Laconia Daily Sun Letter

[VitaBene]

I picked up the Laconia Daily Sun today and found this letter.

Almost none of us want to see return to chaos on the Big Lake
To the editor,
Once we got past the bad weather of
June, it was a wonderful summer for
boating and other activities on Lake
Winnipesaukee. Surely the safest and
most enjoyable in many years. Nobody
can sincerely argue otherwise.
While one could usually count as
many boats on the lake, if not more,
it felt much less crowded and safer
because civility fi nally reigned. It’s
amazing how big a lake can seem when
fi lled with boats operating at reasonable
speeds. Sailing vessels once again
became a common sight. Families in
smaller craft going for evening ice
creams in their runabouts were back.
Kids were being taken water skiing
again. Campers were canoeing again in
numbers we have not seen for years.
Lake Winnipesaukee was once
again a place that all could share and
enjoy. 45 miles per hour in the daytime
and 25 miles per hour in the nighttime
proved plenty fast enough for all
safe and reasonable boating. AND WE
FINALLY HAD A SUMMER WITHOUT
A HIGH-SPEED TRAGEDY.
No boaters were run over this year,
no boats crashed up onto islands, no
speeding boats lost control and fl ipped
over. But then, isn’t that what most of
us expected?
The Marine Patrol deserves a heartfelt
thank you for their efforts to make
the lake a more enjoyable place for all
once again. They heard the concerns
of the boating masses and responded
professionally and effectively. And
their efforts really paid off.
Our biggest thanks should go to those
who formed WinnFABS and made this
happen. Using their own funds, this
group of local citizens fought on our
behalf for several years to fi nally get
this law in place against an organized
political machine funded by those who
profi ted from crowding our lake with
over-sized over-fast boats, and who
wrongly predicted that our economy
would be destroyed by a law that was
not needed because “nobody goes that
fast anyway” and would just be ignored
(Note the contradiction in this statement
is not mine).
Unfortunately, this most-effective
law is only temporary and will soon
expire, and we face the possibility of
returning to the “get out of my way”
boating environment that brought us
here unless we can convince our Legislature
to make it permanent during
the upcoming session. WinnFABS
must and will again lead our efforts
to make this happen. After writing
this letter, I will make a donation to
them to do my small part. But this
time around promises to be the most
expensive, and it is critical that they
get as much support as possible. Aside
from visiting www.gencourt.state.
nh.us/house/members/wml.aspx to
fi nd your legislators’ e-mail addresses
and writing to them to let them know
of your support for a permanent 45
MPH daytime and 25 MPH nighttime
speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee,
I urge all to go to www.winnfabs.
com and make a small contribution
to WinnFABS’ upcoming campaign.
Almost none of us want to see a return
to the chaos that things had been.
Lake Winnipesaukee is our lake. It is
the gem of NH and the engine of our
economy. Let’s keep it the way it was
this summer.
XXXXXXXXX
-end-
(I redacted the name and town of origin of the writer, with that exception I have copied and pasted in its entirety)

Have we had a high speed tragedy every year??

[Airwaves]

Why let FACTS get in the way of a good letter to the editor?

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

Why let FACTS get in the way of a good letter to the editor?

Or of accusing someone of illegal fishing.

[BroadHopper]

Is about to change drastically. The heartlless Democrats have put NH in deep dept and wants to sell our state parks to pay for it. The NH voters have had it and will prove it on the next election. That being said the Democrats are pushing 'feel good agendas' such as this bill to assure the public they are not so bad.

As a true NH native, I don't like the renroachment of out of staters as they are now telling us what to do. They say it is progress and I, my father and my grandfather say 'Progress? Hell!'.

Most of the proponents of the SL are not NH natives. A number of them are not even NH voters! What do they want from us? Leave us alone! If they don't like it here, GO HOME!

It's a free country. LIVE LIKE IT!

'Live Free or Die'

[NoRegrets]

I do not like wasting time on stupid lies that are found in editorial pages but this one struck a nerve and caused me to realize what is going on. To attack the lies with facts did not work combating generalities like safety of fear. There was a lack of leadership tactics surrounding the Speed Limit / Lake issue that led to where we find ourselves today.

Here is my observation and opinion on what went wrong in this long political “battle”. It was not lost because we were outspoken or sat at home. It was lost because we did not effectively beat or address the "safety and fear" issue. There was a much more devious game going on and the issue was lost due to an exploitation of a leadership tactic.

Leadership on social issues (slightly different than business since they are not measured by gains or losses) has interesting characteristics and if you study effective leaders you can see how they win or loose. A true leader (weather good or bad – Reagan or Hitler) never debates the facts openly. They champion a cause and let the lower levels debate or mute the merits. This is where the media has all power to either report unbiased or win (steal) battles. The leader stays above the fray while the opponents are painted to look like lunatics with details that can be minimized. The masses that don’t seem to care are really the voters that when forced to make a choice tend to side with the leader that has stayed out of the battle but still stays true to the vision (safety and fear). If the leader of one side gets into the fight and cries foul, points out lies, brings details to the debate the voters are turned off. If you apply this process to historical political campaigns you will see how effectively it works until a revolution erupts.

If you accept this viewpoint then here is how I beleive it applies to the Speed limit issue:
There were 2 sides of the issue leading up to the creation of the law. One side used FEAR and SAFETY while the second group was all about FREEDOM and RIGHTS. To the unaffected masses (voters and lawmakers) we already have speed limits everywhere so that did not seem too resonate with the Freedom and Rights argument. The obvious winner was the SL.

Everyone is right on to suggest the Laconia article is totally WRONG but trying to fight it like last time will probably still end up with more restrictions instead of real solutions. The educated people that have suggested we all need to be active in setting the facts straight are great Americans and what makes this country great but we will still need to get the leadership position in place for round 2 of the debate. The SL group is in the driver’s seat leaving the opponents of the SL on the defensive. It is also hard to gain ground when you are on the defense but I know there are many brilliant minds that do not give up and I see obvious leaders and winners in the forum member’s writings. I have not thought about a strategy but using position like: “a resource grab by Greedy Rich Land owners or corrupt big liberal government may be a start.

Sorry for the long reply but I think we are on a slippery slope and we need to work more effectively the next time. Have a safe boating weekend all!

[Kracken]

NoRegrets,

That was perfectly stated, a thanks at the end of your post did not seem sufficient.

Thank you.

[VtSteve]

The biggest problem I have with people that deal like that are statements like this.

45 miles per hour in the daytime
and 25 miles per hour in the nighttime
proved plenty fast enough for all
safe and reasonable boating. AND WE
FINALLY HAD A SUMMER WITHOUT
A HIGH-SPEED TRAGEDY.
No boaters were run over this year,
no boats crashed up onto islands, no
speeding boats lost control and fl ipped
over. But then, isn’t that what most of
us expected?

When was the last time Winnipesaukee had a HIGH-SPEED TRAGEDY?
I also note that while he applauds the MP, they don't support his view of the lake.


Regardless of anyone's personal view on the SL, or the lake in general, why do people have to lie? Is this what the WINFABs group is all about? I think the biggest thing I have against people and groups like that, is they lack character. For me, that's the worst thing I can say about someone, and it amounts to ZERO respect.

I listen to viewpoints, try not to interpret things to arrive at a pre-determined conclusion, and can admit being wrong if I just am wrong. But I don't suffer lies well. If your arguments and positions can't stand on their own merits, possibly you should change them.

If the facts are presented in that paper, he'd look like the fool he is.

[Kracken]

This is truly the Theatre Of The Absurd

Putting aside the numerous bold face lies in this article, I can only hope this was an editorial and not being passed off as actual news because it has no basis in fact.

Speed limits are not the reason the lake is quieter this year.

It has been stated correctly many times in this forum and in the real news that the traffic is down due to the weather and the economy.

1. Weather
There were only a handful of weekends all summer that were rain/wind/thunderstorm free. While this may not stop lakefront property owners from boating it would surely stop day boaters. Downing’s Landing should have had a great year with the closing of the ramps at Ames Farm. I spoke with the former train conductor at Dawning’s and he confirmed it was a horrible year. There were only a couple of days this summer they were full.

2. Economy
I have heard the argument over and over that gas is 3 bucks on the lake and last year it was almost 5 bucks so it’s really not the economy.

BULL HOCKEY

This year more people are unemployed but that is not the big factor. Most Americans are fearful of becoming unemployed and in this economy the prospect of finding a new job is scary at best. A two dollar decrease in gas price is meaningless compared to people not knowing if or when their next paycheck will come.

Giving credit to a silly law for making the lake quieter and safer is moronic and irresponsible. I realize the people who supported the limits are happy with their victory and do not want to give up something they fought so hard for. But do not fabricate results to justify your position. If the speed limit supporters wanted to extend the law because any data this year is tainted due to the decreased traffic I would completely understand it and even support it. But to claim its working??? The facts do not substantiate this.

I hope somebody here will send a letter to the editor to counter the original article.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

.... When was the last time Winnipesaukee had a HIGH-SPEED TRAGEDY?.....

It was LAST YEAR!

You may have a different definition of "high-speed", but any speed that is a lot more than conditions allow meets mine.


This Letter to the Editor is a perfect example of the arguments the opposition must overcome. And quite frankly, that is all but impossible.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

This Letter to the Editor is a perfect example of the arguments the opposition must overcome. And quite frankly, that is all but impossible.

I'm not going to debate the high speed thing, but I will point out that the current bill, as passed, is set to expire at the end of 2010. At this point, there is nothing that opponents to the SL must overcome. This is the proponents fight.

[Woodsy]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

It was LAST YEAR!

You may have a different definition of "high-speed", but any speed that is a lot more than conditions allow meets mine.


This Letter to the Editor is a perfect example of the arguments the opposition must overcome. And quite frankly, that is all but impossible.

Bear Islander....

If your definition of hi-speed is based on prevailing conditions, then you would have to agree that there are times and places on the Lake where the prevailing conditions would allow for Hi-Performance boats to run free of restriction....

For example the Broads on a day like today.... Bluebird weather, unlimited visibility and nary a boat out there!

There is very little doubt (IMHO) that the boat was travelling too fast for the prevailing conditions that fateful night. This accident appears (to me) to meet the burden of proof for Coast Guard Rule 6 (that NH NEEDS to adopt) and NH Negligent Operation/Failure to Keep a Proper Lookout. The effect that HB-847 would have, should have, could have had on that fateful night is still very unclear.

The NHMP has yet to make the accident report public, so we dont know the estimated speed of the boat at impact. We do not know her BAC. Its entirely possible she was traveling at 25MPH or less when the boat struck the island. If thats the case then HB-847 would have had no effect on the tragic outcome...

But she could quite possibly be in violation of other PRE-EXISTING LAWS!


Woodsy

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Bear Islander....

If your definition of hi-speed is based on prevailing conditions, then you would have to agree that there are times and places on the Lake where the prevailing conditions would allow for Hi-Performance boats to run free of restriction....

For example the Broads on a day like today.... Bluebird weather, unlimited visibility and nary a boat out there!

There is very little doubt (IMHO) that the boat was travelling too fast for the prevailing conditions that fateful night. This accident appears (to me) to meet the burden of proof for Coast Guard Rule 6 (that NH NEEDS to adopt) and NH Negligent Operation/Failure to Keep a Proper Lookout. The effect that HB-847 would have, should have, could have had on that fateful night is still very unclear.

The NHMP has yet to make the accident report public, so we dont know the estimated speed of the boat at impact. We do not know her BAC. Its entirely possible she was traveling at 25MPH or less when the boat struck the island. If thats the case then HB-847 would have had no effect on the tragic outcome...

But she could quite possibly be in violation of other PRE-EXISTING LAWS!


Woodsy

Thanks Woodsy.

Personally I believe that Rule 6 would actually give MP more power and do much more to curb the issues we all want squelched. It's an example of a great compromise as those who have claimed that they were scared when a boat "passed by 150' away going 70MPH." The Marine Patrol COULD actually pull someone over for that and at the very least give them a warning and perhaps even a ticket. Rule 6 is actually way more subjective to the officer. An officer may suggest to the boater that his or her actions were not reasonable and prudent due to high boat traffic. At any rate it would most likely send a clear message to the Performance Boaters that they would quickly understand. If you want to go fast you'd better have the room and it may push those individuals to the broads. Just what we've all been pushing for all along.

Just my .02

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Ryan

I'm not going to debate the high speed thing, but I will point out that the current bill, as passed, is set to expire at the end of 2010. At this point, there is nothing that opponents to the SL must overcome. This is the proponents fight.

Sorry, you are quite wrong.


The bill to make this permanent has already been written. If the opponents do not put up a fight then the bill to make speed limits permanent will quietly walk through the legislature. And in my opinion the only fight that has any chance at all is a compromise.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Sorry, you are quite wrong.


The bill to make this permanent has already been written. If the opponents do not put up a fight then the bill to make speed limits permanent will quietly walk through the legislature. And in my opinion the only fight that has any chance at all is a compromise.

Surprisingly all this talk and nothing has been filed.

[Pineedles]

Are you sure?

[EricP]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Surprisingly all this talk and nothing has been filed.

I am guessing his Island neighbor told him it is written, probably while sitting 'round the campfire. Of course everything a politician says is fact, right?
She has more important things to worry about, like getting re-elected and if I have anything to do about it she won't.

[Rinkerfam]

Woodsy, when you mention "pre-existing laws" you summed up my argument since day one. I must have been on a different Winnipesaukee than all of the SL supporters this summer. When the weather was nice it was a mad-house out there. (By mad-house I don't mean the number of boats out there or the speeds that they were traveling). I'm sure I wasn't the only boat that had other vessels pass at distances far less than 150'. I'm sure that I wasn't the only boat that had to surrender to a "give-way vessel" numerous times. I'm also sure that I wasn't the only one to be horrified at all the boats traveling through the Governor's/Eagle NWZ just below planing speed creating monster wakes while the MP looked on without care. Maybe the SL supporters are among those who don't know what 150' means. Maybe the SL supporters are among those who don't know who is the "stand-on or give-way vessel" in a given situation. Otherwise it would stand to reason that they would be complaining about those safety concerns as well. I guess as far as the SL supporters are concerned having a boat pass by them at 50' is ok as long as it isn't going more than 45mph. Heck, we could really streamline things by doing away with all of the existing boating laws other than HB 847 since it is apparently the only law we need to be safe. What a fool I am for not realizing this sooner.

[KTO]

It's a good thing that letters to the editor are only opinion. Unfortunate that this lacked any fact, though.

[Weekend Pundit]

Originally Posted by Rinkerfam

Woodsy, when you mention "pre-existing laws" you summed up my argument since day one. I must have been on a different Winnipesaukee than all of the SL supporters this summer. When the weather was nice it was a mad-house out there. (By mad-house I don't mean the number of boats out there or the speeds that they were traveling). I'm sure I wasn't the only boat that had other vessels pass at distances far less than 150'. I'm sure that I wasn't the only boat that had to surrender to a "give-way vessel" numerous times. I'm also sure that I wasn't the only one to be horrified at all the boats traveling through the Governor's/Eagle NWZ just below planing speed creating monster wakes while the MP looked on without care. Maybe the SL supporters are among those who don't know what 150' means.

I'm with you on this one. Far too often my only problem with boats going too fast have been those violating the 150' rule.

Twice within a period of half an hour a Captain Bonehead passed too close, on the first occasion almost swamping my boat.

My father-in-law and I were on our way back to Smith Cove from Weirs Beach and as we were making our way (at headway speed) towards Governor's Island bridge, a boat passed between us and the shore at 'mush' speed. We were only 100' from the shoreline, so he was about 50-60' off the shore. His wake spilled over our transom and left almost a foot of water in the cockpit before it drained away into the bilge. (Thank goodness the bilge pump was able to get rid of it!)

The second incident took place after we had pumped the bilge dry and and made the turn towards the bridge but before we reached the No Wake zone. There was another boat about 80' ahead of us and the second Captain Bonehead was also heading towards the bridge and decided to 'thread the needle' between us while on plane.

Both were speeding but not in violation of the speed limit. They were speeding because they broke the 150' rule. I'll bet a wide majority of the so-called speeding incidents are really 150' rule violations.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Surprisingly all this talk and nothing has been filed.

In politics . . . . timing is everything!

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

In politics . . . . timing is everything!

It most certainly is not. There's quite a bit of BS needed to really get silly things passed.

So they wait until the last moment, preferably when the big trial begins, and they flood the media with more silly stories and outright lies. You truly should be proud of yourself, and your cause BI. Truly.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

. . . . timing is everything!

Yes it is!

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

It was LAST YEAR!

You may have a different definition of "high-speed", but any speed that is a lot more than conditions allow meets mine.


This Letter to the Editor is a perfect example of the arguments the opposition must overcome. And quite frankly, that is all but impossible.

If the obvious factors of last year's accident prove true, I definitely agree with you BI, TOO FAST FOR CONDITIONS. I DO NOT disagree with you on that, but I do not sacrifice my character and values to paint it to support anyone's agenda either. I don't think anyone on this board has ever not supported that argument. Except for maybe 2BD, who rambled on and argued that the conditions were fine that night.

But to call that a HS accident, and then state that the lies published in that letter are hard to overcome, well I think perhaps you need to go back and take a hard look at everything.

So now you're delighted that the opposition has to overcome a series of lies and misstatements? I quite honestly thought you were better than that BI. I really did.

[EricP]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

It was LAST YEAR!

So it's been proven that speed was the cause? Did I miss the court case?
Give me a break, that is your opinion, not fact. Weak arguement at best.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by EricP

So it's been proven that speed was the cause? Did I miss the court case?
Give me a break, that is your opinion, not fact. Weak arguement at best.

Do you honestly think there's any possibility she was going headway speed or less? Considering she hit it, she was obviously within 150' of the island. I think we can all agree she was going well over the existing speed limit at the time.

[fatlazyless]

This Lake Winnipesaukee forum is really something........one guy writes a well written letter to the editor........normally a letter disappears after one day or so as the old paper gets thrown out. Here on
the forum, it gets analyzed, bisected, disected, refuted and discussed for days. It has staying power as it hangs around and hangs around..

Interesting medium.....a high speed internet forum......lol ......and don't forget.....going 45mph in a boat is hardly a slow speed......it is a very fast speed......how fast do you need to go?


Never could understand all 'the need for speed' anyway.......a motorboat is a machine....amd for most all boats just going 45mph is very very fast.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

and don't forget.....going 45mph in a boat is hardly a slow speed......it is a very fast speed......how fast do you need to go?

I cut and pasted from another thread because I didn't want to write it out all over again... but I still stand by this:


You mention that 45 is fast enough... What I find again is that many opinions are based on the individual owners determination of "fast" based on their own boat. For example if you have a 21 foot 1982 Century with a 260, when the boat is a WOT (wide open throttle) it gets up to approx. 46mph. The boat is bouncing around and is very loud in comparrison to its normal cruising speed of 30ish. With my boat cruising at 3600 rpms I will be at 50 mph. At that speed I am perfectly comfortable and well in control. Passengers can talk and have sodas while enjoying the lake. So that being said it is a very reasonable speed for me. Where an individual with a boat that is 17 feet long crusing comfortably at 22 mph that gets passed by me may not realize it feels the same.

I have discussed limits for years now with individuals. In many situations those in favor of limits (even once with a MP officer) I offer to take them for a ride. In doing so we go across "cruising" and they are astounded the control and how slow you feel you are going in a performance boat at 45 or 55 mph.

It becomes upsetting to me and friends of mine, that those passing the laws and those in favor of limits have never been on or experienced a performance boat. Now you may have, but I am just making a generalization.

That being said, I invite you at anytime (once my boat is fixed) to take a ride if you have not experienced a performance boat ride. You may feel differently.

[fatlazyless]

,,,here's one way to solve the need for speed...and no offense intended...well. not too much offense anyway......I think you need a smaller boat.....smaller boats get you closer to the water and more in sync with the wind & waves....instead of just powering through the water a smaller boat is a totally different animal.


It gets better..... for the very reasonable price of $8500. let me sell you my 18' aluminum cabin cruisr, a 1974 Starcraft Starchief with a somewhat late model Japanese 4-stroke 70hp outboard......the ultimate Lake Winnipesaukee cruiser....and capable of handling any waves, anywhere on the Big Lake. Much better than a 28' Baja 1200hp .....and just $8500 w/ a trailer! Cruise along all day on just six gallons....with a planing speed of maybe 18mph?

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

,,,here's one way to solve the need for speed...and no offense intended...well. not too much offense anyway......I think you need a smaller boat.....smaller boats get you closer to the water and more in sync with the wind & waves....instead of just powering through the water a smaller boat is a totally different animal.


It gets better..... for the very reasonable price of $8500. let me sell you my 18' aluminum cabin cruisr, a 1974 Starcraft Starchief with a somewhat late model Japanese 4-stroke 70hp outboard......the ultimate Lake Winnipesaukee cruiser....and capable of handling any waves, anywhere on the Big Lake. Much better than a 28' Baja 1200hp .....and just $8500 w/ a trailer! Cruise along all day on just six gallons....with a planing speed of maybe 18mph?

LOL.... thank you for the offer but I have waited my whole life for a boat like this, and been saving for 4 years to get her... I understand your premise of getting a boat that suits the lake. I have been in huge GFB's on the lake topping off over 100mph and while that is perfectly safe to do the lake seems to get very small for boats like that. That is why most are used not only on the lake but elsewhere in the country. My 28 still feels good on the lake and is fun in the broads on a very windy day. However, I didn't buy the boat strictly for the lake. I use it up and down the east coast but Lake Winni is my home. I grew up there and my family has been on the lake for 2 generations. I as well as everyone on this forum obviously has a great attachment to the lake or we wouldn't care so much either way. So in my case, selling my boat wouldn't be an option ever!... I got my dream and plan on having her the next 20 years.

But I will keep your boats in mind if I hear of someone looking.

PS. the ride offer next season still stands!

[KTO]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

one guy writes a well written letter to the editor........

Well written? Wouldn't that include facts? In college, I'm required to submit a works cited (reference) page when I use facts in any of my papers. I'd like to see the author of this letter works cited page, unless of course this is common knowledge...

[Rattlesnake Guy]

If it's only about politics. And we all know that politics are all about power, money and getting reelected. How do we identify and fund the replacements who might have a more "traditional" and measured approach on the subject of over reaching need for regulation.

More logic abuse.

If speed limit = fewer boats this year.
And
Worse world wide economy this year,
then is
the speed limit the cause of the worse economy?
or
could the worse economy impact number of boats?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

"...going 45mph in a boat is hardly a slow speed......it is a very fast speed......how fast do you need to go...and for most all boats just going 45mph is very very fast..."

Among the NH Marine Patrol boats best equipped for emergencies, can any exceed 50-MPH?

In an emergency, at what speed would NHMP need to go and not pose an additional peril to public safety?

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

In an emergency, at what speed would NHMP need to go and not pose an additional peril to public safety?

That would depend on the situation. Wide open areas, on a day with excellent visibility, and and MP officer at the helm with skills and experience would safely allow much higher speeds than narrow congested areas traversed at night, in the fog, by a rookie.

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by Rattlesnake Guy

If it's only about politics. And we all know that politics are all about power, money and getting reelected.

Something the legislatative supporters of the Speed Limit law should keep in mind this time around...the complete abandonment of WinnFabs and their supporters of Sen Kenney when it came time for them to step up when he ran against Gov Lynch.

I don't know if the landslide victory by Lynch set a record or not, but the support for Kenney by WinnFabs and their kind evaporated when he needed it!

Sounds like WinnFabs and the like are fair weather friends that can't be counted on to me!

[Resident 2B]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

Originally posted by Rattlesnake Guy

Something the legislative supporters of the Speed Limit law should keep in mind this time around...the complete abandonment of WinnFabs and their supporters of Sen Kenney when it came time for them to step up when he ran against Gov Lynch.

I don't know if the landslide victory by Lynch set a record or not, but the support for Kenney by WinnFabs and their kind evaporated when he needed it!

Sounds like WinnFabs and the like are fair weather friends that can't be counted on to me!

The reality is, there really are not many WinnFabs people. The few core members are very well organized and have been able to raise funds based upon their mis-truths and misrepresentations. They are also able to get support for their side from voters that have no idea of what is happening other than the horror stories from WinnFabs spin doctors.

A good portion of the WinnFabs supporters cannot vote in New Hampshire. Other than the smoke and mirrors publicity that has fooled many good people, there is no big organization. WinnFabs is a House-of-Cards.

They can write a bunch of crap and get it into the local papers and that is very effective. However, those who are actually on the lake know the truth.

We have to get our word out and get more organized. Other than on these threads, we are the silent, but truthful, majority!

R2B

[KTO]

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

We have to get our word out and get more organized. Other than on these threads, we are the silent, but truthful, majority!

R2B

I just wrote a letter to the editor. Now I just need to send it.

[VtSteve]

That hardly anyone can answer these questions

Feel free to chime in Mr. Weeks

1. How many high-speed accidents/fatalities have there been on Lake Winnipesaukee since 1980?

2. How many fatalities have there been on Lake Winnipesaukee involving kayaks/canoes/small-craft fishing boats?

This year alone, the amount of fatalities during early fishing season is astronomical. Perhaps seatbelts in these boats is the answer.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

That hardly anyone can answer these questions

Feel free to chime in Mr. Weeks

1. How many high-speed accidents/fatalities have there been on Lake Winnipesaukee since 1980?

2. How many fatalities have there been on Lake Winnipesaukee involving kayaks/canoes/small-craft fishing boats?

This year alone, the amount of fatalities during early fishing season is astronomical. Perhaps seatbelts in these boats is the answer.

In this forum, I have learned to be careful when asking question #1. You have to specifically ask for accidents directly caused by excessive speeds. Otherwise, they will say that the Littlefield accident was caused by excessive speed, when we all know what the real cause was.

[fatlazyless]

The same letter was in yesterday's Sunday Concord Monitor as a "My Turn" guest opinion.

Believe the legislative session runs from January to June, unless a special session gets called for in Sept-Oct-Nov-Dec or something.

Doesn't New Hampshire already have a designated go-fast lake.......Lake Winnisquam....which comes fully equipped with the Winnisquam Trading Post.....which has its own dock and sells all the good stuff....beer, ciggies, lottery tickets....and fishing bait.....and a brand new double ramp, freebie state boat launch in Laconia. Why go anywhere else? Go Winnisquam.........understand it has no big bad rocks to mangle the props.....how good is that? And, at 4238 acres it has planty room to run at wide open throttle.

[fatlazyless]

Today's Laconia Daily Sun has another well written letter in support of the speed limit titled "The Go-Fast-Be-Loud Brotherhood is plotting a comeback" Different author than the above letter and runs on a similar........chug-chug-chug........ train of thought.


...and the public relations plot twists and turns......


What say you all fast boaters just seek out some local state reps' political support for a high speed Winni venue which could be either a marked off area or a specific time to include the entire lake such as every Friday or something. Like. why not just have Alton Bay legislatively declared to be the designated GO-FAST ZONE. Most all the state reps in Alton are good Republicans who are against any type of regulations, and have accepted contributions from the NH boat marina lobbyist so's just say "let's go to Alton Bay.....and push that throttle ahead to wide open......live free or die......hey..............vroooom vroom Alton Bay!"

[OCDACTIVE]

And it was written by no other then Ed Chase of Meredith.

It is actually comical. He is warning the Sun from listening to others that oppose the law.

There is so much made up rehtoric I don't even know where to begin....... check it out for yourselves...

[Rattlesnake Guy]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Doesn't New Hampshire already have a designated go-fast lake.......

We used to......

[NoRegrets]

FLL – Before you start to take bows and accolades for the pro-speed limit perspective and the lack of the capability of the masses of voters to be convinced of your position I would like you to reflect on some of the current issues that may prove you to bit premature in your celebration.

I think the tolerance of the country is changing and more people are paying attention to what is making our country become sloppy and unable to compete on the international field. Many of your posts have been about the excesses of people in the McMansions (everyone should live on a ¼ acre with 5 rooms), big cruisers (buy my 28 ft tub), freebees for all, and how we should all aspire to shop at Walmart, business closures and empty property, and so on. The legal sleaziness that is prevalent in our country is destroying what made us America! This new political experiment by the liberal political majority is quickly being exposed for what it is! A power hungry group of politicians that have no clue on how to run anything. They are in trouble and I hope they have a true awakening that not only shocks them but the world. The next election will be telling!

There are many that hold true to freedoms and constitutional rights that are at the core of our country that should be motivated to action and expose the intent of the few as something akin to the deceptive ploys of ACORN. I salute the forum members from both sides and believe the truth will win. The silent majority that were magically convinced that we needed a speed limit will become more cognizant of the issue next time. This will become apparent as marches and controlled marches on our politician’s offices and Washington continue to demand we get back to the fundamentals and stop the financial and moral bankrupting of our nation. This will hopefully be the top perspective when this speed issue is back on the docket and then we will get back to bonehead issues and not this arbitrary attack on the GF type boats. Have a good night.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

"...I don't know if the landslide victory by Lynch set a record or not, but the support for Kenney by WinnFabs and their kind evaporated when he needed it...Sounds like WinnFabs and the like are fair weather friends that can't be counted on to me...!"

According to a telephone conversation I had with a Senator Kenney staffer, the Senator wasn't even lukewarm on the issue originally: perhaps the issue could have helped him, but any support he gave was too late.

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...They have boats and PWC that can easily exceed 50 mph..."

Depending on conditions, I'd say that the MP06 boat (a "fast" MP boat) cannot exceed 55-MPH.

You and Dave R missed my point: If 55-MPH (max) is consistent with Public Safety, what is 90-MPH, but a blatant disregard for Public Safety?

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

what is 90-MPH, but a blatant disregard for Public Safety?

If the boat can handle it and the conditions warrent why would this be an issue at all?

[OCDACTIVE]

That same letter rebutting Mr. Week's letter appeared in the Concord Monitor today under:

Summer wasn't a true test of speed limits.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

I try to look at the LDS daily but if I miss any (either side of the discussion) let me know and I will look back at the archive and post them.

I guess we all should be looking at the Monitor and other papers as well.

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

That same letter rebutting Mr. Week's letter appeared in the Concord Monitor today under:

Summer wasn't a true test of speed limits.

Here is the link http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/p...909240319/1017

And the letter:
As I was sitting at the Meredith town docks reading Jack Weeks's column concerning his support for the speed limit law on Lake Winnipesaukee ("All quiet on the big lake," Sunday Monitor Viewpoints, Sept. 20), a few things came to mind.

Weeks attributes the reduced boating activity to the success of the new speed limits. However, recent reports in all the local newspapers, not to mention statements from the Marine Patrol and marina owners, all said that boat traffic was way down this summer, not only on Lake Winnipesaukee, the only lake affected by the speed limits, but across the entire Lakes Region. Not surprising, given the economic recession and the poor weather in June, July and parts of August.

The economy has battered people's retirement accounts and home values, and the unemployment rate has risen to a two-decade high. Not exactly the environment one would expect a lake area to thrive in.

What surprised me the most was Weeks's statement that "We finally had a summer without a high-speed tragedy." This made me wonder, when was the last time a high-speed tragedy occurred on Lake Winnipesaukee? New Hampshire Marine Patrol accident statistics do not list a "high-speed tragedy" in recent memory.

As to his praise for the Marine Patrol, it well is deserved, since their budgets are not thriving in this economy. But I feel the praise was misplaced.

The Marine Patrol director is on the record at least twice in not supporting the speed limits. His reasoning? Speeding is not a problem on the lake. The tests on Winnipesaukee last year pretty much backed up the director's claims.

The law has a sunset provision, a given period of two years.

The supporters now want to make the law permanent, without any data to review. They know full well that the lake traffic this year was pretty low, not to mention that the data would clearly not support the speed limit.

Lake Winnipesaukee is a state treasure, not something that belongs to people with political or ideological agendas. It is a shared resource.

Before anyone buys into Weeks's drama concerning the chaos that has magically disappeared, perhaps you should ask him and the WinnFabs to support any of their previous claims that chaos of speeding boats ever existed in the first place! Drama belongs in the theater, not in the law-making process.

[OCDACTIVE]

To be fair there is also another small letter in the Laconia Daily Sun today from a supporter. Opinion is fine. He doesn't say anything inflameatory. The only issue again is he says they FEEL safer with the limits. Again laws are not supposed to make you feel safer they are supposed to make you safer... I can't stand redundant laws that accomplish nothing.....

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

To be fair there is also another small letter in the Laconia Daily Sun today from a supporter. Opinion is fine. He doesn't say anything inflameatory. The only issue again is he says they FEEL safer with the limits. Again laws are not supposed to make you feel safer they are supposed to make you safer... I can't stand redundant laws that accomplish nothing.....

I'm curious who keeps the count of canoes and kayaks on the lake? According to the author (who is probably a member of WinnFABS - IMO) there were "many" more non powered boats on the lake.

Seems to me it's just another ficticious statistic - similar to all of the high speed accidents from previous years.

[onlywinni]

Originally Posted by Ryan

I'm curious who keeps the count of canoes and kayaks on the lake? According to the author (who is probably a member of WinnFABS - IMO) there were "many" more non powered boats on the lake.

Seems to me it's just another ficticious statistic - similar to all of the high speed accidents from previous years.

Scare tactics, misinformation and right out lies-appear to be the tools utilized by the Extreme Speed Limit Supporters.

I have two questions:

-If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around does it still make a sound?

-If I blast across the broads at 65mph and no one is close enough to hear or see me are people still Traumitzed??????

[ApS]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

If the boat can handle it and the conditions warrent why would this be an issue at all?

The Marine Patrol's Public Safety officers meet emergency requirements with much less than 55-MPH—perhaps with an MP fleet-average of only 45-MPH. (!)

With emergencies met by Public Safety officers at an average speed of 45-MPH, what is 90-MPH—but a reckless disregard for the naïve boater who occasions Lake Winnipesaukee?
.
.

.
.
.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Among the NH Marine Patrol boats best equipped for emergencies, can any exceed 50-MPH?

In an emergency, at what speed would NHMP need to go and not pose an additional peril to public safety?

They have boats and PWC that can easily exceed 50 mph.....

In the worst emergencies they actually do not call a boat... they get the coast guard helo's out of portsmouth.. those exceed 50 mph no problem.

[Ryan]

While one could usually count as
many boats on the lake, if not more,
it felt much less crowded

How can his first arguement completely contradict itself? The entire opinion piece lacks fact and logic.

I think I just threw up in my mouth.

[malibu]

There used be a group that fought the good fight against these lies (winnilakers), we need to educate the general public with the true facts like they use to. If we allow these lies to continue people will start believing they are true. Were any of you part of winnilakers; I was and participated as much as I had time for. If I recall they actually had a spokes person that would concentrate their efforts.

Maybe a new site is in order to concentrate everyone’s thoughts and efforts, one that locks out the uninvited.

Malibu

[Pineedles]

If YOU "Speed Limit Opponents" have any hope of defeating or even negotiating a compromise, then YOU better learn from this letter. It will kill YOUR chances of anything if not rebutted in this and every newspaper in the State of New Hampshire. If YOU REALLY CARE about this issue, then in the next 2-3 days, YOU should be writing a letter exposing this collection of lies to every publication in NH that accepts letters to the editor submissions. Stop arguing with TB and others, and write the damn letters! i really don't care that much, i just like to see the playing field leveled, and YOU need to do some leveling.

Good luck!

[WeirsBeachBoater]

I have tried to stay out of the SL debate for some time now. But I can't sit here tonight and not write this. I spent 4 yrs working against the speed limit. Back when it was grass roots, even before winnfabs was formed etc. I was a member of NHRBA, and quite frankly, the biggest reason the speed limit got through was because too many people sat at their keyboards or at home saying " it will never happen". Guess what.... it did, and it will not go away as long as the majority of the opposition doesn't speak. We were out voiced in Concord, but more importantly we were beat in the MEDIA. They (winnfabs) won, and you know why, they got the non boating public to believe that Winnipesaukee had become more dangerous than the wild west. What really is sickening, is that Winnfabs is really only about a handful of people. If you attended the hearings and the lobbying in Concord it was the same 6-8 people there everytime! They did do a good job of raising money, and they are well funded. But come on, we can sit here for days and kick this around winni.com. But what really needs to happen is a big time push in the Media to prove they are not only Wrong, but lying to the non boating public to instill fear and sway them into calling the reps and senators to keep this law on the books. I will leave you with this, GET INVOLVED, that is the only way it will get defeated. I know that I am done, I gave it all, and have other responsibilities now that keep me from going on with this cause. I hope someone steps up and leads the charge for this next phase. -WBB

[jeffk]

I have said this before but since it is starting up again: This is not a logical/rational discussion. It is an emotional one. The SL supporters use fear and anger to push their point and gutless politicians respond very well to these tactics. They feel justified bending or making up facts to push their argument. We have gone through all this discussion before. The reasons were NEVER there to support a SL. However the emotion drove it through. The lake has always had a good safety record compared to other bodies of water. Speed has not been a significant contributor to accidents and especially fatal accidents because there haven't been that many and most of them have been swimming or small boat drownings. Other lakes that establish speed limits don't really enforce them. None of it matters as long as the pols respond to the emotions.

[pm203]

What a crock of you know what. The sailboats returned, its safe to go for an ice cream and so on. Looks like the propoganda machine has been fired up once again.

[VtSteve]

Of course, you are spot on WBB. Well-crafted, and well-distributed lies, are effective. These scare tactics and misstatements sound like politics as usual don't they? Your words ring very true.

I just hope everyone remembers this. Always fight lies with fact. If the facts are not available, wait for them, don't make them up. Something Mr. Weeks mama didn't succeed in teaching him. But that's ok, as WBB stated, people can figure it out on their own once presented with it.

I think it's high time people like that were forced to answer some questions, publicly. As WBB and others say, call them on it, publicly.

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by pm203

The sailboats returned

Variants of this statement have been made by several posters. I personally find it a little hard to swallow.

Overall this has been a down-year economy wise. Lots of property foreclosures around the lake, people selling off their toys (boats, etc.), and lots of people leaving their lake getaways mothballed.

On top of that you have the theory that the lake has been so dangerous for so many years that the majority of the sailboaters didn't feel safe anymore. Add to that the various speed limit oppositions.

But your post wants us to believe that the minute the speed limit went into effect all of the "violaters" either suddenly disappeared from the lake and/or suddenly complied with the law and became civil rational boaters AND all of these sailboats that had sat unused for years came out of the woodwork to re-take the water?

The people seeing drastic changes this year on the lake are doing so through rose-colored glasses. Things like this speed limit don't just switch on overnight, or over a single season. Had there been a few more sailboats sighted and comments along the lines of "it feels a little better on Sunday's" or "I saw the MP pulling over ANOTHER speeder today", I might be inclined to believe that the speed limit law could have had some effect or time.

Statements that want the public and lawmakers to believe that THIS law was finally the one that brought justice to the water overnight, that THIS law is one people are suddenly adhering to, are a little too much like propaganda for me to believe.

[Yosemite Sam]

CHAPTER 270-D, “BOATING AND WATER SAFETY ON NEW HAMPSHIRE PUBLIC WATERS” http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/...-D/270-D-2.htm already has a section (Section 270-D:2 X a) that talks about "Safe Passage".
To me that is good enough and they can remove sub paragraphs b, c, and d of that section.

Section 270-D:2
X. (a) No person shall operate a vessel on Lake Winnipesaukee at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions and without regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing. In all cases, speed shall be controlled so that the operator will be able to avoid endangering or colliding with any person, vessel, object, or shore.
(b) Where no hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with subparagraph (a), the speed of any vessel in excess of the limit specified in this subparagraph shall be prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful:
(1) 25 miles per hour during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise; and
(2) 45 miles per hour at any other time.
(c) The speed limitations set forth in subparagraph (b) shall not apply to vessels when operated with due regard for safety under the direction of the peace officers in the chase or apprehension of violators of the law or of persons charged with, or suspected of, any such violation, nor to fire department or fire patrol vessels, nor to private emergency vessels when traveling to emergencies. This exemption shall not, however, protect the operator of any such vessel from the consequences of a reckless disregard of the safety of others.
(d) The speed limitations set forth in subparagraph (b) shall not apply to boat racing permitted under RSA 270:27.

[VtSteve]

It should be noted that El Chase scoffed at the Safe Passage rule. I believe that was the same time Codeman's boat problem story was being scoffed at as well.

This is fine

"Section 270-D:2
X. (a) No person shall operate a vessel on Lake Winnipesaukee at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions and without regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing. In all cases, speed shall be controlled so that the operator will be able to avoid endangering or colliding with any person, vessel, object, or shore. "