Winnipesaukee Forum

Winnipesaukee Forum (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/index.php)
-   Speed Limits (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=19)
-   -   Life after speed limits (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5835)

VtSteve 05-09-2008 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar (Post 70021)
Haselnut, the only question that you answered from my previous post was: "Haselnut, are you just on this forum to insult others?"

Apparently the answer is "yes." (based on your reply, since it served no other purpose here).

#1) You insulted me by treating me like an idiot, just because I disagree with you - I was merely defending myself - but I was recruited by my university, and my tuition is mostly paid for by academic scholarships.

#2) My "unsmart" physical activities do keep me fit, and I'm a collegiate athlete. Both are true statements. How many on this forum are currently in good enough shape to compete on a collegiate team? My statement that "I’m probably in better shape that most of you" is likely an accurate accessment.

#3) I posted "SEA KAYAK" not kayak or canoe - "Have you even been in a sea kayak?"

#4) An enforced speed limit will make any lake safer. It's not magic - it's a fact that, all else being equal, going slower is safer.

#5) I don't hate powerboats - I just hate the attitudes of some powerboat owners.

#6) I'm a She

#7) I own my own home in Littleton. Just because I'm a full-time university student doesn't mean that I'm a kid.

That's it! I'm done defending myself. Go harrass someone else.

You're certainly not an idiot, and I'd hate to even begin to compare fitness levels, I bet you're a very fit babe :) Nothing bad intended.

We definitely agree on the Attitudes of "some" boaters. When you combine the 'tudes with stupid you get an even worse outcome. Most of the idiots, no, make that ALL of the idiots, I encountered last year were doing 15mph to maybe 35 mph. Unfortunately, my VHF radio seems to attest to the lack of funds for our many law enforcement agencies here. Probably more devoted to smugglers and border jumpers than safe boating anymore.

I think one thing that would benefit ALL boaters, is to try to get more funding for the MP. It would be hard work, but five years has already been wasted on the current actions. I think everyone would be delighted to see how much support there is for that, and if successful, how much better the outcome would be.

SIKSUKR 05-09-2008 11:18 AM

Is it me or does anyone else see the wa wa wa,Im better than you,I know more than you,I'm an expert at everything posts by some of these members.Give it a rest and focus on the topic.Your style is getting very old and it's cost you your credibility.

EricP 05-09-2008 11:29 AM

I'd like to propose a bill
 
I'd like a law that states if you're going to kayak across the broads, or other large congested areas of the lake, you must have a flag that sticks up 3' from either the bow or stern of your kayak so you can be seen from further than 150' away by other recrerational users of Lake Winnipesaukee.

chipj29 05-09-2008 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar (Post 70013)

What compromises have power boat operators made? Name just one. You guys are just used to getting your own way, and don’t care if your actions are negatively affecting others. It’s the same old “I have more horsepower/money, so get out of my way” attitude again. You even want to ban us from using the main lake, or ban us from the entire lake, just so you can still have your own way.

Well, that’s not going to happen. We’ve already made enough compromises with this bill – it has been watered down with amendments for the benefit of powerboaters – it now will only applies to Winni (instead of to all NH lakes); and it now has a 2-year sunset clause. But that’s not good enough for you. I’m done compromising.

Good luck with the Class Action lawsuit. That would be like trying to sue the state for having highway speed limits.

I am only going to comment on the part in bold. There have been many, many, many compromises made by power boaters. How many bodies of water in the state have current speed limits, or horsepower limits? Squam Lake comes to mind. There are plenty more examples. Ask someone who owns a PWC about compromises and restrictions.

So, the kayakers can go on every single body of water in the state of NH. However the same cannot be said for the power boaters. Who is making the compromises?

VtSteve 05-09-2008 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29 (Post 70036)
I am only going to comment on the part in bold. There have been many, many, many compromises made by power boaters. How many bodies of water in the state have current speed limits, or horsepower limits? Squam Lake comes to mind. There are plenty more examples. Ask someone who owns a PWC about compromises and restrictions.

So, the kayakers can go on every single body of water in the state of NH. However the same cannot be said for the power boaters. Who is making the compromises?

They can't even enforce a NWZ now, I think more laws would be ridiculous.

Don't forget about the big wake party if the speed limit does pass. I figure with all of the boats going 1omph to just under plane for an entire weekend, the erosion on the islands will be so great, it may just open up some more water :laugh:

Mashugana 05-09-2008 12:13 PM

A flag for kayaks is a great idea
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EricP (Post 70035)
I'd like a law that states if you're going to kayak across the broads, or other large congested areas of the lake, you must have a flag that sticks up 3' from either the bow or stern of your kayak so you can be seen from further than 150' away by other recrerational users of Lake Winnipesaukee.

What a great idea EdicP. A flag with it's base at least 3 feet above the kayak would be excellent. Evenstar would be seen from even further away with a flag like that. That certainly would help her feel safer. An excellent solution.

I wonder how they will toss out your idea. They will say that it won't work. Then they may call it or you idiotic and make HB847 appear to be the only solution.

I say good for you. EricP should get an award for such a great idea. A flag for kayaks so they can be seen from a longer distance.

By the way, does Evenstar represent the average kayaker on the big lake?

AC2717 05-09-2008 12:32 PM

Seriously
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mashugana (Post 70039)
What a great idea EdicP. A flag with it's base at least 3 feet above the kayak would be excellent. Evenstar would be seen from even further away with a flag like that. That certainly would help her feel safer. An excellent solution.

I wonder how they will toss out your idea. They will say that it won't work. Then they may call it or you idiotic and make HB847 appear to be the only solution.

I say good for you. EricP should get an award for such a great idea. A flag for kayaks so they can be seen from a longer distance.

By the way, does Evenstar represent the average kayaker on the big lake?

This should be proposed, it is a great idea and safe for eveyone, not trying to be a jerk here. They want to be seen and be safe and we want to know where they are and it will not cause any problems to the kayak, I might just do that to mine

codeman671 05-09-2008 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mashugana (Post 70039)
What a great idea EdicP. A flag with it's base at least 3 feet above the kayak would be excellent. Evenstar would be seen from even further away with a flag like that. That certainly would help her feel safer. An excellent solution.

I wonder how they will toss out your idea. They will say that it won't work. Then they may call it or you idiotic and make HB847 appear to be the only solution.

I say good for you. EricP should get an award for such a great idea. A flag for kayaks so they can be seen from a longer distance.

By the way, does Evenstar represent the average kayaker on the big lake?

It has been brought up a few times before and Evenstar was not a fan...

hazelnut 05-09-2008 01:08 PM

Evanstar read the title of YOUR post #189 posted just yesterday at 9:18am. It speaks volumes about your character. I have real problems with people like you and I have mentioned it before. You consider it perfectly fine to insult every opponent of your beliefs but as soon as somebody calls you out you whine like a crybaby. You are a girl great, represent yourself and be strong. Don't insult others unless you can take it right back.

Sea Kayak yes I've seen them and last time I checked the PROFILE of a sea kayak is no greater than that of a regular kayak. You are a sitting duck in the broads regardless of a speed limit. It is a fact that most boats aren't traveling over 45 even though you assume they are. Those boats will continue to violate your 150 foot zone unless there is better enforcement and education enacted. Don't take my word for it, just let me know in a couple of years if you "feel" safer. I highly doubt you will.

EricP 05-09-2008 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by codeman671 (Post 70044)
It has been brought up a few times before and Evenstar was not a fan...

Yes, But I am.

codeman671 05-09-2008 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricP (Post 70051)
Yes, But I am.

I agree with it as well, no arguments here.

VtSteve 05-09-2008 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricP (Post 70051)
Yes, But I am.


I'd have to say that I am as well. In this day and age of high premiums and boat congestion, we can't afford to have anything in the water that isn't easy to see.


I feel that lakes need more regulations for sure.

VtSteve 05-09-2008 01:56 PM

One thing has me worried. Would the speed limits have any impact on the NASWA Bikini Contest? I haven't even gotten over there yet. :rolleye1:

codeman671 05-09-2008 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve (Post 70056)
One thing has me worried. Would the speed limits have any impact on the NASWA Bikini Contest? I haven't even gotten over there yet. :rolleye1:

The one bonus I see is that at slower speeds it will be easier to be on bikini watch with passing boats :D

brk-lnt 05-09-2008 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by codeman671 (Post 70053)
I agree with it as well, no arguments here.

As do I. In fact, I haven't seen any opposition since it was recently proposed. It appears to have 100% support.

EricP 05-09-2008 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by codeman671 (Post 70068)
The one bonus I see is that at slower speeds it will be easier to be on bikini watch with passing boats :D

Being that it's held at the Naswa smack dab in the middle of a NWZ the only ramifications of HB847 passing is that the Naswa will have fewer customers and possibly even participants in the contest because it will take longer for them to get there to be on time. I think the Naswa needs to speak up against HB847 or risk less people frequenting their place. As a red blooded male it really concerns me that we may possibly have less bikinis present during the contest! :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Oh my goodness, now I sound like FLL :laugh: !!

brk-lnt 05-09-2008 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricP (Post 70073)

Oh my goodness, now I sound like FLL :laugh: !!

No, your post is still readable without needing a decoder ring and a spellchecker.

Keep trying though.

Wolfeboro_Baja 05-09-2008 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brk-lnt (Post 70075)
No, your post is still readable without needing a decoder ring and a spellchecker.

Keep trying though.

Too funny!! :laugh:

Wolfeboro_Baja 05-09-2008 04:41 PM

New revenue source?
 
If the state's looking for more revenue, perhaps it's time they started registering kayaks, canoes or any other non-motorized boat. A small fee, like the one charged to hikers heading out for a hike in the White Mtns. (it's essentially a parking fee but whatever......!) should generate some revenue for the state. Perhaps they can even direct the fees collected to the Marine Patrol since they are so under-funded.

I'm just thinking that if they want to use the lake like the power boaters do, perhaps they should share in the cost of funding the MP. It could even go hand-in-hand with EricP's flag idea; pay an annual fee, collect the sticker and affix it to the flag so not only would they be easier to see on the water, but the MP could easily determine if they have registered their kayak, canoe or what-have-you.

No flaming required, it's just an idea...............

Evenstar 05-09-2008 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricP (Post 70035)
I'd like a law that states if you're going to kayak across the broads, or other large congested areas of the lake, you must have a flag that sticks up 3' from either the bow or stern of your kayak so you can be seen from further than 150' away by other recrerational users of Lake Winnipesaukee.

EricP, why do you keep bringing this up? You just posted this same thing two weeks ago in the "HB 847 Meeting ..." thread, where I thought that I had explained why this is not a good idea - but you neglected to even respond to my reply. Here's exactly what I posted earlier:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar (Post 68403)
How many times do I have to explain this? Why don’t you people stick to what you know?

A sea kayak is long and narrow. My kayak is only 22 inches wide! I control it with thigh braces . . . and by leaning (which is called “putting it on edge”). Paddling a sea kayak is a constant balancing act.
A flag that would be large enough and tall enough to actually make a difference in my visibility would make my kayak very unstable – and it would make my kayak practically impossible to steer in even a moderate breeze, since it would make my kayak like a weather-vane.

My kayak is very visible – its upper hull is bright red and its lower hull is white. My friend’s kayak it bright yellow. My paddle blades are bright orange and my PFD is red.

We are extremely visible!

Yet some high speed boats have still violated our 150 foot zone – in the middle of a sunny afternoon – because they were going too fast and they didn’t see us in time. That is the problem.

In decent visibility I can spot most other kayaks up to a mile away – but I’m only going about 5 mph.This is not about me being unsafe or doing unsafe things - this is about high speed boat operators who will not slow down to a safe speed without the state enacting a speed limit.

I'll also add that a flag would make rolls, and self-rescues impossible to do. And I never go out on the main lake when visibility is not good. Oh, and my bikini is bright blue - maybe I need to get a fluorescent orange one, with strobe lights. (Sorry, but I just completed a 2-hour international law final, so I'm a bit giddy right now.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mashugana (Post 70039)
What a great idea EdicP. . . . By the way, does Evenstar represent the average kayaker on the big lake?

Probably not, but there's no way of knowing, since most are not going to post on such a hostle forum. (read what I posted above, for why a flag isn't a "great idea"

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut (Post 70049)
Evanstar read the title of YOUR post #189 posted just yesterday at 9:18am. It speaks volumes about your character.

No it doesn't - I was responding directly to three people who posted that kayaks should either be banned from the lake or prevented from venturing more than 150 from shore. In my opinion, their only reasoning was so that they could continue to travel at unlimited speeds on the lake - this is a pretty selfish reason to ban any type of boat (and before you jump all over me again - a speed limit doesn't ban any type of boat).

I have kayaked on a lake with an enforced speed limit - it's not perfect, because there are always people who violate laws, but there's a huge difference in the safety factor for paddlers.

I am not a selfish person, but I will stand up for my right to use the entire lake - since there is no reason that an experienced sea kayaker should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where I can paddle for 20 miles without going around in circles.

hazelnut 05-10-2008 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar (Post 70084)
I am not a selfish person, but I will stand up for my right to use the entire lake - since there is no reason that an experienced sea kayaker should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where I can paddle for 20 miles without going around in circles.


But you DO have the right to paddle anywhere on the lake. Nobody has told you that you can't. I've told you I think it isn't smart but neither is swimming across the broads. I equate the two activities as similar. This is a direct quote from YOU:

In a sit in kayak, you actually sit below the water line and your top speed is maybe 5 MPH.

So if you are sitting below the water line how can you compare that activity to power boating and not swimming. Don't you agree that swimming in the broads is stupid? If so, how is kayaking the broads ANY different??? It is an activity that has some risk associated with it. It will always have risk associated with it speed limit or no speed limit. I know that you will never see it that way so we can agree to disagree. Anyway using your activities as a REASON for a speed limit is ridiculous. Why should anyone have to alter their activities for somebody who wants to risk their life? This is even WITH a speed limit in place.

brk-lnt 05-10-2008 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar (Post 70084)

I am not a selfish person, but I will stand up for my right to use the entire lake - since there is no reason that an experienced sea kayaker should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where I can paddle for 20 miles without going around in circles.

I will stand up for the right for powerboats to use the lake without an enforced speed limit - since there is no reason than an experienced power boater should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where a powerboat can travel at speeds greater than 40MPH without going around in circles.

Evenstar 05-10-2008 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut (Post 70119)
But you DO have the right to paddle anywhere on the lake.

Come on, you know very well what I meant! The key here is that I should be able to do this safely - without having high-speed power boats violating my 150 foot zone, because they were traveling faster than their ability to see smaller boats.

Quote:

So if you are sitting below the water line how can you compare that activity to power boating and not swimming. Don't you agree that swimming in the broads is stupid? If so, how is kayaking the broads ANY different???
Now you're just being argumentive - trying to annoy me. If this is the best your side can do in trying to dispute the need for a lake speed limit, you're in real trouble.

There is NO comparison between paddling a kayak and swimming. It's not just me outhere alone - I'm in a BOAT!!! And I'm in a very visible boat - I can literally spot another kayak a mile a way - I cannot spot a swimmer a mile away. An inch or two of my butt might be below the waterline, but the rest of me isn't - including my RED PFD - and more than half of my 16-foot-long BRIGHT RED KAYAK is above the waterline. And the BRIGHT ORANGE blades of my paddles extend 4 to 5 feet above the waterline.

Quote:

It is an activity that has some risk associated with it. It will always have risk associated with it speed limit or no speed limit. I know that you will never see it that way so we can agree to disagree. Anyway using your activities as a REASON for a speed limit is ridiculous. Why should anyone have to alter their activities for somebody who wants to risk their life? This is even WITH a speed limit in place.
I agreed to disagree with you months ago, but you won't give it a rest and you keep tearing apart my replies to others - because you can't stand the fact that I and many others here disagree with your totally illogical reasoning.

There's a risk to almost any recreational activity, but allowing powerboats to travel on our lakes at unlimited speeds create a totally unnecessarily high risk to paddlers. An enforced speed limit will greatly lower that risk.

I can reduce the risk of paddling on Winni by using a kayak that is designed for the conditions found on a large lake, by having a kayak that is very visible, by paddling with my best friend (who has an equally visible kayak), by being an excellent swimmer, by wearing a PFD, by knowing how to do self-rescues, by taking coursing in CPR, advanced paddling techniques, and coastal navigation, by wearing the proper clothing when the water is cold, by having extra gear with me, by being experienced in paddling in large waves, by paying attention to the weather, and by being in the best shape possible.

My only real risk comes from the power boats - and mostly from the ones that are traveling at speeds beyond their ability to see smaller boats. The only "risk to my life" out there on any part of the lake is from some of the powerboats.

Quote:

Originally Posted by brk-lnt (Post 70120)
I will stand up for the right for powerboats to use the lake without an enforced speed limit - since there is no reason than an experienced power boater should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where a powerboat can travel at speeds greater than 40MPH without going around in circles.

The reason is that you are putting others at risk - that's a pretty good reason. Winni is only 20 miles long, so if you are traveling at high speeds on it, you will be going in circles. And the faster you go, the more you'll be traveling in circles. Maybe you need to go to the ocean.

brk-lnt 05-11-2008 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar (Post 70133)

The reason is that you are putting others at risk - that's a pretty good reason.

No, re-read my post. Experienced boaters operating safely are no different than experienced kayakers operating safely. The two can coexist easily.

If one or the other operates unsafely (and both groups are equally guilty of this), then all bets are off. You, quite obviously, feel that for reasons that are significant to you and your interests, that boaters should compromise to make you feel happier and safer.

You can wear the brightest colors imaginable, but height above waterline is a greater contributing factor to visibility than colors.

VtSteve 05-11-2008 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brk-lnt (Post 70145)
No, re-read my post. Experienced boaters operating safely are no different than experienced kayakers operating safely. The two can coexist easily.

If one or the other operates unsafely (and both groups are equally guilty of this), then all bets are off. You, quite obviously, feel that for reasons that are significant to you and your interests, that boaters should compromise to make you feel happier and safer.

You can wear the brightest colors imaginable, but height above waterline is a greater contributing factor to visibility than colors.

It's already been stated that there are better places to do some paddling, without fear apparently. If I resided on a smaller lake, I'd be boating accordingly. On Champlain, my 22 footer is almost too small. I'd feel stupid in my old little bowrider asking for a law that prevented cruisers from making wakes. I'd also feel pretty stupid asking for speed limits so I could paddly the 13 miles or so across the lake, or the over 100 miles north to south.

When something seems inappropriate in a given situation, it probably is. As kids, we always knew that when in the canoe, we travelled along the shore, free of the main passageways. Even as kids, it made sense to us all.

On a congested body of water, common sense is the big thing that makes it all work. Unfortunately, common sense isn't in play for many. The current laws are not enforced, if they were, you'd not have as many issues with idiots that violate the distance law, the BWI laws, and kayakers in the middle of the lake living in fear. But common sense goes both ways. I'd no more take my boat to a little pond and tear things up as I would paddle my way over to NY state to see what's up.

We live in a day and age, a continuation from the 90's, where many of the new rules and regulations are worse than what they seek to limit.

Evenstar 05-11-2008 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brk-lnt (Post 70145)
No, re-read my post. Experienced boaters operating safely are no different than experienced kayakers operating safely. The two can coexist easily.

Quote:

Originally Posted by brk-lnt (Post 70145)
If one or the other operates unsafely (and both groups are equally guilty of this), then all bets are off. You, quite obviously, feel that for reasons that are significant to you and your interests, that boaters should compromise to make you feel happier and safer. You can wear the brightest colors imaginable, but height above waterline is a greater contributing factor to visibility than colors.

</O:p
The problem is that not everyone who operates at high-speeds does so safely. And visibility becomes more of a problem at higher speeds. <O:p

Your idea of a compromise is to ban sea kayaks from using the main lake – others on this forum want to ban all paddlers from the lake completely. Those aren’t compromises – a speed limit is a compromise, because it will better allow all boaters to use the lake – without banning any type of vessel from the lake or from any part of the lake. <O:p

New Hampshire RSA 270:1:II states: “In the interest of maintaining the residential, recreational and scenic values which New Hampshire public waters provide to residents of the state and to the promotion of our tourist industry, and in light of the fact that competing uses for the enjoyment of these waters, if not regulated for the benefit of all users, may diminish the value to be derived from them, it is hereby declared that the public waters of New Hampshire shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses, both from the shore and from water-borne conveyances.”<O:p

I contend that a speed limit is needed to “provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses, both from the shore and from water-borne conveyances.” All other factors being equal, slower speeds are proven to increase safety. Again – if I can see other kayaks as far as a mile away, why can’t some powerboat operators see me before they violate my 150 foot zone? My argument is that they are traveling at speeds that are faster than their abilities. A speed limit will force the fastest boats to slow down, which will give them more time to see smaller boats – and will give smaller boats more time to get out of their way.<O:p

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve (Post 70150)
It's already been stated that there are better places to do some paddling, without fear apparently. … When something seems inappropriate in a given situation, it probably is. As kids, we always knew that when in the canoe, we travelled along the shore, free of the main passageways. Even as kids, it made sense to us all.

<O:p

A sea kayak isn’t a canoe, and I’m not a kid. My sea kayak is designed for large bodies of water, not ponds. If I wanted to paddle on ponds I would have bought a small, much less expensive, recreational kayak. I’m using my boat for exactly what it was designed to be used for – and I am doing so responsibly. There is nothing inappropriate about taking a sea kayak out on the main lake. I have the skills and the proper equipment to do so and I could do so safely if power boats were required to slow down to reasonable speed (so that they would see me).

I live 3 miles from a 10 mile long lake, where I do most of my paddling, and yet it is safer to kayak on Squam (which is a larger lake) on weekends, because Squam has a speed limit. So going to smaller NH lakes is not the answer, unless that smaller lake has a speed limit. This bill was not supposed to be just about Winni – it was originally written to cover all NH lakes.

Chris Craft 05-11-2008 10:17 PM

Evenstar: my problem with your argument is this. Today you are looking to add a speed limit so that you can take your ocean kayak out on lake winni. Well to me the next step for you will be to look for the same speed limit so that you can take your ocean kayak in the ocean. Seems that it is OK for me to not be able to use the lake in a safe responsible manner but if that is put on you then..... Why are your rights more important then mine?

Lakegeezer 05-12-2008 06:31 AM

Let's look at the law again
 
The first paragraph of the existing law is enough to satisfy the rights mentioned in RSA 270:1:II, the one Evenstar expresses concerns about. Safe and mutual enjoyment comes with speeds that are reasonable and prudent under existing conditions.

We are currently living under a good rule that we all should be able to agree on. It does not allow unlimited speed. The debate should be about enforcement of existing law, not extensions that create legitimate disrespect for the law.

From HB 0847: No person shall operate a vessel on Lake Winnipesaukee at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions and without regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing. In all cases, speed shall be controlled so that the operator will be able to avoid endangering or colliding with any person, vessel, object, or shore. <-- Good enough!

The reason there is a public outcry against the proposed law is that it defines what is not reasonable or prudent, removing the responsibility and freedom from certified boat pilots. To imply that going over 45 mph is unreasonable or not prudent when it is 7AM in the broads, on a Tuesday in May, with no boat in sight; is just plain wrong. Yet, that is what the law is implying.

(b) Where no hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with subparagraph (a), the speed of any vessel in excess of the limit specified in this subparagraph shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful:
(1) 25 miles per hour during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise; and
(2) 45 miles per hour at any other time.

Skipper of the Sea Que 05-12-2008 06:55 AM

Amazingly good synopsis Lakegeezer
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer (Post 70197)
The first paragraph of the existing law is enough to satisfy the rights mentioned in RSA 270:1:II, the one Evenstar expresses concerns about. Safe and mutual enjoyment comes with speeds that are reasonable and prudent under existing conditions.

We are currently living under a good rule that we all should be able to agree on. It does not allow unlimited speed. The debate should be about enforcement of existing law, not extensions that create legitimate disrespect for the law.

From HB 0847: No person shall operate a vessel on Lake Winnipesaukee at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions and without regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing. In all cases, speed shall be controlled so that the operator will be able to avoid endangering or colliding with any person, vessel, object, or shore. <-- Good enough!

The reason there is a public outcry against the proposed law is that it defines what is not reasonable or prudent, removing the responsibility and freedom from certified boat pilots. To imply that going over 45 mph is unreasonable or not prudent when it is 7AM in the broads, on a Tuesday in May, with no boat in sight; is just plain wrong. Yet, that is what the law is implying.

(b) Where no hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with subparagraph (a), the speed of any vessel in excess of the limit specified in this subparagraph shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful:
(1) 25 miles per hour during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise; and
(2) 45 miles per hour at any other time.

This is one of the best posts on the subject that I have seen. I wish I could have said it like that LG but English Composition was not my best subject :).

If it make a difference to anyone I agree 100% with what Lakegeezer has said. BTW, as I've said before, the only way my boat can go as fast as 45 mph is DOWNHILL.

Skipper of the Sea Que 05-12-2008 08:11 AM

Being seen in a Kayak and more anti new speed limit stuff
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar (Post 70181)
The problem is that not everyone who operates at high-speeds does so safely. And visibility becomes more of a problem at higher speeds. <O:p

The same can be possible for ANY boaters regardless of speed. Not all boaters do so safely including boats going 45 mph or slower. Enforcing current laws is the answer here. The visibility factor is a relative issue (see below).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar
if I can see other kayaks as far as a mile away, why can’t some powerboat operators see me before they violate my 150 foot zone? My argument is that they are traveling at speeds that are faster than their abilities. A speed limit will force the fastest boats to slow down, which will give them more time to see smaller boats – and will give smaller boats more time to get out of their way.<O:p

You, in your low to the water kayak, can see another low kayak, "As far away as a mile". It follows that boat operators who are up much higher than you are can see further than you can see from your low kayak. If you can see a kayak as far away as a mile then the power boater with a higher vantage point can see the same kayak from even further away than a mile. Pretty good visibility. So from a mile away a boater at 60 mph has 58 seconds (almost a full minute) to avoid your 150' safe passage zone. That is more than sufficient time to react to your kayak. If that is not enough time in your opinion then the boater must be violating other rules which can be enforced. Such illegal boating jeopardizes everyone, not just Evenstar's Kayak and should be addressed by stricter enforcement of existing rules. I picked 60 mph because it makes the numbers easier to understand. 60 mph = 1 mile per minute.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar
There is nothing inappropriate about taking a sea kayak out on the main lake. I have the skills and the proper equipment to do so and I could do so safely if power boats were required to slow down to reasonable speed (so that they would see me).

We differ on this point. You would increase your visibility with a safety flag. You don't have ALL the proper equipment without a kayak flag. If you are truly concerned about being seen better than you are now, then get the proper equipment. Specifically a kayak flag. One made just for KAYAKS. You claim you can not kayak with these. I believe that with your skill you could handle a safety flag better than the average kayaker.

Here's a review of a kayak flag: "I have been looking for this for a long time! It sticks to the boat extremely well. It is very visible, yet doesn't get in the way. Easy to roll with too. I love it, especially with an after market pirate's flag addition. Thanks!" from This catalog.

Or this Kayakers safety visibility flag
The product description says: Be seen by power boaters & jet skis! The Paddler's Visibility Flag has a 4-foot pole topped with colorful streamers. This flag is suitable for use with sit-in-side kayaks and will not prevent Eskimo rolling. Flag is flexible enough for most rough landings and shallow water tip-overs. (Streamers can be substituted with a small flag. USCG suggests an American flag, but any flag, sports pennant, our your own "coat of arms" could be used.)

http://topkayaker.net/TopKayakerShop...T-PF01_MED.jpg

One of those "made for kayak" flags added to your bright colored kayak, with highly visible paddles, bikini and PFD, should make you even more visible from over a mile away regardless of reasonable (sometimes over 45mph) speed.

We all need to work together to make boating safe and fun for all. We do not need more speed related laws to do that.

Mashugana 05-13-2008 04:00 AM

Same old lament with a twist
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar (Post 70133)
There's a risk to almost any recreational activity, but allowing powerboats to travel on our lakes at unlimited speeds create a totally unnecessarily high risk to paddlers. An enforced speed limit will greatly lower that risk.

You know better than that Evenstar. All your concerns are covered by existing laws. Unsafe speeds are not allowed here. Enforced existing laws will lower your risk more than concentrating on an additional new law.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar
My only real risk comes from the power boats - and mostly from the ones that are traveling at speeds beyond their ability to see smaller boats. The only "risk to my life" out there on any part of the lake is from some of the powerboats.

Elsewhere you claim that your kind of kayaking is risky in the first place. All you have is your observation that fast boats can not see you in enough time to avoid your 150 foot safe passage space. No other proof tangable or otherwise. You say that it is not safe for you. If you are boating unsafely then that might be considered illegal for you to do.

Think of it like anchoring in a No Rafting Zone. You get there and set your anchor and take a nap. An hour later boaters make a raft 30 feet from your boat. Your boat is now anchored illegally. It is not your fault but you are still illegal. So too is boating unsafely. Since youbelieve that you can not boat safely on the lake you are then breaking the law by knowingly boating unsafely.

Several of the messages above clearly respond to your situation. The made for kayaks safety flag sounds like what you need. You can reduce your feeling of risk with the proper kayak flag. That would make it safer for you. Your excuse for not using a kayak safety flag is invalid. They are made for kayaks. We do not need to adjust everyone to accommodate you. Be seen with a flag and let MP enforce the laws we already have in place.

Kayak safely.

codeman671 05-13-2008 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by evenstar
There's a risk to almost any recreational activity, but allowing powerboats to travel on our lakes at unlimited speeds create a totally unnecessarily high risk to paddlers. An enforced speed limit will greatly lower that risk.

I am not sure what planet the lake you kayak is on, but boats are not traveling at "unlimited" speeds" per se. When I hear you say "unlimited" it makes Winnipesaukee sound like boats are traveling at 100mph+ recklessly wherever and whenever they go. This is simply not the case. The average boat on the lake IMHO travels below 55mph. Sure, there are exceptions but rarely do you see boats flying around at 80mph+. It takes an ungodly amount of HP and money to break the 80mph mark, even though money is not an issue in the lakes region the number of boats capable of going that fast is limited. Silver Sands for instance dropped Fountain and only has 1 used boat that will exceed 80mph on the lot. I pick 80mph as it is the top speed of the typical twin engine big block powered (but stock) GFBL sold on the lake without serious mods.

At this point almost all the performance boat lines are not even being sold on the lake.

VtSteve 05-13-2008 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mashugana (Post 70280)
You know better than that Evenstar. All your concerns are covered by existing laws. Unsafe speeds are not allowed here. Enforced existing laws will lower your risk more than concentrating on an additional new law.



Elsewhere you claim that your kind of kayaking is risky in the first place. All you have is your observation that fast boats can not see you in enough time to avoid your 150 foot safe passage space. No other proof tangable or otherwise. You say that it is not safe for you. If you are boating unsafely then that might be considered illegal for you to do.

Think of it like anchoring in a No Rafting Zone. You get there and set your anchor and take a nap. An hour later boaters make a raft 30 feet from your boat. Your boat is now anchored illegally. It is not your fault but you are still illegal. So too is boating unsafely. Since youbelieve that you can not boat safely on the lake you are then breaking the law by knowingly boating unsafely.

Several of the messages above clearly respond to your situation. The made for kayaks safety flag sounds like what you need. You can reduce your feeling of risk with the proper kayak flag. That would make it safer for you. Your excuse for not using a kayak safety flag is invalid. They are made for kayaks. We do not need to adjust everyone to accommodate you. Be seen with a flag and let MP enforce the laws we already have in place.

Kayak safely.

Good post. Worth noting that the word "Enforcement" is vital to these discussions. It's pretty much the same problem all over, people want new laws so they can feel good about their efforts, but never properly address the enforcement of existing laws. Some people love to have a cause. Maintaining proper distance from other boaters and the shoreline has always been of paramount importance on the water. So is keeping a watch.

But there are several concerns going on at once on these threads.

1) Many want the GFBL boats to go away sooner rather than later, regardless of their speeds.

2) Some feel that they will never be safe unless boats are forced to slow down, regardless of existing laws.

3) Many feel that if existing laws were enforced, the lake would be safer, and would address many of the issues that brought the speed limit to the foreground.


From my perspective, I obviously agree with 3. But my opinion is also based on enforcement, which obviously isn't happening now. Nobody has been petitioning their representatives for more funding for the MP, and I've heard scant few comments about funding in general. Interestingly enough, enforcement of the speed limit would require, at least initially, a larger presence and more dedication from the underfunded MP. If they can't enforce the 150' rule, nor the NWZ rules, what the heck are they going to do with a speed limit law? (Note: For those that hate the GFBL boats on the lake, I understand your underlying motives).

Without funding, your laws are of no consequence.

As for the dreaded night time boating experience. Same as in daytime, only the nut cases are even easier to spot. The two primary accidents mentioned over and over again, would not have been impacted by a speed limit law. They most likely would have occurred regardless of the MP presence or funding in place. They were both pretty low speed accidents, and both involved negligence.

You can't legislate common sense and courtesy, but you can enforce both if that's what you want. Those that choose to pass additional laws and try to legislate bad behavior, do all boaters a disservice, and it's a direct insult to our intelligence. You can also expend all of your brainpower and free time communicating and being all political, but in the end, it gets nothing accomplished.

brk-lnt 05-13-2008 09:19 AM

[QUOTE=Evenstar;70181] </O:p
The problem is that not everyone who operates at high-speeds does so safely. And visibility becomes more of a problem at higher speeds. <O:p

The problem is that not everyone who kayaks on the lake does so safely. For example, no kayakers seem to use a kayak flag to promote their visibility. And visibility becomes more of a problem when you have a low-height craft paddling in an area with high waves.

Every argument you make about speed limits and powerboat operators can be turned back around on you. You have failed to present any arguments that are truly compelling (other than in your own little world) .

SIKSUKR 05-13-2008 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evenstar (Post 70084)
I'll also add that a flag would make rolls, and self-rescues impossible to do. .

So after Evenstar has endlessly told us how safe and skilled a kayaker she is and has stated repeatedly how she cannot do a self rescue roll with a flag,we read this from catalogs.Which is it?OK now, I'm sure I'll be accussed of "picking" on her again by questioning her posts so fire away.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Skipper
Here's a review of a kayak flag: "I have been looking for this for a long time! It sticks to the boat extremely well. It is very visible, yet doesn't get in the way. Easy to roll with too. I love it, especially with an after market pirate's flag addition. Thanks!" from This catalog.

Or this Kayakers safety visibility flag
The product description says: Be seen by power boaters & jet skis! The Paddler's Visibility Flag has a 4-foot pole topped with colorful streamers. This flag is suitable for use with sit-in-side kayaks and will not prevent Eskimo rolling. Flag is flexible enough for most rough landings and shallow water tip-overs. (Streamers can be substituted with a small flag. USCG suggests an American flag, but any flag, sports pennant, our your own "coat of arms" could be used.)


Pricestavern 05-13-2008 11:24 AM

Kayak Safety
 
A kayaker needs to understand that they are inherently difficult to see and should take all precautions as if they were invisible. A speed limit will not make a kayaker safer and it should not be relied on to do so. I have been kayaking for quite some time now in a 16' sea kayak (bright red) and have come close to being run down by sailboats!

Island Lover 05-13-2008 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by codeman671 (Post 70294)
I am not sure what planet the lake you kayak is on, but boats are not traveling at "unlimited" speeds" per se. When I hear you say "unlimited" it makes Winnipesaukee sound like boats are traveling at 100mph+ recklessly wherever and whenever they go. This is simply not the case. The average boat on the lake IMHO travels below 55mph. Sure, there are exceptions but rarely do you see boats flying around at 80mph+. It takes an ungodly amount of HP and money to break the 80mph mark, even though money is not an issue in the lakes region the number of boats capable of going that fast is limited. Silver Sands for instance dropped Fountain and only has 1 used boat that will exceed 80mph on the lot. I pick 80mph as it is the top speed of the typical twin engine big block powered (but stock) GFBL sold on the lake without serious mods.

At this point almost all the performance boat lines are not even being sold on the lake.

Some of the opposition arguments are getting ludicrous. Why do you keep pretending there is some kind of speed limit already? Who are you trying to convince? There is no speed limit on Winnipesaukee! This is a fact. When you start talking about no wake zones and reckless operation regulations as if they were speed limits you make yourself look silly. And, in truth, very desperate.

ApS 05-13-2008 12:28 PM

No RECORD of Kayaks Being Run Over...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by brk-lnt (Post 70296)
"...You have failed to present any arguments that are truly compelling other than in your own little world...."

Besides kayaking, there is "the little world" of fallen windsurfers, capsized sailboats, kids on floats, people on land within 130' of the water's edge, ejected passengers, sunk/wrecked survivors, divers, canoes, swimmers and fallen skiers. (In addition to sailboats run over while sailing upright).

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve (Post 70295)
"...Without funding, your laws are of no consequence..."

The NHMP already has trained radar officers AND radar tools have been provided—for free! How do you think the Speed Survey was accomplished?

Yes, I know...Woodsy cheers the Speed Survey at the same time touting THE FACT that radar doesn't work on water.
Quote:

"How would you enforce the new law? You cannot shoot a handheld radar gun at a speeding boat and get an accurate reading unless you are close to the same bearing."
—Woodsy
But Woodsy has previously vouched, "there are no records of kayaks being run over on Winnipesaukee".

Say, doesn't a run-over kayak need to be worth $2000 for a report to be legally required? :confused:

Yes...Let's give the MPs the means to spot extreme speeders more readily. Existing "Unsafe Passage" regulations are NH-only and clearly neither being observed nor enforced.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve (Post 70295)
"...You can also expend all of your brainpower and free time communicating and being all political, but in the end, it gets nothing accomplished..."

Because we don't know how aggressive the NHMP will be, we don't know how effective the outcome will be. I suspect that Bear Islander is correct, and that fewer Winnipesaukee cowboys will frequent the lake—even if radar isn't used at all!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mashugana (Post 70280)
"...Unsafe speeds are not allowed here..."

It happens every hour: the wrong people refuse to see any unsafe speed. :(

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mashugana (Post 70280)
"...Be seen with a flag and let MP enforce the laws we already have in place..."

1) Why put the burden on the kayaker minding his own business? Capsized kayaks, windsurfers, canoes or sailboats will be displaying zero flags. :rolleye1:

2) While Dave R and I are on different sides of this law, both of us are on record here as saying "the invisible kayak" isn't the problem on the lake; but any capsized boat could be a problem. (Think of a certain sunken Cobalt—but at night). :eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skipper of the Sea Que (Post 70203)
"...We all need to work together to make boating safe and fun for all. We do not need more speed related laws to do that..."

As we saw, Littlefield's boat rocketed through a giant loophole: that prompted Concord to make new laws in 2002—and we continue to need new laws.

Law enforcement continues to need every possible tool: why tie their hands? :confused:

Excalibur 05-13-2008 01:02 PM

It should be funny
 
I will find it funny to see all the small pleasure boats being pulled over around and after sunset for going over the 25 mph speed limit.

Then there will be the 30 foot plus boats not being able to plane and making a huge wake..

We may even see a few boats with out running lights going along with night vision goggles. My spot light has pissed a few off in the past...

Woodsy 05-13-2008 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Island Lover (Post 70310)
Some of the opposition arguments are getting ludicrous. Why do you keep pretending there is some kind of speed limit already? Who are you trying to convince? There is no speed limit on Winnipesaukee! This is a fact. When you start talking about no wake zones and reckless operation regulations as if they were speed limits you make yourself look silly. And, in truth, very desperate.

Island Lover...

Your ignorance of the rules & regulations is absolutely astounding!!

There are numerous rules and regulations pertaining to EXACTLY how fast a boat is ALLOWED to travel during CERTAIN situations! A NWZ is a SPEED LIMIT! The 150' Safe Passage Rule is a SPEED LIMIT! In fact the very definition of both of those rules SPECIFICALLY STATE a MAXIMUM SPEED OF 6 MILES PER HOUR. Sounds like a speed limit to me!

RECKLESS OPERATION laws are there to protect you from a Capt. Bonehead. It is an INTENTIONALLY BROAD STATUTE designed to cover a myriad of bad behavior.... For example, the MP witness a boat traveling at 45 MPH that violates your 150' bubble by a small margin, lets say they come within 100' of you. Thats a no brainer, they get pulled over and get a warning on the 150' rule...

Same Bonehead, same scenario but instead he violates your bubble by a big margin, lets say he is 15' away from you traveling at 45MPH... this is where the Reckless Operation Statute comes into play! Now he could possibly be arrested and punished in a far more severe manner!

Woodsy


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:11 AM.

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