Winnipesaukee Forum

Winnipesaukee Forum (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/index.php)
-   Speed Limits (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=19)
-   -   more expert testimony on SB-27 (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11509)

Rusty 04-17-2011 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimi (Post 154919)
Riddle me this Batman: Why did/does WinnFABS want speed limits? What is the primary reason? Do tell.


You have made up your mind that WinnFabs only goal is to keep GFBL boats off the lake so why keep asking that question.

If WinnFabs says there goal is safety, then you say "What is the primary reason?"

So why keep asking that question if you (in your mind) know the answer. It really is an obsession with you.

Why don't you ask the SBONH folks why they support going faster if their primary goal is safety? Going faster in any vehicle is less safe that going slower.

lawn psycho 04-17-2011 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 154923)
Why don't you ask the SBONH folks why they support going faster if their primary goal is safety? Going faster in any vehicle is less safe that going slower.

Nice try but that's a classic strawman argument. Why not make highways all have 25 MPH speed limits too....

Rusty 04-17-2011 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawn psycho (Post 154954)
Nice try but that's a classic strawman argument. Why not make highways all have 25 MPH speed limits too....

:rolleye2:
It’s not “strawman”, it’s straw man. Two words, not one.

Your comment is the straw man approach. You are trying to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise. It won’t work my friend! ;)

lawn psycho 04-17-2011 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 154957)
:rolleye2:
It’s not “strawman”, it’s straw man. Two words, not one.

Your comment is the straw man approach. You are trying to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise. It won’t work my friend! ;)

No I was trying to point out the fallacy of your argument with an example.... Did you notice I posed the argument as a question? Carry on....

Dave R 04-17-2011 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 154923)
Going faster in any vehicle is less safe that going slower.

Good thing you're not an airplane pilot...

Rusty 04-17-2011 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave R (Post 154961)
Good thing you're not an airplane pilot...

You know for a fact that I'm not an airplane pilot?

You are assuming something and making a judgement of being true without evidence or validation.

Dave R 04-17-2011 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 154963)
You know for a fact that I'm not an airplane pilot?

You are assuming something and making a judgement of being true without evidence or validation.

Nope. I assumed you weren't because you don't seem to understand the fundamentals of flight.

If you are an airplane pilot, you may want to bone up on the fundamentals...

Either way, your statement was very wrong. Flying too slow tends to lead to tying the record for lowest altitude.

Rusty 04-17-2011 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave R (Post 154966)
Nope. I assumed you weren't because you don't seem to understand the fundamentals of flight.

If you are an airplane pilot, you may want to bone up on the fundamentals...

Either way, your statement was very wrong. Flying too slow tends to lead to tying the record for lowest altitude.

I guess I thought that everyone understood that what we talked about most of the time when it came to speed was boats and automobiles. I guess I was wrong.
Planes need thrust and uplift to stay in the air and that doesn’t always relate to speed though. Have you ever seen the Harrier do a vertical/short takeoff and landing?

http://juliantheaviator.files.wordpr...01/harrier.jpg

Dave R 04-17-2011 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 154969)
I guess I thought that everyone understood that what we talked about most of the time when it came to speed was boats and automobiles. I guess I was wrong.
Planes need thrust and uplift to stay in the air and that doesn’t always relate to speed though. Have you ever seen the Harrier do a vertical/short takeoff and landing?


Yes, I have actually, several times and it is cool. You realize that those have the worst safety record of any jet in the military, right?

chipj29 04-18-2011 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 154923)
You have made up your mind that WinnFabs only goal is to keep GFBL boats off the lake so why keep asking that question.

If WinnFabs says there goal is safety, then you say "What is the primary reason?"

So why keep asking that question if you (in your mind) know the answer. It really is an obsession with you.

Why don't you ask the SBONH folks why they support going faster if their primary goal is safety? Going faster in any vehicle is less safe that going slower.

How many accidents have there been on Lake Winnipesaukee that were directly attributed to speeds above the current limits?

jrc 04-18-2011 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 154969)
I guess I thought that everyone understood that what we talked about most of the time when it came to speed was boats and automobiles. I guess I was wrong.

Well I wouldn't bring up automobiles. As any web search will tell you, auto accident death rates have fallen dramatically as the speed limits have gone up of the last 30 years. From Wikipedia:

"The number of deaths – and deaths relative to the total population – have declined over the last two decades. From 1979 to 2005, the number of deaths per year decreased 14.97% while the number of deaths per capita decreased by 35.46%. Traffic fatalities in 2009 were the lowest in 60 years."

So there is no statistical correlation in between speed limits and safety in automobiles.

What do people attribute the decrease in deaths to, increased enforcement of DUI laws.

Chimi 04-18-2011 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 154923)
You have made up your mind that WinnFabs only goal is to keep GFBL boats off the lake so why keep asking that question.

If WinnFabs says there goal is safety, then you say "What is the primary reason?"

So why keep asking that question if you (in your mind) know the answer. It really is an obsession with you.

Why don't you ask the SBONH folks why they support going faster if their primary goal is safety? Going faster in any vehicle is less safe that going slower.

No, I have not made up my mind, that's why I'm asking the question. (PS: You seem to make a point of correcting spelling/grammar, so I'll do the same: In your 1st sentence "there" should be "their". In your last sentence "that" should be "than"). All I want to know is what WinnFABS stands for. Obviously a speed limit, but why? Is it to make the lake "safer" or is it to save the planet by reducing fuel consumption? If it's to make the lake safer, then why won't they support other legislation that will really improve safety? (such as the temporary boating license issued by marinas)? Please, no spin this time. Just tell it like it is.

lawn psycho 04-18-2011 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimi (Post 155033)
No, I have not made up my mind, that's why I'm asking the question. (PS: You seem to make a point of correcting spelling/grammar, so I'll do the same: In your 1st sentence "there" should be "their". In your last sentence "that" should be "than"). All I want to know is what WinnFABS stands for. Obviously a speed limit, but why? Is it to make the lake "safer" or is it to save the planet by reducing fuel consumption? If it's to make the lake safer, then why won't they support other legislation that will really improve safety? (such as the temporary boating license issued by marinas)? Please, no spin this time. Just tell it like it is.

Chimi, when people don't have a good argument or poor logic they deflect from the topic by pointing out spelling and grammatical errors. In a battle of intellect Rusty would show up unarmed.....

ishoot308 04-18-2011 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29 (Post 155008)
How many accidents have there been on Lake Winnipesaukee that were directly attributed to speeds above the current limits?

None...

Dan

Bear Islander 04-18-2011 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29 (Post 155008)
How many accidents have there been on Lake Winnipesaukee that were directly attributed to speeds above the current limits?

Below is a quote from David Barrett the head of the New Hampshire Marine Patrol and a long time opponent of speed limits. And these three are not just accidents attributed to speed. They are FATAL accidents attributed to speed.


Over the past 10 years, Barrett said, there have been three boating deaths attributed to speed.


More than enough evidence to support a speed limit.

Now I assume you guys will give some convoluted reasoning why these accidents don't count. The general public is not interested in convoluted arguments. They want speed limits.

ishoot308 04-18-2011 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 155100)
Below is a quote from David Barrett the head of the New Hampshire Marine Patrol and a long time opponent of speed limits. And these three are not just accidents attributed to speed. They are FATAL accidents attributed to speed.


Over the past 10 years, Barrett said, there have been three boating deaths attributed to speed.


More than enough evidence to support a speed limit.

Now I assume you guys will give some convoluted reasoning why these accidents don't count. The general public is not interested in convoluted arguments. They want speed limits.

With all due respect, the question was how many accidents have been attributed to speed "above the current limits", this would mean 46 MPH or greater. I stand by my answer of none...

Dan

lawn psycho 04-19-2011 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 155100)
.......The general public is not interested in convoluted arguments. They want speed limits.

The general public or the boating public?

chipj29 04-19-2011 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 155100)
Below is a quote from David Barrett the head of the New Hampshire Marine Patrol and a long time opponent of speed limits. And these three are not just accidents attributed to speed. They are FATAL accidents attributed to speed.


Over the past 10 years, Barrett said, there have been three boating deaths attributed to speed.


More than enough evidence to support a speed limit.

Now I assume you guys will give some convoluted reasoning why these accidents don't count. The general public is not interested in convoluted arguments. They want speed limits.

Thanks, but that doesn't answer my question. If a boat crashes while going 25 mph in a NWZ and someone dies, wouldn't that also be attributed to speed?

What speed caused the 3 boating deaths? Were any of them >25/45?

lawn psycho 04-19-2011 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29 (Post 155122)
Thanks, but that doesn't answer my question. If a boat crashes while going 25 mph in a NWZ and someone dies, wouldn't that also be attributed to speed?

What speed caused the 3 boating deaths? Were any of them >25/45?

Do intoxicated people even care about speed limits?

Rusty 04-19-2011 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawn psycho (Post 155124)
Do intoxicated people even care about speed limits?

Why don't you ask the president of the SBONH, he has a lot of experience about that topic. That's what the rumor mill is saying anyway. ;)

Bear Islander 04-19-2011 11:50 AM

As I predicted you respond with denials and incorrect information.

I'm starting to think most of you only know about two of those fatal accidents. The ones that received all the publicity.

And as usual you are not going by the estimated speeds for the accidents. You are going what is the minimum possible speed.

Can you name all three accidents?

chipj29 04-19-2011 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 155162)
As I predicted you respond with denials and incorrect information.

I'm starting to think most of you only know about two of those fatal accidents. The ones that received all the publicity.

And as usual you are not going by the estimated speeds for the accidents. You are going what is the minimum possible speed.

Can you name all three accidents?

And as I predicted you respond by avoiding the question.

Rusty 04-19-2011 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimi (Post 155033)
No, I have not made up my mind, that's why I'm asking the question. (PS: You seem to make a point of correcting spelling/grammar, so I'll do the same: In your 1st sentence "there" should be "their". In your last sentence "that" should be "than"). All I want to know is what WinnFABS stands for. Obviously a speed limit, but why? Is it to make the lake "safer" or is it to save the planet by reducing fuel consumption? If it's to make the lake safer, then why won't they support other legislation that will really improve safety? (such as the temporary boating license issued by marinas)? Please, no spin this time. Just tell it like it is.

This was in the LDS today, I hope it helps answer your question:

To the editor,

Responding to Brett Goodhue's letter to the editor, dated April 16, It appears, at first glance, that Mr. Goodhue is not a registered voter in Gilford and some of his information is patently false. Shep Brown's Marina has never been a supporter, rather an adamant opposer, of WinnFABS. The NH Marine Trades Association also have not been in support of speed limits for boats anywhere. The boat dealers reason for being in business is to make a profit and keeping their patrons happy with their sales and services.

Mr. Goodhue obviously has not paid attention over the years, WinnFABS has never said it wants the performance boats off the big lake, only that they use common sense and courtesy when operating their vessels. That includes complying with the speed limits of 45/30 mph at which all water sports, except speed for the sake of speed alone, can and have been practiced over many years. They have had their way for as long as we can remember, over 40 plus years and we now believe it's time for everyone to realize that accidents, injuries and fatalities can easily be averted by slowing down. It is we believe a very simple factor of physics that is not that hard to understand.

The marina owners would like the Boaters Education Safety Certificate law to remain as it has been for a lot of years so that any one wanting to rent a boat for an hour or so still has to have the proper certification required by the current law and not have to hold their entire family up for an extended time waiting for them to study the book, take an on-line test, with the possibility of failing the score requirements, and not to be able to enjoy a half day with their families on the water.

Now you believe that 12-15 year olds should be taking a somewhat lengthy test that does not provide them with a whit of operating experience and then allow them to operate a vessel of 25 hp or less without an adult on board — give us all a break.

By the by, since 2005 or earlier, WinnFABS has not been about anything but speed. We are not like the current bunch, SBONH, that claim to be about everything to do with boating safety but haven't asked for any new laws that have a darn thing to do with same.

Bill Bertholdt

Gilford
.

Chimi 04-19-2011 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 155195)
This was in the LDS today, I hope it helps answer your question:

To the editor,

Responding to Brett Goodhue's letter to the editor, dated April 16, It appears, at first glance, that Mr. Goodhue is not a registered voter in Gilford and some of his information is patently false. Shep Brown's Marina has never been a supporter, rather an adamant opposer, of WinnFABS. The NH Marine Trades Association also have not been in support of speed limits for boats anywhere. The boat dealers reason for being in business is to make a profit and keeping their patrons happy with their sales and services.

Mr. Goodhue obviously has not paid attention over the years, WinnFABS has never said it wants the performance boats off the big lake, only that they use common sense and courtesy when operating their vessels. That includes complying with the speed limits of 45/30 mph at which all water sports, except speed for the sake of speed alone, can and have been practiced over many years. They have had their way for as long as we can remember, over 40 plus years and we now believe it's time for everyone to realize that accidents, injuries and fatalities can easily be averted by slowing down. It is we believe a very simple factor of physics that is not that hard to understand.

The marina owners would like the Boaters Education Safety Certificate law to remain as it has been for a lot of years so that any one wanting to rent a boat for an hour or so still has to have the proper certification required by the current law and not have to hold their entire family up for an extended time waiting for them to study the book, take an on-line test, with the possibility of failing the score requirements, and not to be able to enjoy a half day with their families on the water.

Now you believe that 12-15 year olds should be taking a somewhat lengthy test that does not provide them with a whit of operating experience and then allow them to operate a vessel of 25 hp or less without an adult on board — give us all a break.

By the by, since 2005 or earlier, WinnFABS has not been about anything but speed. We are not like the current bunch, SBONH, that claim to be about everything to do with boating safety but haven't asked for any new laws that have a darn thing to do with same.

Bill Bertholdt

Gilford
.


Two points: 1) What does being a "registered voter" have to do with the price of tea in China? 2) Apparently, an "hour" is not enough time for an unlicensed boater to run somebody over because he has no idea how to a) drive a boat and/or b) has no clue on the rules and regulations specific to the State of NH. Well, too bad, he might keep his family waiting while he might learn a technique or rule that would help him avoid killing someone! This is the most absurd argument I've ever heard. This is just more spin from WinnFABS to take the attention off of the real problem on the lake. Thanks for nothing!

lawn psycho 04-19-2011 04:34 PM

The fact that Bertholdt replied like he did just confirms the claims of the original editorial. Open sentences to attack Goodhue's residency? How about giving us a break and stick to germaine facts.

WinnFlabs is definitely losing it and their wits. The editorial is 100% opinion, no facts and provides nothing we haven't heard to the argument. Can you say broken record?

Looks like the sting of the Goodhue editorial hit Bill right in the nose:laugh:

WinnFlabs duped many supporters in the name of "safety" and now they want to spin it another direction? Good luck with that....

jrc 04-19-2011 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 155158)
Why don't you ask the president of the SBONH, he has a lot of experience about that topic. That's what the rumor mill is saying anyway. ;)

Do you any facts to back up your innuendo? I mean this arguing about speed limits and such is interesting but are you accusing Scott Verdonck of commiting a crime? You should either say what you mean or drop the subject.

DEJ 04-19-2011 04:48 PM

Letters mean little to nothing.
 
Here is an actual "article" written by an actual "reporter" that is trained in journalism.


Laconia Daily Sun April 8th on SBONH
President insists Safe Boaters is not a 1 issue group; few own 'performance' craft, he says
By Michael Kitch
Apr 08, 2011 12:00 am
CONCORD — In the ongoing debate over boating speed limits, Safe Boaters of New Hampshire (SBONH), the group that has opposed restrictions on speed, has been painted by critics as a "go fast," "thunder boat" crowd of hard-drinking helmsmen hell-bent on whipping across the water at breakneck speeds leaving canoeists, kayakers and anglers trembling in their wash.

Not surprisingly, Scott Verdonck, the president of the organization, bridles at this characterization. Alluding to widely circulated e-mails, in which he tells of drinking bouts, he claims that "they are jokes and quotes taken completely out of context." He insists that he never drinks when driving anything — "not a boat, a car, a farm tractor or a bicycle."

The fabricated personal attacks, he said, are aimed at discrediting the organization.

In June, 2008, when the first legislation to limit boat speeds was enacted, the opposition was led by the New Hampshire Recreational Boaters Association, whose president, Erica Blizzard of Laconia, was at the helm when her boat struck Diamond Island. One of her passengers lost her life, Blizzard and the other were severely injured. With that the association disappeared from view.

"We have nothing to do with the Recreational Boaters Association," Verdonck said.

SBONH, he recounted, began in November 2009, after the Legislature had set the speed limits for two years and before it voted to make them permanent. When the legislation was filed to make the speed limits permanent, Verdonck contends that SBONH took no position for or against them, but objected to making them permanent until the Department of Safety completed a two year study, which he maintains was the intent of the law. He said that SBONH supported a bill to extend the study another year and only turned against speed limits when it failed.

"We came together because we didn't like the way things were being done," Verdonck said. He estimated that SBONH counts around 100 members, most of whom are year round residents of New Hampshire, while others are seasonal residents and regular visitors. He said that "performance boaters," owners of vessels designed and equipped for speed, were a small minority of the membership.

Verdonck claims that SBONH's agenda is not confined to speed limits. "Our mission is 'to promote safe boating through education and effective legislation,''' he said. "We are not a single issue group." He said that SBONH has developed relationship with other organizations and stakeholders with shared interests and has worked closely with lawmakers and state agencies, especially the New Hampshire Department of Safety (DOS).

Apart from the speed limit issue, SBONH has supported legislation to close a loophole in the mandatory boater education law that ensures that no one younger than 12 can operate a motorboat without supervision of a certified adult while enabling 12 to 15-year-olds to become certified to operate vessels of 25 horsepower or less.

Verdonck said that this year the organization requested legislation to enable boaters to tie up to public docks in the event of medical emergencies or inclement weather, which was tabled because lawmakers found it encroached on local control. SBONH also supported a bill to allow boats to be fitted with a device to reduce exhaust noise to levels set by statute. Verdonck said the group plans to request other legislation to improve safety on the water next year. "We intend to pursue safety issues through effective legislation for years to come," he said.

Last year SBONH incurred the wrath of residents of the Barber Pole area of Tuftonboro when it challenged a petition to have the channel designated a "no wake zone." After granting the designation, the DOS reversed its decision when it discovered the petition was invalid. Verdonck insists that SBONH took no position for or against the "no wake zone" but objected to the inadequate notice of the public hearing, which left interested residents unable to attend, and to the flawed petition.

Last week, residents again petitioned DOS for a "no wake zone" at Barber Pole. Verdonck said that SBONH would again remain strictly neutral while acknowledging that "we will inform our membership and individuals may take positions for and against the proposal."

Despite the sharp differences between SBONH and the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABs) over speed limits, Verdonck said that there may be more common ground between the two than first appears. "We both recognize that there are issues, including safety issues, on the lake that need to be managed," he said. "Where we disagree is that we don't believe that excessive speed is the primary, let alone the only issue and that speed limits will solve all the problems."

In particular, Verdonck emphasized the importance of concentrating the limited resources of Marine Patrol on closer enforcement of the so-called "safe passage" or "150-foot rule," which requires boats to slow to headway speed (6 mph.) within 150 feet of shore, docks, moorings, rafts. swimmers and other vessels. "That is the most important problem and boating while intoxicated is the most dangerous," he said.
.

Rusty 04-19-2011 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEJ (Post 155202)
Here is an actual "article" written by an actual "reporter" that is trained in journalism.


Laconia Daily Sun April 8th on SBONH
President insists Safe Boaters is not a 1 issue group; few own 'performance' craft, he says
By Michael Kitch
Apr 08, 2011 12:00 am
CONCORD — In the ongoing debate over boating speed limits, Safe Boaters of New Hampshire (SBONH), the group that has opposed restrictions on speed, has been painted by critics as a "go fast," "thunder boat" crowd of hard-drinking helmsmen hell-bent on whipping across the water at breakneck speeds leaving canoeists, kayakers and anglers trembling in their wash.

Not surprisingly, Scott Verdonck, the president of the organization, bridles at this characterization. Alluding to widely circulated e-mails, in which he tells of drinking bouts, he claims that "they are jokes and quotes taken completely out of context." He insists that he never drinks when driving anything — "not a boat, a car, a farm tractor or a bicycle."

The fabricated personal attacks, he said, are aimed at discrediting the organization.

In June, 2008, when the first legislation to limit boat speeds was enacted, the opposition was led by the New Hampshire Recreational Boaters Association, whose president, Erica Blizzard of Laconia, was at the helm when her boat struck Diamond Island. One of her passengers lost her life, Blizzard and the other were severely injured. With that the association disappeared from view.

"We have nothing to do with the Recreational Boaters Association," Verdonck said.

SBONH, he recounted, began in November 2009, after the Legislature had set the speed limits for two years and before it voted to make them permanent. When the legislation was filed to make the speed limits permanent, Verdonck contends that SBONH took no position for or against them, but objected to making them permanent until the Department of Safety completed a two year study, which he maintains was the intent of the law. He said that SBONH supported a bill to extend the study another year and only turned against speed limits when it failed.

"We came together because we didn't like the way things were being done," Verdonck said. He estimated that SBONH counts around 100 members, most of whom are year round residents of New Hampshire, while others are seasonal residents and regular visitors. He said that "performance boaters," owners of vessels designed and equipped for speed, were a small minority of the membership.

Verdonck claims that SBONH's agenda is not confined to speed limits. "Our mission is 'to promote safe boating through education and effective legislation,''' he said. "We are not a single issue group." He said that SBONH has developed relationship with other organizations and stakeholders with shared interests and has worked closely with lawmakers and state agencies, especially the New Hampshire Department of Safety (DOS).

Apart from the speed limit issue, SBONH has supported legislation to close a loophole in the mandatory boater education law that ensures that no one younger than 12 can operate a motorboat without supervision of a certified adult while enabling 12 to 15-year-olds to become certified to operate vessels of 25 horsepower or less.

Verdonck said that this year the organization requested legislation to enable boaters to tie up to public docks in the event of medical emergencies or inclement weather, which was tabled because lawmakers found it encroached on local control. SBONH also supported a bill to allow boats to be fitted with a device to reduce exhaust noise to levels set by statute. Verdonck said the group plans to request other legislation to improve safety on the water next year. "We intend to pursue safety issues through effective legislation for years to come," he said.

Last year SBONH incurred the wrath of residents of the Barber Pole area of Tuftonboro when it challenged a petition to have the channel designated a "no wake zone." After granting the designation, the DOS reversed its decision when it discovered the petition was invalid. Verdonck insists that SBONH took no position for or against the "no wake zone" but objected to the inadequate notice of the public hearing, which left interested residents unable to attend, and to the flawed petition.

Last week, residents again petitioned DOS for a "no wake zone" at Barber Pole. Verdonck said that SBONH would again remain strictly neutral while acknowledging that "we will inform our membership and individuals may take positions for and against the proposal."

Despite the sharp differences between SBONH and the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABs) over speed limits, Verdonck said that there may be more common ground between the two than first appears. "We both recognize that there are issues, including safety issues, on the lake that need to be managed," he said. "Where we disagree is that we don't believe that excessive speed is the primary, let alone the only issue and that speed limits will solve all the problems."

In particular, Verdonck emphasized the importance of concentrating the limited resources of Marine Patrol on closer enforcement of the so-called "safe passage" or "150-foot rule," which requires boats to slow to headway speed (6 mph.) within 150 feet of shore, docks, moorings, rafts. swimmers and other vessels. "That is the most important problem and boating while intoxicated is the most dangerous," he said.
.

This is just more spin from the SBONH to take the attention off of the real problem on the lake. Thanks for nothing!

I like it where he says: Alluding to widely circulated e-mails, in which he tells of drinking bouts, he claims that "they are jokes and quotes taken completely out of context."

He sure is a big JOKESTER isn't he. Has anyone ever read some of that trash???

lawn psycho 04-19-2011 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 155204)
This is just more spin from the SBONH to take the attention off of the real problem on the lake. Thanks for nothing!

I like it where he says: Alluding to widely circulated e-mails, in which he tells of drinking bouts, he claims that "they are jokes and quotes taken completely out of context."

He sure is a big JOKESTER isn't he. Has anyone ever read some of that trash???

Rusty, please submit every email, every joke, and every derogatory comment you've ever told in your life (written or spoken). When you can prove to me you're clean as a whistle then come back and make these statements..... I'm waiting :sleeping:

Rusty 04-19-2011 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawn psycho (Post 155210)
Rusty, please submit every email, every joke, and every derogatory comment you've ever told in your life (written or spoken). When you can prove to me you're clean as a whistle then come back and make these statements..... I'm waiting :sleeping:

Sorry psycho but I don't have any of that stuff scattered all over the World Wide Web to show you. I have too much respect for myself and my family to do that.

Bear Islander 04-19-2011 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawn psycho (Post 155210)
..... I'm waiting

I'm waiting to see if anybody can name the three fatal accident on Winni in the last 10 years. You guys keep claiming they don't apply to an argument for speed limits. Now I don't think you even know what they are!

If you can't name them, please stop saying they don't apply.

lawn psycho 04-19-2011 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 155222)
I'm waiting to see if anybody can name the three fatal accident on Winni in the last 10 years. You guys keep claiming they don't apply to an argument for speed limits. Now I don't think you even know what they are!

If you can't name them, please stop saying they don't apply.

I do and we've already hashed through this. Edit: How do you want to count the drunk falling overboard on the Mount and what law do you want to pass to stop it?

jrc 04-19-2011 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty (Post 155204)
...

He sure is a big JOKESTER isn't he. Has anyone ever read some of that trash???

No I haven't, please show me this so I can make an informed decision. If you can't show this and back up your arguements, you really shouldn't expect me to take you seriously. Plus you should retract your innuendo.

jrc 04-19-2011 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 155222)
I'm waiting to see if anybody can name the three fatal accident on Winni in the last 10 years. ...

I have a little problem when you say three, obviously Blizzard and Littlefield were convicted of causing a fatal accident, so we have all kinds of data.

But the two fishermen in 2009, the guy who fell off the Mount, the guy who just fell off his hovercraft, the two people who drowned from their boats in 2006, the diver in 2004, which one is number three?

Rusty 04-19-2011 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrc (Post 155224)
No I haven't, please show me this so I can make an informed decision. If you can't show this and back up your arguements, you really shouldn't expect me to take you seriously. Plus you should retract your innuendo.

Not retraction necessary my friend. I never accused anyone of BWI and if you can show me where I have then I'll retract it.

I don't think the audience on this forum wants to see those e-mails and forum comments again that were made by the president of the SBONH.
Please don't push me to post these because I don't really like reading them either.

Thank you

Bear Islander 04-19-2011 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrc (Post 155233)
I have a little problem when you say three, obviously Blizzard and Littlefield were convicted of causing a fatal accident, so we have all kinds of data.

But the two fishermen in 2009, the guy who fell off the Mount, the guy who just fell off his hovercraft, the two people who drowned from their boats in 2006, the diver in 2004, which one is number three?

WOW! You really don't know!

Sorry, the third accident is none of the above.

jarhead0341 04-20-2011 06:33 AM

wow....... back to the mid 70' s alcohol related accident again .... you know the one that we have no official data on how fast the boat was travelling

Rusty 04-20-2011 06:46 AM

Altogether of the 80 people who signed the roll at the House Transportation Committee hearing yesterday, 73 marked themselves opposed to SB-27.

Where has all the support for the Bill gone???? I think the hand writing is on the wall about this Bill!


Below is the article that is in today's LDS:

CONCORD — After nearly six years what can be said for or against speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee has been said and yesterday was said again before the House Transportation Committee during a two-and-a-half hour hearing on Senate Bill 27, which would raise the limit on The Broads to 55 mile per hour.

No stranger to the issue, Rep. Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry), who chairs the committee, opened the hearing by announcing that apart from the bill's sponsors, the 50 people seeking to speak would be limited to two minutes. "Keep it civil," he reminded the overflow crowd, "or I will shut you off." Likewise, directing members of the committee to keep their questions relevant and short, he warned "otherwise I'll shut the committee off. Let's hope we can get through this nicely and quickly," he said.

In 2009 the Legislature set limits of 45 mph. in daylight and 25 mph. after dark for two years but last year, after raising the nighttime limit to 30 mph., made them permanent. This year Safe Boaters of New Hampshire (SBONH), formed in opposition to the speed limits, sought to replace them with a standard of "reasonable and prudent," but, at the urging of lawmakers agreed to a bill that would maintain the limits while exempting The Broads, which would be designated a 55 mph. zone.

Last month SB-27 carried the Senate by the narrowest of margins —13 to 11. Senators Jeanie Forrester (R-Meredith) and Jeb Bradley (R) Wolfeboro voted against changing the current law while Jim Forsythe (R-Strafford), the third senator representing the Lakes Region, voted for the bill.

"Good things always happen in Holy Week," Senator Lou D'Allesandro (D-Manchester), who introduced SB-27, told the committee. He said that the bill kept the speed limits in place except for "a specified area — The Broads. That is the only change." When Representative Lisa Sontsas (R-Nashua) alluded to highway driving and whether a posted limit of 55 mph. amounted to a practical limit of 65 mph., D'Allesandro simply read from the bill.

Speaking against the bill, Forrester recalled that she, together with her parents and brother, was the victim of a boating accident on Lake Huron caused by excessive speed that left her mother and brother with lasting injuries. Moreover, she said that e-mails and letters from individuals and businesses, especially those in the hospitality industry around the lake, were running three-to-one in opposition to any change to the speed limits.

Forrester was echoed by representatives from the Lakes Region, including Alida Millham (R-Gilford), Harry Accornero (R-Laconia) , Elaine Swinford (R-Barnstead), Bob Luther (R-Laconia) and Bill Tobin (R-Sanbornton) also spoke against increasing the speed limit on The Broads.

Jeff Thurston of Thurston's Marina at The Weirs emphasized that "uniformity is important," urging the committee not to "create a zone of frenzied activity," which he cautioned would further stretch the scarce resources of Marine Patrol. He said that exempting The Broads from the 45 mph. speed limit would be "impractical and not enhance safety."

Dick Bouley, a lobbyist representing the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABS), the organization that from the beginning has led the effort to curb speed on the lake, told the committee that he was "disturbed" that the bill was originally assigned to the Resources, Recreation and Development Committee, which includes three members from the Lakes Region, was referred to the Transportation Committee, where the region is unrepresented. He urged the committee members to pay special attention to lawmakers and residents of the Lakes Region.

Altogether of the 80 people who signed the roll at the hearing, 73 marked themselves opposed to SB-27.

The bill drew its strongest support from SBONH, who have consistently challenged the need for speed limits, frequently citing David Barrett, the director of Marine Patrol, who has said more than once that speed is not a problem on the lake. Likewise, the organization has consistently argued that there is no statistical evidence to support the claims of WinnFABS that excessive speeds have increased the risks of boating on Lake Winnipesaukee.

Scott Verdonck, president of SBONH, insisted that SB-27 represents a compromise by maintaining speed limits on the most heavily travelled parts of the lake while raising the daytime limit just 10 mph. on The Broads where there are no islands and little traffic.

Dick Smith, conservation director of the New Hampshire Bass Federation, said his group saw no need for speed limits, but "reluctantly supported SB-27." He explained that bass fisherman pilot fast boats, designed to get them from one fishing spot to another in the least time to allow the maximum time for fishing. Questioning the wisdom of speed limits, he said that at some times 45 mph. is too fast and at others it is too slow.

Ultimately, said Smith the debate has dragged on for far too too long. "Let's put this to bed," he told the committee. "Let's stop it and let's go fishing."
.

jrc 04-20-2011 07:23 AM

Bear Islander, in a few weeks I have a milestone birthday, so I'm old and forgetful, let me off the hook and tell me what fatal boating accident in the last decade you are talking about. My point was that there were a lot more than three, and speed had nothing to do with the majority of them.

Rusty, sorry I made the mistake of thinking that you were a normal person that just got a little overzealous and neglected the unwritten rules that you need to back up what you say and the rules that say, I wouldn't want my name smeared with rumors and innuendo, so I won't smear others.

lawn psycho 04-20-2011 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander (Post 155250)
WOW! You really don't know!

Sorry, the third accident is none of the above.

So explain to me why 45 MPH is justified over any other speed as a numerical limit?

We've been over this before. Do you REALLY believe a speed limit would have made even the slightest difference in these case? In the Blizzard case even if MP was correct in their numbers we're talking a different of maybe 2-5 MPH. If you want to split hairs then fine but it won't help your argument.

With most boats doing well under the speed limit (even before the SL was slammed through) and a limited number of MP officers (they can't be everywhere) I personally think the SL is a waste of time as an enforcement tool. A lot of effort with little results.

You have wanted to and support restricting all sorts of activities of boaters on Winni. Rafting, overnight anchoring, speed, horsepower, etc. I'm not being a wise arse but why did you buy a lake front property? It's not like people are beaching there boats on your property and lighting a bon-fire for a party.

I just don't understand why people get so wound up about boating activities on a lake. I hope you weren't suprised after moving onto BI that boats would be going by. When I read your posts you make it seem as if every boater out there to cause trouble and infringing on your minute little world.

Is it really that big a deal that someone with a nice Cobalt can easily cruise along at 55 MPH going from Center Harbor to Wolfboro to meet some friends or over to Meredith to walk around or to the Weirs to waste a few quarters playing Galaga in the arcade? Heaven forbid they head over to a nice sandbar and drop anchor and get 149.9999 feet from shore as they might just be having too much of a good time! 150 ft and they're OK.

When I read editorials like Bill's it is clear to me that he's gotten to a win-lose stance rather than sticking to what's important.

Regardless of what we type here on the forum I suspect that most legislators already have their minds made up on how they'll vote. I hope the 55 MPH limit passes (still too low) because even my middle of the road Four Winns can do 45 MPH on calm days in comfort and nobody feels like it's being driven by Mario Andretti. When everyday boats like mine start getting restricted like this you should not be suprised at the back-lash. Your side has benefitted the most by misinformation as if I took every legislator out on a boat at 45 MPH they would quickly realize it's not that fast, not by a long shot.

Instead of going for the red herring arguments why don't you and the WinnFlabs consortium start putting perspective into the discussion?

Red Herring Example1: Has the lake been overrun by fast boats for the last 40 years as Bill asserts? I think not.

Red Herring Example2: How many campers have been run over by fast boats? Zero! But yet and others have thrown that into the mix for the soundbite. Let us not forget most camps operate during the week when the lake is practically a ghost town.

You can bet if the 45 MPH sticks that this issue isn't going away. WinnFlabs is not working towards safety and their arguments are deceptive to anyone who supports there SL efforts.

SBONH has promoted safety inspections. Ask MP and they will tell you boats are out there without adequate equipment.

SBONH worked to help reduce the noise issue which I think is the elephant in the room for many of the SL supported but they won't admit it. So now maybe you can refer to the boats as GFBQ, eh? Personally, I find the guy who comes into the sandbar as Johnny come lately with his mega bass speakers for the whole area to hear as more of a PITA nuisance than a boat going by.

SBONH supports the 150 ft rule and supports increased BUI enforcement.

Those are things that really impact the quality and safety of the lake. We should all be happy for that. A speed limit will do nothing for the lake IMO.

I for one will be the wacky guy who waves to all my fellow boaters (even you and Rusty). I would like to see more comraderie out on the lake.

In fact, I am hoping we can find a nice spot and have a nice big Winni.com raft-up sometime later this year. I'll even tip my homemade lemonade an/or sun tea to ya'!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:39 PM.

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