet – which could easily be enough to avoid being run over. With a 70mph powerboat, I really don’t have a chance. With a 45mph powerboat, I have a chance of getting out of the way. This is what makes speed a major issue for me.

If you actually try to restrict small boats from using a large portion of the lake, you’ll just end up with a much bigger fight than the one you have now. You might be surprised at how many of us there are. I really don’t think that you want all of us banding together against the larger boat owners.

Please read my entire post. I’m very visible. If I’m not seen, it is because you’re not paying attention. Add high speed to inattention and we have a very dangerous situation.

I am still trying to figure out why people think kayaks are difficult to see in daylight. I think they are incredibly easy to spot. If one can spot spars (a necessary skill on this lake), a kayak is a piece of cake to spot. Maybe that's why NONE have ever been hit in daylight in NH. If one kayaker can spot another a mile away from that low on the water, imagine how easy it is for someone in a boat with at least 4 times the freeboard.

I still can't figure out why kayaks should be outlawed because they might get run over by boats.

If you can't see a kayak in the daytime, don't take the helm.

If you can't spot a kayak, how can you spot a swimmer? Or is swimming in the lake to be outlawed now.

Dave, it's COMMON SENSE like that that blows the SL proponents arguments right out of the water, not to mention the actual statistics that exist proving that there is not a problem.

Unfortunately COMMON SENSE is in short supply, thanks for sharing some with us.

Problem-Boaters with Problem Boats VI
 

I got the same sense with the following Quality-of-Life issues when these were before the Legislature recently:
1) The right to smoke cigars in restaurants
2) The right to skim a snowmobile
3) The right to refuse seat belts
4) The right to refuse PFDs for their children

Not killed, but a male kayaker was run over, suffered "broken bones" and was evacuated by air via DART4 to Dartmouth-Mary Hitchcock Hospital from Lake Winnipesaukee. I posted it at the old forum.

Then why is New Jersey experience going unchallenged in this thread? :confused:

To whit:

1) "...Down here the coast guard or marine police catch you in a channel or boatway in a kayak you get a ticket for unsafe operation of a vessel..."

2) "...Kayaker"s are often in places that they should not be. We see it all the time on Barnegat bay here in New Jersey..."

3) I've seen the inlet deal you mentioned also. Kinda like riding a bike on an interstate..."

Smith Mountain Lake was a double for Lake Winnipesaukee for a movie—yet their double-fatality is challenged as "not on Winnipesaukee". :rolleye2:

(Yet Maine's Long Lake double-fatality was, what, forty miles away?) :confused:

You'd think...

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...dJoan039-1.jpg

You'd think... :rolleye1:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...tta800x375.jpg

(Had Evenstar been in the photo, she'd have been in that lone sailboat—center foreground).

Of course not.But the point is,do you think it's a good idea for someone to be swimming in the middle of the lake with no boats next to him?I grew up on a very small lake in southern NH (Baboosic) and would not think to be out there alone.I would not go in the middle in a little rowboat and that's on a lake where no boat went more than 50 mph.I did not expect larger faster boats to see every small subject in the lake.We always stayed near shore when in small self-propelled craft.It's just comman sense and it was drilled into my head by my father.One of the first things I was taught when I learned to waterski was that if I fell and driver did not immediately turn back to protect where the fallen skier was,take off my ski and wave out of the water so other craft could see you.It's comman sense and being in small craft or swimming in a large lake should take place close to shore.My boat is only 11 ft long so I know about being the little guy out there.I spend a minimum 0f 25 days on Winni in the summer and almost all on weekends so I know about the worst conditions.The bigger boats that go 70 mph are almost never a problem.It's the Capt Boneheads in their 17 ft bowrider that is on a daytrip.Those are the ones I've had the problems with and I'm not alone.Their boats don't even go 45 mph.Speed is not the problem.Perception and scare tactics are now the problem.

There are many things that are a bad idea, but not illegal.

There are many reasons why a swimmer can be in the water far from shore. They may have fallen of the Mount Washington, or other boat. They may have had their boat sink from under them. It could be a SCUBA diver on the surface. It could even be an irresponsible idiot availing himself of his legal right to swim across Winni un-escorted.

And if you run over any of them you better call an attorney real quick.

I agree 100%. The visibilty of kayaks is a red herring. If you can't see a kayak in open water and in daylight, you shouldn't be operating a boat. Now at dusk or in narrow areas, I can see being startled by an unexpected paddler.

It's Science...
 

They are easy to spot, but it depends on your speed.

The human female retina is amply and evenly filled for color detection. Women have the ability to detect colors better. This is likely an evolutionary adaptation from earliest human's seeking berries and other food gathering needs.

Men have fewer of those color-detecting "cones" in their vision and those are all located in the center of their retinas.

Overall, the male retina is biased towards black-and-white detectors—called "rods"—which are particularly dense in mens' vision outside of center. "Rods" are smaller, and can be packed more tightly and in larger numbers onto the retina.

This is of special impact to those who crave extreme speeds for the following reasons:

1) Peripheral vision is enhanced for movement with only black-and-white vision. (An evolutionary benefit for the stalking hunter-male).
2) Once a kayak gets out of dead-center of the male's vision at high speed, it doesn't matter what color the kayak is.
3) At high speeds, peripheral vision becomes blurry or, at advanced high speeds, lost altogether. The retina-center that detects color becomes much smaller for the operator. The effect is called tunnel-vision, or funnel-vision. The effect is like peering through a long pipe with a very shiny interior. At very high illegal speeds on the highway, a driver will overlook the patrolman sitting in the median!

In the extreme, such as the centrifuge mentioned previously, one's vision can go black even while the participant is fully conscious. Perhaps Bear Islander has been made aware of this.

Women would see kayaks best; unfortunately, most boaters with the excessive speed imbalance are compensating men.

Kayaks can disappear with excessive speed: it's science, not common sense.

I suppose those poor people that ran over the aunt and the two children in Mass should have seen them in the speed limited highway and should now call their attorney?Unfortuanately all tragedies in life cannot be avoided and legislated for the sake of one incident.Let me give you an example that might hit home for you BI.You like risking your life going to extreme climates and I think that's awsome.If you died or someone died trying to save you from your "adventure" should we have laws that outlaw your kind of behavior?Of course not.If there were numerous occurances of these incidents then it might have some merit.We must always weigh overreacting to such things.I think over reacting is exactly whats going on with a speed limit.

Pedestrians are not allowed on highways. And double murder with suicide is against the law everywhere. Swimming across the lake is legal.

Common sense and good judgment argue against swimming far from shore. The LAW requires the boater to keep a proper lookout.

But there are numerous occurances - even if many here are not willing to admit it. Collisions might be rare, but close calls seem to happen quite a bit on Winni. No agency keeps track of close calls, so there’s no real data on this. I’ve had close calls with high speed boats on NH lakes (including Winni), so I know for a fact that they do happen. And many other boaters had stated that they have had close calls. But whenever we point this out, we are told that we are exagerating (or are accused of lying).

Others feel like we are putting ourselves at risk if we venture more than 150 feet from shore. They believe that kayaks have no business going out on the main lake. For instance:
Why does any boat NEED to be out beyond 150 feet? The obvious answer is because we enjoy being out on the main lake as much as any other boater. I own a boat that I can carry by myself, will float in a 6 inches of water, and is designed for large waves. I'm very experience and physically in shape, and have the proper equipment . . . so why would I want to limit my paddling to just the first 150 feet of a lake?

You may view a lake speed limit law as the result of over reacting - I view it as self-preservation.

Bear Islander...

I think Siksukr used a bad analogy... however the point remains that the LAW requires the operator of ANY vehicle, car, truck, boat, pwc, bicycle, kayak, etc to keep a proper lookout for potential hazard.


Perhaps a better analogy would be your impending (hopefully) space flight. Using your own logic, I could argue that civilian "tourist" spaceflight should be banned. Flying to the edge of space as a passenger on a rocket doesn't make you an astronaut any more than flying at Mach 2 on the Concorde makes you a fighter pilot. Why should a bunch of wealthy thrill seekers (it cost $200,000 per ride for approx 4 minutes of weightlessness) be allowed to outrageously pollute the atmosphere and quite possibly scatter toxic debris over hundreds of square miles just to satisfy thier inner adrenaline junkie? What/whom gives them the right? (Oh wait... its not a right, but a personal freedom!) Spaceflight is obviously fraught with peril to you, others flying with you and to people on the ground. There have been many people killed. One just has to look at the fateful mission of STS-107 Columbia (foam failure on launch), or the explosion they had over at Scaled Composites (Burt Rutan's Co.) that killed 3 people while doing testing of the Virgin Galactic rocket's nitrous/solid fuel propulsion system. This project hasn't flown yet and it is already killing people!

Woodsy

PS: I am just pointing out the flawed logic that Bear Islander is using to justify HB-847 and applying that same logic to ban something that he wants to do. I think civilian spaceflight is a great idea (environmental concerns aside)and I am all for it.

There is ABSOLUTELY NO DATA SUPPORTING THE THEORY THAT SPACEFLIGHT IS DANGEROUS!

Full disclosure requires me to explain that I am only considering accidents that are rocket-to-rocket, occur in the stratosphere, under moonlight, carry six passengers and involve air launched, liquid fueled rockets.

I am distressed to learn that my flight does not meet the NHRBA definition of the word astronaut. I will console myself with the knowledge it does meet NASA's.