[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

I think it is important to understand why the speed limit supporters feel it is necessary.

How can you explain how the speed limit supporters feel? Have you polled them? Are you one? Do they all feel the same way and have the same reasons and motivation? How can a post that starts out with you speculating in an extremely general way have much merit?

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

First, I would like to know if there are any statistics that are specific to Winnipesaukee detailing the number of accidents involving more than 1 boat in the last 1, 2, 5, 10 years etc and if there are how many involved serious injury, property damage or both & how serious the injuries or damage was. If these are available is there any information explaining how fast the boats were traveling at impact etc. I am asking about this because to me this is what should be used to support or not support a speed limit.

This has been answered time and time again. Why would there be a single record that cites the cause of an incident as excessive speed, when there is no such thing as "excessive speed" in this lake? ...When marine patrol currently has no means, and makes no attempt to measure speed? Should we be expecting to find a police report that says "this accident was caused because the boat was travelling 78MPH?" How would they know that when they are makign no attempt to measure or note the speed? So instead, they categorize accidents according to the nearest infraction that currently pplies; operator error, reckless operation, etc.
Of course there are no statistics. There were no statistics kept for many years to correlate tobacco smoking to cancer either. It was not until a means to prove the correlation was adopted that the statistics could be compiled and the correlation could be proven. Does this mean that tobacco did not cause cancer before statistics were compiled?
Can we please stop having to answer the "no statistics" argument now?

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

by all accounts the offending boat did not appear to be exceeding any of the proposed speed limits.

Although this is irrelevant, it is also untrue. This boat was going 27MPH, which is indeed OVER the proposed nightime speed limit of 25. Although we will never be able to prove the real cause of this accident unless someone finds a vial of the driver's blood from that night.

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

I can only speculate. Lets take a stab at it.

Let's not speculate, let's believe what the proponents have been saying. I do not feel that any speed is safe on this lake. I feel that some limit is reasonable and should be in place. I feel that 45MPH is a reasonable daytime limit and 25 is a reasonable nighttime limit. Now you should say how YOU feel, and let other people say how THEY feel, and stop speaking for them.

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

being too crowded has nothing to do with speed.

You surely did not mean that. I'll assume that you misspoke and will correct it.

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

I will speculate on this, because they are not happy with the noise ordinance they think that if they can pass a speed limit that will make high performance boat owners so unhappy that they will not frequent Winni, this will solve their noise problem.

Again, you speculate wrongly, at least for me. And I have heard NO supporters say that they think the noisy boats will leave. I feel that any boat capable of doinf so makes less noise at 45MPH than it does at 90MPH. I'm sure you will have to admit this is true. he motor is not reving as high,and that results in less noise. Although I have no statistics, I assume you will accept this obvious point of reason. So by slowing down, boats will become quieter. This is a fortunate side effect we will enjoy from the speed limit, but it is only a side effect. Every supporter I have have talked to mainly wants to see boats limited to a REASONABLE SPEED for this lake (but I don't want to speak for them).

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

There is one other possible reason that I have stated in previous posts. Some, not all, just don't like high performance boats for no specific reason, just don't like them & would rather see them go somewhere else. Again this is not related to speed but a speed limit appears to be the only way to possibly rid the lake of these kinds of boats.

This is the most far-reaching of your stabs. I in fact love performance boats. I also love race cars and like to go to races at Louden, but would not like to see those cars racing down my street at those speeds when my grandkids are riding their bikes. I love to watch performance boats scream by when I'm in Miami Beach. I used to take my kids to watch the offshore event on the lake every year. It's very exciting and the boats are beautiful. But that was a sanctioned and highly supervized event, with family boaters kept out of the paths of the racing boats. I would feel differently if they allowed runabouts to travel in and out of the racing paths as they wished. Surely, you do not feel that would be safe, right? Yet today, that same situation could happen and it would be legal. Twenty offshore boats COULD trailer up here this weekend and have a drag race around the lake at 90MPH, with family boaters and sailboats meandering through their paths and dodging them, and it would all be legal. But would it be safe?

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

This post is not meant to chastise speed limit supporters. I am just trying to understand where they are coming from. If these reasons I have discussed here are why they are in support of HB162, I understand them but I do not agree that they should be used by legislators as a basis for passing HB162. Statistics showing that speed in excess of 45 mph is causing too many collisions with property damage & injuries is what the legislators should be demanding before they consider passing HB162.

Or perhaps they should be obeying the mandate of their constituency. That is what this is really about. There is no "right" to drive fast in a boat in this state, so this should and will come down to the number of NH citizens who are in favor of a speed limit versus the number of NH citizens who oppose it. The way our government is set up, legislators know that they will subject themselves to being voted out if they do not adhere to the wishes of those whose votes they will need, and if they hope to be re-elected, they will vote according to the majority of their constituents. I'm anxious to see which way that will go. That is why don't want to waste my time listening to the opinions of GFBL boaters from New Jersey and Oregon. Their opinions simply don't count here. The opinions of people from Mass who own NH real estate and pay NH real estate taxes are always going to be given a certain amount of heed, but it is really going to come down to how NH voters feel.