LP,

That was a very well written post. Thank you!

I will also be a wacky guy who waves to all my fellow boaters (including you LP). :)

Every lake and river in Massachusetts has a 45-mph speed limit for motorboats. It's a state wide law! That alone makes it a good reason for New Hampshire to do the same thing!

The State of Montana used to have no speed limit on their interstate highways, but not anymore. They now have a posted speed limit just like all the other states. The problem with no speed limits in Montana was that people would drive their cars there just to open them up, driving as fast as they could go, just for the experience or the fun of it, or some non-reason called "the need for speed."

Going 45-mph in a boat is hardly a slow speed. 45-mph is very fast for most all boats and if this 55-mph speed limit gets passed through the House for some whacko-fruitloop manipulation coming from "leadership" reason then you can bet your go-fast that Governor Lynch will be right there with a fast VETO on it! You can expect to see Gov Lynch's VETO coming right at you at about 107-mph.......zoom.....roooarrrr.....budda, budda, bing!

Way-to-go.......Gov Lynch.......one fast veto (anticipated in advance)!

At yesterday's State House hearing chaired by Rep Sherman Packard, 73 out of the 80 people who signed the hearing roll indicated they were opposed to SB-27 and the proposed increase from 45 to 55-mph. (Today's LaDaSun SB-27 article)
..........

"Boating activist has need for speed;" today's April 20 www.cmonitor.com front page article.....Monitor articles are almost always much lengthier than the U.L. and have follow up email comments, too.

Another clear, concise letter to the editor of today's Laconia Daily Sun. Someone else who sees through Mr. Berthold's & WinnFABS continuous avoidance of the real issues. Thank you Mr. Stewart (Now please go register to vote because Mr. Berthold and WinnFABS will be checking on you for sure).

http://www.laconiadailysun.com/story/terry-stewart-4-19

It's reasonable to allow for higher speeds on largest part of lake
Apr 20, 2011 12:00 am
To the editor, It’s very unfortunate that the fuddy duddies are still harping about the boating speed limit and wasting the valuable time of our state’s leadership. Given the more pressing problems we are facing I’d really prefer my representatives to keep their eye on th...
To the editor,

It’s very unfortunate that the fuddy duddies are still harping about the boating speed limit and wasting the valuable time of our state’s leadership. Given the more pressing problems we are facing I’d really prefer my representatives to keep their eye on the budget problems. I believe representative Forsythe used common sense in concluding that if we have faster speed limits on I-93 then we do on Rt.106, then it’s reasonable to have a faster speed limit in the Broads of Lake Winnipesaukee.

Of course, common sense doesn’t seem to matter to the WinnFABS crowd. WinnFABS local mouth piece, Mr. Bertholdt, has a lot of nerve accusing anyone of making misleading statements after some of the whoppers he’s been spouting. Most, if not all of his data, comes from waterways other than New Hampshire. Much of it is Coast Guard data encompassing every other body of water in the U.S., including our oceans. The problem for the WinnFABS folks is that the facts simply don’t support their rhetoric. The fact is that 90-percent of our lake’s boating fatalities occurred on boats that weren’t even moving and most of the others were alcohol related. I do agree with his statements on more rigid requirements on boater education, however that has little to do with speed limits.

Apparently Mr. Bertholdt hasn’t listened to one of his own lengthy tomes lately. He often refers to his opposition as “spoiled brats” and the “go fast make noise crowd”. You see it’s not about safety; it’s really about “those people”. Seriously, who would suggest canoeing in the middle of the Broads as a “safe” activity? Even with zero boats on the lake that would be dangerous on most days. As far as noise is concerned; thanks to WinnFABS efforts, we all get to listen to those loud boats go by slowly and for a much longer period of time. Life was clearly better when the noise simply went by quickly.

If we must have a speed limit, which we really don’t, then there isn’t any reason why it can’t be reasonable in the sense that it allows for higher speeds in the largest part of the lake that provides plenty of reaction time. The proposed 55 MPH daytime limit isn’t outrageous. Many of the “right kind” of people that Mr. Berthold would approve of own leisure craft and wave runners that are safely driven at that speed. Safety as whole won’t be effected by the speed limit change because it was never a factor to begin with. Can’t we all just get along and live with this change and move on with our lives?

Terry Stewart

Gilford

That's awesome! My boat is on the front page. Four Winns should give me some royalty money for getting their brand out there.

[QUOTE=fatlazyless;155268]Every lake and river in Massachusetts has a 45-mph speed limit for motorboats. It's a state wide law! That alone makes it a good reason for New Hampshire to do the same thing!

That is the dumbest reason for a speedlimit I have ever heard. If Massachusetts jumps of a bridge are you going to?

You are all for camaraderie, getting all sides together, and enjoying the lake with lemonade. Yet you still insist on using and insulting misnomer when referring to WinnFABS.

I disagree with much of your post, but one paragraph is so nuts I just have to call you on it.

Do you really think most camps on the lake are closed on weekends? The truth is they just look closed because they will not send out their sailboats, kayaks and canoes onto a weekend cowboy filled lake.

It is unfortunate that when people take their "nice Cobalt can easily cruise along at 55 MPH going from Center Harbor to Wolfboro" they have no idea how many thousands of children are being kept off the lake so you can have a nice ride.

THAT is the truth of the situation. Thousands inconvenienced so that dozens can go fast. But you are going by so fast, you can't see, or even imagine what you are doing.

Let's not forget now about the unlicensed rental boaters. They, of course, never go near campers, kayaks and canoes and never cause a safety hazard.:laugh: Oh yeah, and according to Mr. Berthold, they only want to rent for an hour or so and don't want to keep their families waiting while they take an actual boater education class. How many marinas on this lake offer a 1-hour boat rental? Answer: Probably none. I believe you'll find that it's either a 1/2 day or full day minimum rental, so again, Mr. Berthold's lies and mistruths come right to the head of the class.

Thousands of children? Are you guys compulsive exaggerators?

See you out on the lake;)

And somehow the lake fills with thousands of children when boats pass by at 45 MPH? :rolleye2:

I've stayed out of this battle for a while, it is time to put my 2 cents in.

Is 55mph in the Broads vs 45mph really that different? That does not allow for speeders to be blasting by Lawrence or Nokomis endangering children. Some of the articles I have read make the proposed change sound like the 10mph increase spells the end of people's safety on the lake which simply isn't true. Chances are you probably won't even notice a difference. I can't imagine every fast boat in the northeast is going to converge on the 9.5 mile long "speed zone" to get a few extra mph in. If the limit was 20-30mph faster maybe...

I don't have a dog in this fight. My jet ski is quite fast but my fastest boat will only do 55mph and I doubt that MP is going to give me a second glance if I am doing 50-55mph in a pontoon vs 45mph. I could truly care less one way or the other if it passes or not as I am not affected. Does that mean I will intentionally push the limit? No.

Hats off to Winnfabs for their aggressive fight on this, but the truth behind this is that they are exaggerating the truth and have been for some time.

When you say "cowboy filled lake" do you mean that it is very busy and congested on weekends with all sorts of watercraft on the lake? Thought so! :rolleye2:

Thank you for once again displaying how out of touch you people are.

Bear Island alone has two camps with 4 two week (including Saturdays and Sundays) sessions of 300 campers. That is 1,200 campers just on one island.


I'm still waiting to hear about the third fatal accident in the last ten years.

fixed it for you

Could it possibly be the under aged ladd that took out his parents waverunner without their permission and crashed it?

No thank you for showing how much you distort facts. You said, "thousands of children are being kept off the lake."

The camps have sent kids out on the water before the speed limit. And how many were run over? And let's untwist the distortion. There are never thousands of kids standing on the beach with kayak in hand sighing because boats are keeping them off the water. It's simply not true and you know it.

In fact, any camp that put all 300 kids out in boats on the water I would question the ability to properly supervise that many kids.

RED HERRING

BI...

So essentially your saying that during an 8 week summer session, there are 300 children at any given time on Bear Island? and of these kids how many are actually old enough to venture onto the water unsupervised? Not exactly thousands....

Lets talk some facts.... the lake is very very quiet during the week. The camps can effectively and safely run thier watersport programs during the week. The ONLY time those children may be inconvenienced is on saturdays... thats the day EVERYONE boats. Saturdays are the busiest days on the lake by far. A few sundays qualify on the holiday weekends. So why not schedule the water fun then? Whats so hard about that?

The Camp/Childrens freedoms do not trump anyone elses freedoms.... There has never been ANY accident involving a child at camp and a hi speed (< current limits) boat EVER! Not 1 accident!!! I think there is plenty of room on this lake to share with everyone!

Woodsy

Woodsy, it's some of those same kids who are out on the water doing 65+ on waverunners and skiing behind Nautiques's but of course that doesn't matter to BI either.

Maybe the clues lie here?
 

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...read.php?t=720

Interesting how APS (then Madrashas) thought the lake problems were caused by boat waves back in 2004. They all got tired of beating that dead horse so they had to start on something else - speed limits. :yawn::yawn::yawn:

Huh??? What are you talking about?

Woodsy

If unsupervised means no counselors actually in the boat, then nearly 100% of campers go out on the lake "unsupervised" at some point. A sailboat or war canoe might have two older (about 14 year old), campers and two younger (about 7 year old) campers.

Everyday is pretty much the same at camp. Usually two activity periods in the morning, two in the afternoon and perhaps one in the evening. Activities are rotated so if 15 campers can do sailing in one period then 75 can be in sailboats in a day. The same is true for kayaks, canoes, and water skiing. Therefore you could theoretically have 75 x 4 = 300 campers on the lake in one day. Each camp on Bear has only 150 campers each so on a really good day you could average 2 boat experiences, per camper, per day.

In reality there is a good chance you will lose 2 days or more of boating a week because of rain, high winds or it being session swap day. Add 2 days for the weekend cowboys and you might only be able to put boats out on the lake 3 out of 7 days in a week.

Can camps double up on off water activities on weekends? Yes, they do it all the time. Is that fair and reasonable? No, it's not! Are most boaters oblivious to the damage they are doing to the programming in children's camps? Yes, they are!

And how many days out of the summer do I actually get to boat after paying THOUSANDS of dollars in slip, hotels, maintenance, and restaurants?

Us nasty cowboys that have a boat that can do 50 MPH are just ruining it for everybody. Yeah right.

Get a grip BI

I don't undertstand how raising the speed limit to 55 on the Broads affects kids going to camp on Bear Island. With the 45 MPH daytime speed limit, there's obviously nothing to limit to on-water activities right now. If the speed limit gets raised in the Broads, nothing changes for Bear Island camps, it's still 45 MPH near the camps.

You are correct. I am not opposed to 55 mph on the broads. It seems to be a very reasonable compromise.

The central argument is speed limits vs no limits.

Are you saying that if 55 in the broads passes you will then be perfectly happy with speed limits?

I think 55 is a little slow for an area that's 15 square miles open water, but it's better than 45 and a step in the right direction. I was perfectly happy without daytime limits, but I think 45 around areas like Bear Island is reasonable and prudent.

Yesterday's April 20 Laconia Citizen, which is now only available to read when you buy it for 50-cents at a news stand and not on the internet anymore, had a headline article on the SB-27 hearing at the statehouse. The Concord Monitor, Laconia Daily Sun, and the Laconia Citizen all had news stories on it. The Union Leader, which is the biggest newspaper in the state, did not cover it.

The article in the Citizen suggests that the tide of legislative opinion in the 400-seat House of Representatives could be turning, and that it well could be that SB-27 will be voted NO by a majority of the state reps.

Of the 80 different people who attended the hearing as visitors to the statehouse, which included "camp directors, the Loon Preservation Society, business owners, the N.H. Lakes Association, and regular voters": 73 signed the roll as being against SB-27, which raises the speed limit in the broads from 45-mph up to 55-mph, and only 7 were in favor. That's a ratio of ten to one!

Could be that Gov Lynch and his veto stamp may not be needed? Time will tell?

You are right "fatlazyless", the tide is changing in a big way.

The Republican State Representative D. J. Bettencourt, the House majority leader, has just put this thing to bed. He is against SB-27.


This is what the Citizen article said:

Boat speed limit supporters buoyed by hearing
Posted: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 6:00 am

Boat speed limit supporters buoyed by hearing By JOHN KOZIOL jkoziol@citizen.com citizen.com | 0 comments

CONCORD — Based on his and others' testimony, including a number of Lakes Region lawmakers, Warren Hutchins is optimistic that a bill to raise the daytime speed limit in The Broads on Lake Winnipesaukee will not succeed.

Senate Bill 27, which squeaked out of the Senate on a 13-11 vote, was the subject of four hours of hearings Tuesday before the House of Representative's Transportation Committee which will vote on the item sometime next month.

In addition to what he said appeared to be the committee's receptivity to the pro-speed limits argument, Hutchins, who is a Laconia resident and a member of WinnFABS — the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety — also has an e-mail pledge from state Rep. D.J. Bettencourt, the House Republican leader, to oppose SB27.

SB27 represents a compromise presented by the Safe Boaters of New Hampshire, which has faced off against WinnFABS since 2006, that would have eliminated numeric speed limits on the Big Lake entirely, instead letting Marine Patrol officers determine whether a boat was traveling too fast for current conditions.

Having prevailed in getting the Legislature in 2009 to adopt a 45-mile-per-hour daytime limit and 25 mph nighttime limit on Lake Winnipesaukee, WinnFABS and its supporters were upset when the N.H. General Court last year raised the nighttime limit to 30 mph. When SB27 was introduced earlier this year, WinnFABS lined up against it and later against the compromise proposed by SBONH that would raise the daytime limit to 50 mph, but only in The Broads.

Last week, both WinnFABS and SBONH released studies that they said bolstered their respective positions. On Tuesday, Hutchins said he reiterated some of the points in his group's research which he noted found overwhelming support for speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee.

By his math, Hutchins thinks speed limit supporters outnumbered opponents by a factor of 10:1 on Tuesday, based on the number of people who noted their preference in writing to the committee; while in direct testimony, "and I try not to be prejudiced, but I believe it was close to 85 percent of speakers who wanted to leave the 45-25 as it is."

Among the speakers on behalf of the speed limits were Jeff Thurston of Thurston Marine in Laconia, as well as state representatives Alida Millham, R-Gilford, chair of the Belknap County Delegation, as well as Peter Bolster, R-Alton; and Harry Accornero and Bob Luther, both of whom are Republicans from Laconia.

Hutchins presented letters from both the Laconia City Council and the executive board of the Lakes Region Planning Commission supporting current speed limits.

A member of the Laconia Planning Board, Hutchins also pointed out that, of the 1,500 approved residential units in Laconia, 85 percent are in The Weirs "and the reason for that is the lake."

"We need buyers who want to come buy these properties," said Hutchins, and the buyers will come, he continued, if they know they will have safe access to the lake.

Hutchins said he called members' attention to the fact that the transportation committee has no one from the Lakes Region serving on it and said the committee needs to question the credibility of those who come before it to speak on behalf of SB27.

"I feel very confident" that SB27 will not get out of the committee to the full House, said Hutchins. "I felt that the committee members were paying attention and could discern credible evidence."

He added that he was further encouraged by a reply he received to an e-mail he sent to Bettencourt.

In his April 10 answer, a copy of which Hutchins provided to The Citizen, Bettencourt concedes that, while he previously opposed speed limits, that no is longer the case.

"Since this issue directly affects an area outside of my district, I am going to be deferential to those voices who experience and live with this issue everyday. Therefore, it is my intention to oppose Senate Bill 27."
Bettencourt said feedback "indicates the limits have been a success and that the lake has not lost its fun or enjoyment. It is also clear that the speed limits have not stopped ANYONE from boating. In fact, they have instilled and reinforced a sense of proper behavior on our state's most important and well-known waterway."

If SB-27 does not pass, does WinnFlabs think the issue will be dead?

Also, in the article posted by Rusty he fails to point out that some legislators testified in support of the bill.

I've gone to about 10 public hearings combined between Concord and Disgusta. If anyone thinks the sign-in log is the tell-tale of the constituency then we're all in trouble.

We really don't know how this vote is going to go and for Hutchins to say otherwise is an optimistic WAG. I think it's a huge political mistake for WinnFlabs to oppose SB-27. Kinda like taking points off the board after kicking a FG to try for a TD and then fumbling the next snap.

The claims made by WinnFlabs are just over the top absurd.

Unfortunately the boating community is a relatively small percentage so you'll have people who know nothing about boating chiming in. You can tell by reading some of the comments. This is something WinnFlabs gets a tactical advantage and they don't have to even work to gain it.

According to WinnFlabs, prior to the speed limit everyone was driving around at WOT and people were staying off the water because of speeding boats. Now it's all song birds and canoes. Of course we all know that's not the truth.

I can respect people's opinion but the exaggerations and distortion added to statements used by BI, APS and others is where they lose credibility IMO. You'd think I've never driven a boat on Winni and because they say something that it just "must be so." I can see with my own eyes thank you.

In the end, WinnFlabs has not ONE piece of evidence that the SL improves safety for ANYONE. Will be an interesting vote nonetheless.

You know what’s funny psycho? SB-27 was originated by a young immature dreamer, and when he said at the meeting; "I just saw it as not only crushing my dream, but crushing the dreams of other kids growing up”, that pretty much summed it up for why this bill was originated (and why it will be defeated). His need and dreams for speed was the only thing behind this bill and all his followers drank the Kool Aid. He bought himself a “Thunder Boat” and come hell or high water he is going to see how fast he can go and everyone else better get out of his way. That is immature in my book.

While I am for SB-27, I do find that article painted Scott in the worst possible light. If the whole "dreams" pitch was truly his it was not the best pitch to put out there in the news...

You are so right codeman671. I wonder if he cried at the meeting?

Just curious that's all.

I consider Scott to be a friend. I have worked with him on other legislation. He believes in what he is fighting for, and he is doing it in an honorable way. I also think the compromise he wants for the broads is reasonable.

It is unfortunate that a great many responsible boaters have been inconvenienced by speed limits on Winni. I wish there were a way to allow responsible performance boaters to continue to use they lake in the way they once did.

However there is an old saying that you can't make an omelet, without breaking eggs. At the end of the day, I support speed limits and he does not.

Rusty, you seem to have some kind of hatred embedded in your post. I put this in perspective. If you think a driver going 55 MPH on Lake Winni in a nice boat is the anti-Christ than why do you own a lake front business?

Many of these boats were lawfully purchased at NH boat dealers. They don't pose anywhere near the threat that they've been portrayed to do.

If you want to ride slow in your boat then do so. There is so much water on the lake that there's room for everyone to operate. It's worked for a long time that way on the lake. The speed limit is propagated by a very narrow minded group. They've lost objectivity. The SL does nothing for safety and is why WinnFlabs has to repeatedly resort to embellishments of claims.

Again, we don't know how the vote will go. You and I can guess but weird stuff happens when votes get to the floor. I hope it passes. If not, I suspect we'll go through it all over again. What we need is the "right" person to get cited for a speedking violation;) It's not the slam dunk that traffic tickets are and could easily be contested.

I don’t have hatred for anyone. I don’t particularly care for hypocrites, but I don’t hate them.
I’ll just leave it at that.

I will say one thing though, it’s time for you to put your Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum away and try to enjoy what the state of NH has to offer you. I love this state and when people who don’t live here constantly think they know what’s best for us, it bothers the H*** out of me; and I’ll voice my opinion about that every chance I get.

what business does rusty own?

Since he could care less about those from out of town let him tell you. It was already revealed (I think in this thread actually). We'll see if he is willing to put his money where his mouth is.

First, since Dirty Harry is protecting my herd of green friends he upgraded and that's a S&W 0.500 you're looking at:D That's some precious stuff he's watching over....

Second, be careful about painting with a broad brush as some of us have some pretty deep NH ties. Last time I checked my boat also has a NH registration which means my boat is slipped and stored in NH. So try as you might, I have a vested interest in NH boating. Surprise, suprise :rolleye1:

Be reasonable
 

Rusty, without people from out of state, we would not have much of an economy in NH.

ViaBene,

May I ask where I said I didn't welcome out of state visitors?


Thank you,
Rusty

I am not going to argue semantics with you (or argue period), but when you say this:

regarding people from out of state (many who pay more in taxes here than I do), it is not very welcoming. Everyone that visits and supports our economy, or owns property and cannot vote, has the right to express their opinion on what we should do in NH.

The residents of NH reserve the right to listen or not.

You're right VitaBene, but I also have the right to express my disaproval of their opinion without you or anyone else saying I don't welcome visitors to NH.

If you don't want to argue with me or anyone else in this thread then maybe you shouldn't say anything. You can't have it all your way without a response from me or anyone else.