Update to Lake Related Legislation

[Woodsy]

Another useless feel good bill! People rail on this forum every year about how others cannot judge 150'... now they are going to add a 500' foot judgement? Seems kinda silly to me! Never mind the pushback coming from the people that sell & own those $250K boats! Good luck with that!

Perhaps better funding of the MP and enforcement of our existing rules would be a better start!


Woodsy

[Major]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Another useless feel good bill!

Unfortunately, useless feel good bills are the result of large governments with nothing better to do but to enact rules and regulations to control the populace. There are so many useless and superfluous rules and regulations, even if we had sufficient numbers of law enforcement they wouldn't be able to effectively enforce the laws.

The issue comes down to common sense and respect, both of which are lacking in today's world. Car manuals from 50 years ago had instructions to rebuild transmissions. Today, those same car manuals provide instructions not to drink the battery acid. That's all you need to know about the world we live.

[Descant]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Another useless feel good bill! People rail on this forum every year about how others cannot judge 150'... now they are going to add a 500' foot judgement? Seems kinda silly to me! Never mind the pushback coming from the people that sell & own those $250K boats! Good luck with that!

Perhaps better funding of the MP and enforcement of our existing rules would be a better start!
Woodsy

It will be easy to enforce in the sense that the sport will effectively be eliminated from many bays and small lakes. Since wake surfers like calm waters, as they get pushed into areas where there is no protection from winds, there will be fewer and fewer days suitable for the sport.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Another useless feel good bill! People rail on this forum every year about how others cannot judge 150'... now they are going to add a 500' foot judgement? Seems kinda silly to me! Never mind the pushback coming from the people that sell & own those $250K boats! Good luck with that!

Perhaps better funding of the MP and enforcement of our existing rules would be a better start!


Woodsy

So the smaller PWC/Skicraft will have a 300' setback, but a larger boat will not?
And how do you propose that we structure the boat registrations to cover a higher cost MP enforcement funding?

Serious questions - not being rude - but we need a basis for the idea/thought.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

So the smaller PWC/Skicraft will have a 300' setback, but a larger boat will not?
And how do you propose that we structure the boat registrations to cover a higher cost MP enforcement funding?

Serious questions - not being rude - but we need a basis for the idea/thought.

I agree with your desire for a standard. Things have been standardized for years at 150' for all vessels. The "ski craft" rule was old and obsolete, it didn't really apply as almost all newer machines don't meet that criteria. I think all should have the same standard, be it 150', 200' or whatever truly makes sense.

With the new proposals in play why should a pwc have a 300' setback, a surf boat actively surfing have a 500' setback, and a 38' Carver (or even a 56' Galeon) be allowed to plow along at a 150' setback? Its not hard to determine which is the least and which is the most detrimental to the lake in this example.

As far as funding is concerned, something needs to be done to solve the problem. There is hardly any enforcement, if there was we wouldn't even be having these discussions. How much would they really need to raise the cost of registrations to add extra seasonal patrol officers on the few large bodies of water where the problems lie? I saw a statistic for 2022 that NH had 105k boat registrations. How about a charge for paddle sports as well?

[Descant]

Originally Posted by codeman671

I agree with your desire for a standard. Things have been standardized for years at 150' for all vessels. The "ski craft" rule was old and obsolete, it didn't really apply as almost all newer machines don't meet that criteria. I think all should have the same standard, be it 150', 200' or whatever truly makes sense.

With the new proposals in play why should a pwc have a 300' setback, a surf boat actively surfing have a 500' setback, and a 38' Carver (or even a 56' Galeon) be allowed to plow along at a 150' setback? Its not hard to determine which is the least and which is the most detrimental to the lake in this example.

As far as funding is concerned, something needs to be done to solve the problem. There is hardly any enforcement, if there was we wouldn't even be having these discussions. How much would they really need to raise the cost of registrations to add extra seasonal patrol officers on the few large bodies of water where the problems lie? I saw a statistic for 2022 that NH had 105k boat registrations. How about a charge for paddle sports as well?

As noted earlier, the cruisers tend to go by once, not repeating in circles. While big cruisers ared noticeable, I see most of trhem nevert leave the dock, or they leave the marina and anchor in front of the beach at Silver Sands.
The budget at MP ("Navigation Safety Fund") isn't the entire problem. Ever since they rolled MP into state police to get federal Homeland Security money for the coast, the requirements to be an MP officer have required more training and it is harder to find people who can train from February to April and qualify.
I am confident the Resources Committee will sort things out. I think they've done well by us in the past.

YES, to me, Kayaks etc should pay a fee. Every time one of them gets into a foolish act of bravado, Fish and Game and MP have to go to the rescue, body retrieval, etc. At the very least, they should be treated like hikers and be responsible for costs, or buy a voluntary "Hike Safe" card. Major issue when a kayak blows off the dock. When it is found, nobody knows who it belongs to or if a person fell overboard, but there is still a search party. Camps and others who ow n many craft should qualify for "fleet rate", noting that youth campers don't go out unsupervised.

[ITD]

My observation of large boats is that they go from one spot to another, anchor for the day, then go from that spot back to their home. My observation of wake boats is they come out, make many, many passes, stop for a while, letting others make many, many passes. All day long. The effect on the shore line is dramatic and non stop when the weather is good. The water is more silty and turbid from these boats. I am absolutely for this rule, I don’t think it goes far enough.

[Descant]

Originally Posted by codeman671

I agree with your desire for a standard. Things have been standardized for years at 150' for all vessels. The "ski craft" rule was old and obsolete, it didn't really apply as almost all newer machines don't meet that criteria. I think all should have the same standard, be it 150', 200' or whatever truly makes sense.

With the new proposals in play why should a pwc have a 300' setback, a surf boat actively surfing have a 500' setback, and a 38' Carver (or even a 56' Galeon) be allowed to plow along at a 150' setback? Its not hard to determine which is the least and which is the most detrimental to the lake in this example.

As far as funding is concerned, something needs to be done to solve the problem. There is hardly any enforcement, if there was we wouldn't even be having these discussions. How much would they really need to raise the cost of registrations to add extra seasonal patrol officers on the few large bodies of water where the problems lie? I saw a statistic for 2022 that NH had 105k boat registrations. How about a charge for paddle sports as well?

As noted earlier, the cruisers tend to go by once, not repeating in circles. While big cruisers are noticeable, I see most of them never leave the dock, or they leave the marina and anchor in front of the beach at Silver Sands.
The budget at MP ("Navigation Safety Fund") isn't the entire problem. Ever since they rolled MP into state police to get federal Homeland Security money for the coast, the requirements to be an MP officer have required more training and it is harder to find people who can train from February to April and qualify.
I am confident the Resources Committee will sort things out. I think they've done well by us in the past.

YES, to me, kayaks etc should pay a fee. Every time one of them gets into a foolish act of bravado, Fish and Game and MP have to go to the rescue, body retrieval, etc. At the very least, they should be treated like hikers and be responsible for costs, or buy a voluntary "Hike Safe" card. Major issue when a kayak blows off the dock. When it is found, nobody knows who it belongs to or if a person fell overboard, but there is still a search party. Camps and others who own many craft should qualify for "fleet rate", noting that youth campers don't go out unsupervised.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by Descant

As noted earlier, the cruisers tend to go by once, not repeating in circles. While big cruisers are noticeable, I see most of them never leave the dock, or they leave the marina and anchor in front of the beach at Silver Sands.
The budget at MP ("Navigation Safety Fund") isn't the entire problem. Ever since they rolled MP into state police to get federal Homeland Security money for the coast, the requirements to be an MP officer have required more training and it is harder to find people who can train from February to April and qualify.
I am confident the Resources Committee will sort things out. I think they've done well by us in the past.

YES, to me, kayaks etc should pay a fee. Every time one of them gets into a foolish act of bravado, Fish and Game and MP have to go to the rescue, body retrieval, etc. At the very least, they should be treated like hikers and be responsible for costs, or buy a voluntary "Hike Safe" card. Major issue when a kayak blows off the dock. When it is found, nobody knows who it belongs to or if a person fell overboard, but there is still a search party. Camps and others who own many craft should qualify for "fleet rate", noting that youth campers don't go out unsupervised.

Kayakers are part of HikeSafe. They would probably support moving to a boat registration format; but that may actually lower the amount of money moving toward SAR - as 100% of the HikeSafe goes to SAR and only $1 of a boat registration.

It would be a required purchase rather than a voluntary; but I don't what the ratio would be.

[codeman671]

The same basic wake-surf bill is being proposed in Michigan.

[John Mercier]

I think each plays off the other...
But I would really love to see the effects of the proposal on bodies that are not Winnipesaukee.

[Lake Winnipesaukee Alliance]

Vermont is doing the same. The VT Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules is set to vote later this month.

https://vtdigger.org/2024/02/02/fina...ke-boat-rules/

[fatlazyless]

March 6, 2023: Vermont wake boat restrictions ...... http://www.wcax.com/2024/03/06/vt-wa...n-this-summer/ ..... are expected to begin this summer.

Hey there Vermont wake-boaters, come to Lake Winnipesaukee! For $25 you can launch and later on, remove your expensive wake boat at the very well designed Center Harbor NH town boat ramp, boat launch ramp attendant usually present, and then park it up the hill in the unpaved parking area behind the nearby NH State liquor store.

Or better yet, stay overnight at the very nearby ...... www.centerharborinn.com/winnipesaukee-webcam/ and park you trailer vehicle and trailer at the inn in their trailer vehicle area.

Go wake boarding all around that smooth serene Center Harbor Bay and come enjoy the Live Free or Die, wakeboarders welcome, wakeboard State of New Hampshire.

[codeman671]

Any updates from today’s hearings?

[Flotnjr]

HB1562 regarding the 'ski craft' to be inclusive of all personal watercraft looks to be almost dead. One person showed in support of the bill, well over 20 in opposition.
HB1390 about the 500' setback I heard was equally argued across the board. We will see with that one.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Flotnjr

HB1562 regarding the 'ski craft' to be inclusive of all personal watercraft looks to be almost dead. One person showed in support of the bill, well over 20 in opposition.
HB1390 about the 500' setback I heard was equally argued across the board. We will see with that one.

That's good about HB1562. I heard that at one point the online submissions were 20 in support and over 400 in oppositions.

I think HB1390 is going to be tight.

[Lake Winnipesaukee Alliance]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Any updates from today’s hearings?

About 150 people attended the 4 hour hearing, with testimony evenly divided for and against the bill. Online testimony showed 1140 in support, 1725 opposed, and 2 neutral. The committee will discuss and make a recommendation on HB 1390 on Wednesday March 13.

[Rich]

Regarding HB-1562, yesterday I received this

Great News!

I just heard, with good authority, that HB-1562 is dead! Supposedly a unanimous vote by the committee.

😎👍👍👍👍

[Lake Winnipesaukee Alliance]

HB 1301, relative to wakesurfing on public bodies of water

This bill proposes that any group of 25 residents or property owners will be able to petition the department of safety (DOS) to restrict or prohibit wake surfing on a public water body, or a portion thereof, pursuant to a petition and hearing process.

*Note that this does not mean 25 people can restrict an area just by petition. The petition goes to DOS and through the formal hearing process*

Status
Public Hearing: 01/10/2024
Executive Session: 03/13/2024
Committee Report: Without Recommendation 03/13/2024 (Vote 10-10)

The first vote in committee was to ITL this bill, stating concerns about waterbodies being in public trust, and the available resources of DOS. After more discussion, the motion of ITL failed (10-10)

*Note that in order for a bill to pass to the full house with a recommendation from the committee (OTP, ITL, Refer to Interim Study, or OTP with amendment) there cannot be a tie*

After the ITL failed there was a motion OTP with amendment, that failed (10-10). Lastly, a motion of OTP as originally written failed (10-10). This bill now goes to the full house with no recommendation from the committee.

ITL= "Kill the Bill"
OTP= Ought to Pass