My comments withdrawn, I wasting my time in this thread

For once I must agree with you!

This thread is about test zones. And as Mike61965 has pointed so eloquently, they are a joke!

I declare victory!




Mike - The LRGH can get that bullet out of your foot.

Does Islander have any realtives in Vermont?
 

Boy did I get a good chuckle out of that line! :laugh:

Many years ago when it had become apparent to all (but a handful) that the war in Vietnam had been lost, a then Republican Senator from Vermont named George Aiken advised Lyndon Johnson and subsequently Richard Nixon to retreat by boldly stating "declare victory, and then get out".

You aren't related to the good Senator by any chance? :confused: :D

Islander wrote:
Mr. President! I thought it was your father that owned the boat! :D

I'm sorry to say I am not. It sounds like he gave great advice!

See you at ForumFest!

Can't wait!
 

You're the main reason I'll be there! ;)

I wish I could make the Forum Fest. I would volunteer a ride for Islander , from whatever island she's on to Wolfeboro. Only stipulation is I cover the speedo and GPS.
I think she might be surprized;)

Good point. I don't think we need the 150 foot law between power boats. It's a good idea regarding swim lines, the shore, docks, etc. but rather silly when it comes to power boats passing power boats. I would not attempt to vote it out though, the courtesy of it makes the lake nicer, we just don't "need" it.

DaveR, you are right on with the 150' rule. The funny thing is the people I was scared to have within 150' of me last year either don't know there is a rule this year or have chosen to ignore it!

See you on the lake!

Agreed. The law is OK, but often it provides a rule of courtesy more than addressing a safety issue. It can increase safety risk too. Forcing similar sized boats to come off wake and back on again creates more wake for kayaks and canoes, increasing the chances they will be swamped - even 150 feet away. But, with the hypersensitive attitude on the lake these days, its best to keep your distance.

I have a test zone detector.

This summer I noticed my depth finder alarm going off in deep water. Then I discovered it was the Marine Patrol's radar that was setting off the alarm on the depth finder. I checked it out on a test zone last week. He points the gun at my boat, the alarm sounds.

This test zone data may give them information on how to use radar on the water but I don't see it makes a difference to the speed limit debate. I don't see that numbers change the central argument.

The age when children are required to wear a PFD changed from 5 to 12. I assume this was done because the legislature felt 12 was a more appropriate age than 5. How many 5 to 12 year olds were already wearing PFD's doesn't change the argument much. The issue was setting an appropriate standard. I hope the legislature does that again when they consider speed limits.

You've followed the first part of the advice, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE follow the last part.:D

Shall I also stay away from ForumFest?

Asking someone to leave the forum is inappropriate. Even if you put a smiley face at the end.

Sadly, I imagine there's plenty of "accidental drowning while swimming from a boat" data in the 5-12 year old range in NH. Assuming the data exists, and my gut says it does (just watch the news), I doubt that voting for a higher PFD age was a tough decision to make.

It's the utter lack of high-speed boat accident data in NH that makes the speed limit argument so tough for me to back. If there was a problem, I'd be for better enforcement of exsisting laws, and maybe a speed limit if it could really be enforced. In my opinion, the proposed speed limit is a "solution" in search of a problem.

That said, If the MP can't find any boats going at high speeds when it's perfectly legal to do so, what makes you think they'll be able to when it's illegal? Maybe the folks who said handheld radar would not work adequately on water were indeed right... I always figured it was just an excuse, but maybe not.

If you get your way, we will have a useless law and could very well have no reasonable way to enforce it in all but the most blatent instances. It would be like current speed limits on back roads and sport motorcycles. The smart police don't even bother to try to enforce them, because they know they have almost no chance of ever keeping up with a moderately well-ridden sport bike, they just radio ahead and hope for some good luck. The dumb police crash trying to keep up. The reality is, if you have the skills and wish to ride really fast on a sport bike, you can pretty much do so at will on back roads.

Seems to me, that if you have a boat that goes really fast, you can do so at will in the right areas, without any chance of getting caught. That's how it works in MA, where they've had speed limts for years and GFBL boats traveling at well over 45 MPH are quite common. I bet Lake George is the same way...

You may think a speed limit will rid the state of fast boats, it won't. Go to any decent-sized body of water in MA if you don't believe me. Even the smaller lakes have stupendously fast bass boats.

Honestly , I don't care what you do. Once again you twist and misconstrue, it's your trademark. Trust me, if I wanted you to leave I would have no problem saying it to you in words even you wouldn't be able to misunderstand. Here's another smiley face for you.:D

Just in case you forgot as you steer us down this road, there is no need for a speed limit, you have no case so your side had to resort to hiring a professional entity to try to make a case. The tests, requested by your side at a Meredith meeting showed that there is not a speed problem on the lake. A speed limit will take valuable resources now dedicated to safety enforcement and relegate those resources to sitting in a hiding spot trying to find the miniscule percentage of boaters that boat over 45 mph. Meanwhile, should you be successful, I predict that the death rate on the lake, which is very low, will actually increase, because of the diversion of MP from meaningful tasks. All of this because you want to turn Lake Winni into some "On Golden Pond" image that exists in your imagination. There are several scenes in that movie of an old "speedboat" that I'm sure had they been filmed in front of your place you would have sworn they were going 90 mph.

So, do I want you to go away, no, do I want your agenda to go away, absolutely. :D :D :D :D

Dave R - You make some good points. But what makes me believe in speed limits is reports from other lakes that have enacted them.

You bring up Lake George. Lt Sneider runs the Marine Patrol there and thinks speed limits have helped their lake. Here is a link to a citizen article on Lake George.

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...073/-1/CITIZEN

I know Winnipesaukee is not Lake George, but if it can help there, it can help here. At least that is the way I see it.

I have friends that boat on lake George. They tell me that they can go whatever speed they want and that the speed limit law is unenforceable. Unless you are going 80 mph 100 feet from shore, blatantly breaking the law, you will not be bothered.

Another point
 

It may be true that the GFBL crowd may not want speed limits. But I don't have a GFBL boat. Unless you want to call a Mastercraft ski boat a GFBL boat. If that is the case, we have outlawed the Abenaki ski club!
My point is, why 45 mph? There are a number of barefoot skiers that will tell you that they can't ski comfortably at 45. I can ski comfortably at 52 mph. You are not only 'discriminating' the GFBL crowd, you are discriminating the barefooot skiers! I will be happy to support a 55 mph limit, but I am totally against 45.
Now that Islander has mentioned an agenda against most boats by imposing a horsepower limit as well as a boat length limit. I can see where a lot of people that can not go that fast is coming from. We need to prevent the speed limits people from gaining an inch. I can see we are up to a lot of discrimination against boaters when they go the mile.
Islander, you can't tell me what 'discrimination' is. I've been profound hard-of-hearing since birth. Believe me! I know what discrimination is!
'Don't tread on me!'

Lake George - All talk, no action
 

The following link is to the Lake George Park commission 2006 Annual report.
http://www.lgpc.state.ny.us/pdf/2006...l%20Report.pdf

The report states at least a couple of speed related items.
There was a poker run in October 2006 and 6 boats were running side by side in excess of 70 MPH, the fastest at 83 MPH. These people were ticketed (5 tickets). There is no further breakdown for non PWC speeding tickets (nor were any mention in last years report).

PWC tickets are broken down into categories. For 2005 and 2006 NO PWC speeding tickets were issued for speeds in excess of 45 MPH. All PWC speed tickets were for no wake speed violations. The previous report also showed no PWC fast speeding tickets issued for 2004 either. No PWC has been been ticketed for over 45 MPH for the past 3 years.

In other statements I have seen online, patrol personnel have stated that they focus on noise more than speed and that speed enforcement is NOT a primary focus.

From a previous forum post:
WeirsBeachBoater01-07-2006, 05:32 PM
From: Lt. Joseph Schneider
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: Info request
The speed limit on LG is only one regulation of a comprehensive set of regulations passed in 1988 on Lake George when the NYS Legislature recognized the need for additional protection of the unique resource that is Lake George. LGPC regulations were promulgated regarding public safety, resource protection, docks and moorings, and special navigation issues such as overcrowding, vessel noise, PWC operation, and more; as such it is impossible to say what the effect of just the speed limit has been.
Lt. J.H. Schneider
Director of Law Enforcement
Lake George Park Commission
PO Box 749
Lake George, NY 12834

So the head of the patrol stated that he thinks speed limits have helped. What is he supposed to say "Well. we ticket people in no wake zones but in the middle of the lake it's a free-for-all and we don't pay much attention there"? If speeding was a focus they would publish the non PWC speeding ticket statistics. They probably don't for a good reason and their public statements played down speed enforcement until 6 BOZOS were so blatant that they couldn't possibly be ignored. They would have probably been ticketed on Winnipesaukee for reckless behavior.

People wanted to feel better about the safety of Lake George. The head of the Marine Patrol is telling them they are safer. This is a public official saying he is doing a good job by telling the people what they want to hear. The observable facts and anecdotal evidence of boaters on Lake George tell a very different story of lax enforcement of the 45 MPH limit. If Lake George is safer, it isn't because of speed limit enforcement.

pm203 and jeffk

If there are reports that the speed limit on Lake George is not working I would like to read them. I try and keep an open mind, but the only things I know about the Lake George speed limit are positive. If there is another side to the story then it should be told.

But neither of you have provided anything solid. "A friend told me" is not good enough in my book. Are there articles, web sites, letters to the editor etc..

1993 SeaDoo GTS. top speed a whopping 37MPH. For sale by the way for $1500.....

1996,97,97 SeaDoo GTI top speed about 45MPH....

1997 SeaDoo GS 45MPH tops....

Lake George does not have a safe passage law now and not before there speed limit. Of course it changes the opinion of Sneider. But remember two boats can have a closure rate of 90 mph within a few feet today. Right now in NH the closure rate is 12mph.

Do you really feel safer on Lake George?

I have to agree here on the lack of safe passage. I feel safer having a boat doing 80mph that is by law to be 150+ feet away than having a 40mph boat passing me down the side at 30-40 feet away. The 80mph boat has less response time to react in an adverse situation than a 40mph boat, but if the 40mph boat is that much closer than the 150' limit in place here the reaction time is cut as well. Taking into account closing speeds of two boats each doing 40mph and headed towards each other the result could still be catastrophic.

Please reread my post
 

I provide a link to the Marine Patrols report. This is hardly hearsay information. Further I provide a copy of an email provided to a forum member, also hard data. I could have provided a link to the comments of the marine patrol I found online but I figured my vouching for it was enough. I should have known better. The last third of my post is my summation and interpretation of the facts. Feel free to disagree with me. But don't try to dismiss hard information simply because it disagrees with your point of view.

The statement that the Marine Patrol focus more on noise than speed does not mean that speed limits are not working. It may mean that speed is not a problem therefore does not require enforcement.

I don't find anything in the Report that indicated to me that speed limits are not working. What specifically indicates a problem with speed limits.

Lt Schneider admits he can not tell how much of their success is due to speed limits alone. That is a long long way from saying speed limits are not working.

But it's ok for you to try to get rid of performance boats:rolleye1:

"Showboating", using your described method, is breaking another of NH's boating rules. "Maximizing Air" is illegal on Lake Winnipesaukee. Also, it is impossible to "Showboat" at reasonable speeds. The broken back and pelvis couldn't have happened at reasonable speeds either.

The wave did cause him to be stopped "almost dead". But the video shows that he continued to swerve directly into the path of two similar boats approaching at a high rate of speed. They both swerved to avoid colliding with him, but also came close to colliding with each other, as the video shows. If he had stopped "dead", instead of "almost dead", the passenger's injuries could have been compounded by collisions with the other two boats. The injuries were severe enough without involving other speedboats in a juvenile quest for "Maximum Air".

Max air?
 

"Maximizing air" is illegal? And only on Winni?
Interesting...I never knew that.

It's not in the report, per se, but since the real goal of speed limits is to rid a lake of high speed boats, it's obviously failed when folks hold poker runs there. What convinced you that Winnipesaukee will be different?

Islander, Why don't you push on areas that really need to be addressed. You would get a lot more cooperation and your agenda could be met without stepping on anyone else. Here are a few suggestions.

Try coming up with a plan to quiet down the boats that are way above the legal limit? You already have a law to work with. I see and hear lots of boats that have to be over the NH law. Just enforce the law!!! This one should be easy.

Try taking you energy and put it in to education. Focus the efforts of Winnfabs to educate the 50 bass boaters before they all take off from lee's mill at 60mph ALL AT ONCE!!

Try to lobby for better enforcement of the 150 rule. Not just more marine patrol but actually having them look for unsafe boating activity instead of sitting in the usual spots..

Separate the night speed issue from the day speed issue. Don't tell me I need a day speed limit because of an accident at night. They are two different issues.

If you really want safety then the above suggestions will help you get there.

That's because Poker Runs are not speed events. The publisher of "Poker Runs America" says so himself:

Funny, I don't recall seeing a law about jumping waves... Can you point that one out? You can launch a boat off a wave and not be doing it in a reckless manner. heck, I have had a 22' bowrider completely out of the water as I am sure many have on Winni being caught by a large wave on a bad day in the broads. If this has not happend to you then you do not boat enough...

They were showing off for the camera and got caught by the wrong wave. Yep, he was pushing the envelope and paid the price as did his pasengers.

After rewatching the video twice I see nothing that show other boats swerving to avoid a collision. As the boat wiped out the do not show any other boats in the video so how can you claim that they almost hit other boats? I think you are completely embellishing this.

How many of these rules did the boat in the video break? Of course these rules only apply in NH.

Saf-C 404.12 Operational Rules for Crossing Boat Wakes and Conduct Near Other Vessels.
(a) No boat operator shall allow his or her boat to cross the wake of another boat, or cross its own wake, in a way that causes the vessel to become airborne. For the purposes of this section, "airborne" means that the boat's hull completely leaves the water.
(b) An operator shall slow to headway speed when crossing the wake of another vessel when within 150 feet of another vessel.
(c) No boat operator shall operate his/her vessel in a manner that is unsafe, including the following types of conduct:
(1) Challenging other boaters by heading directly at a vessel and then swerving at the last minute to avoid collision;
(2) Weaving through congested boat traffic at greater than headway speed;
(3) Operating while his/her vision is obstructed; and
(4) Other types of operation that are intended to create erratic operational patterns so that other boaters cannot determine the course or heading of the vessel.

My goal is to try and change the direction the lake is going in. I would like the lake to be for the peaceful enjoyment of all. Not the enjoyment of a few at the expense of many. I think the are limits to size and speed that need to be set. I would like this to be done in a way that does not punish the boats that are already here.

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

On another site one of the boaters in that poker run said he had to go to court and pay a $250 fine. I hope that is exactly how a speed limit will work on Winnipesaukee.

At the time of the accident he was not crossing another wake, it was a wave that made him go airborne. When he did cross a boat wake he never left the water. He did cross the wake of a boat at less than 150', I am not sure what the FL ruling is on safe passage.

"And the truth shall set you free"
 

"I think the are limits to size and speed that need to be set."

Finally someone admits to Winnfabs true agenda. So its not about speed, its now about size and speed!!!!!



"I would like this to be done in a way that does not punish the boats that are already here."

So why are you pushing to get speed limits?

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



300 hp???? You have got to be kidding me. That is most boats over 20ft nowadays.

So if I want to stay on "your" lake I should invest in a canoe?

So much for my enjoyment, because of the few of you that don't agree with my style of boat. Isn't that exactly what you are preaching? That a few powerboats ruin your enjoyment. Now you are trying to say its ok, for the few of you to ruin the powerboaters enjoyment, as long as it is in your favor????

You are right, there doesn't seem to be a specific rule to address jumping waves, just jumping wakes. I did not catch the difference.

I didn't watch the video closely enough to notice that the accident was cause by a natural ocean wave versus a boat wake. I guess it is safer to run those boats on a lake.

I am not WinnFABS, I am just giving my own opinion.

I don't know the kind of boat you have, but I doubt it was manufactured after 2008.

I think 300 hp is a reasonable limit on a municipal drinking water supply, and crowded recreational lake. You obviously disagree.

I do disagree
 

It is a 25ft bowrider. Might do 55 on a good day.

Municipal Drinking water supply, is that the new angle that is going to be used next?

Sorry to assume you were a member of Winnfabs, guilty by association I guess.