Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Lake Issues > Boating Issues > Speed Limits
Home Forums Gallery Webcams Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-06-2008, 10:18 PM   #1
Gilligan
Senior Member
 
Gilligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The Bay State
Posts: 119
Thanks: 8
Thanked 11 Times in 4 Posts
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
I have just as much right to safely kayak on Winni as I do on Squam, but it has been my experience that I am less safe on Winni, due mostly to the high speeds of some powerboats. Whether you or others believe it or not, some people on Winni operated their powerboats at speeds that are beyond their ability to spot smaller boats (like kayaks) in time. My 150 foot zone has been violated by some of these people - not intentially, but just because they were traveling too fast.

99% of the folks on Winni are not operating their boats in a safe manner, at least not 100% of the time.
Where is my calculator. Less than 100% of the time there are 99% of boaters that operate unsafely. I'll have to work on that to fully comprehend the implications.

I suggest you contact Marine Patrol. One of them on a Sea Doo following you from a distance could bag all those 150' violators. You seem to be a magnet for them. The word will spread quickly and those that still break the law will face the consequences while you feel safer. Of course you could help your situation by making yourself more visible.

Evenstar, I seem to remember that someone did offer to go kayak with you this coming season.
__________________
Gilligan is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 12:02 AM   #2
Evenstar
Senior Member
 
Evenstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilligan View Post
Where is my calculator. Less than 100% of the time there are 99% of boaters that operate unsafely. I'll have to work on that to fully comprehend the implications.
This isn't rocket science. My point was that a lot more than 1% of the boaters on Winni are operating unsafely - and few of those who do generally operate safely, do so 100% of the time.

Quote:
I suggest you contact Marine Patrol. One of them on a Sea Doo following you from a distance could bag all those 150' violators. You seem to be a magnet for them. The word will spread quickly and those that still break the law will face the consequences while you feel safer. Of course you could help your situation by making yourself more visible.
Why is it that you feel the need to pick my posts apart, without fully reading them? I've posted over and over in this forum that I am not the only paddler who has had close calls with high-speed power boats. I've also posted over and over - and even used large red text - that my kayak and I are very visible. The only reason that I'm not seen is because some powerboat operators are not paying attention - or they are traveling faster than their ability.

Quote:
Evenstar, I seem to remember that someone did offer to go kayak with you this coming season.
Let me make it easy for you. In the "Lt. Dunleavy" thread, Mee-n-Mac made an off-handed joke that "we go out paddling for a day and see how many close calls we have." I replied to Mee-n-Mac in the very next post - #348, where I wrote, "I’ve offered to kayak on Winni with anyone / anytime (well, once I complete my spring semester). But be prepared for a real workout, as I generally paddle 16 to 20 miles in an afternoon, and I won’t be hugging the shoreline."

He never responded top my offer - nor has anyone else. Perhaps it was the fact that I do not hug the shoreline like he does. I made this a standing offer a couple of years ago - and my offer still stands, but so far no one on this forum has had the guts to actually go with me on the main lake in a kayak. And yet you guys call me "afraid".
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
Evenstar is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 07:11 AM   #3
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 508
Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
This isn't rocket science. My point was that a lot more than 1% of the boaters on Winni are operating unsafely - and few of those who do generally operate safely, do so 100% of the time.
Why is it that you feel the need to pick my posts apart, without fully reading them? I've posted over and over in this forum that I am not the only paddler who has had close calls with high-speed power boats. I've also posted over and over - and even used large red text - that my kayak and I are very visible. The only reason that I'm not seen is because some powerboat operators are not paying attention - or they are traveling faster than their ability.
Let me make it easy for you. In the "Lt. Dunleavy" thread, Mee-n-Mac made an off-handed joke that "we go out paddling for a day and see how many close calls we have." I replied to Mee-n-Mac in the very next post - #348, where I wrote, "I’ve offered to kayak on Winni with anyone / anytime (well, once I complete my spring semester). But be prepared for a real workout, as I generally paddle 16 to 20 miles in an afternoon, and I won’t be hugging the shoreline."
He never responded top my offer - nor has anyone else. Perhaps it was the fact that I do not hug the shoreline like he does. I made this a standing offer a couple of years ago - and my offer still stands, but so far no one on this forum has had the guts to actually go with me on the main lake in a kayak. And yet you guys call me "afraid".
I'm sorry to say this but the majority of people here probably think that you're not that smart about your recreation choices. While you are at it why not go for a swim across the broads. I just don't see this as a speed limit issue. I think you nailed it on the head when you said: "The only reason that I'm not seen is because some powerboat operators are not paying attention."
A sped limit won't change that. So as far as I see it you are deliberately putting yourself in harms way. I believe that the operators of every vessel are required to keep a sharp lookout but that is not the case. I know you feel passionately about your right to paddle across the broads but even the swimmers do something to draw attention to themselves. Most "Broads" swimmers swim off a boat and don't venture more than a few feet from it. Others who have done the whole length of the lake usually have an entourage of support boats with them. You Kayaking across the broads isn't much different IMO. I think most Marine Patrol officers would caution against it, not because of speed, but because of traffic and inattentive boaters. However, being that it is not illegal they couldn't stop you. I bet if you asked them they would prefer it if you didn't do it. A speed limit won't change their mind. With that said why couldn't you make special arrangements with a chase boat when you decide to take on this risky endeavor. Any way you slice it speed limit or no speed limit you are taking a large risk when you kayak across the equivalent of I-93 on lake winni.
hazelnut is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 08:16 AM   #4
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
This isn't rocket science. My point was that a lot more than 1% of the boaters on Winni are operating unsafely - and few of those who do generally operate safely, do so 100% of the time.


Why is it that you feel the need to pick my posts apart, without fully reading them? I've posted over and over in this forum that I am not the only paddler who has had close calls with high-speed power boats. I've also posted over and over - and even used large red text - that my kayak and I are very visible. The only reason that I'm not seen is because some powerboat operators are not paying attention - or they are traveling faster than their ability.


Let me make it easy for you. In the "Lt. Dunleavy" thread, Mee-n-Mac made an off-handed joke that "we go out paddling for a day and see how many close calls we have." I replied to Mee-n-Mac in the very next post - #348, where I wrote, "I’ve offered to kayak on Winni with anyone / anytime (well, once I complete my spring semester). But be prepared for a real workout, as I generally paddle 16 to 20 miles in an afternoon, and I won’t be hugging the shoreline."

He never responded top my offer - nor has anyone else. Perhaps it was the fact that I do not hug the shoreline like he does. I made this a standing offer a couple of years ago - and my offer still stands, but so far no one on this forum has had the guts to actually go with me on the main lake in a kayak. And yet you guys call me "afraid".
I think that about 99.657% of boaters realize that it's just not a prudent thing to do in the Main Lake. Perhaps we need to enact some rules and regulations, for safety's sake of course

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_New...kayaking/7360/


Rescuers cite need to regulate kayaking

Published: April 30, 2008 at 10:24 AM

WASHINGTON, April 30 (UPI) -- The growing popularity of kayaking in the United States is prompting rescue organizations to call for laws requiring kayakers to take boating safety courses.

The head of the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators says an explosion in the number of kayakers along the nation's waterways has become a "huge drain" on rescue teams, USA Today reported Wednesday.

"Paddling represents our greatest risk in the recreational boating community," says John Fetterman, who is also a member of the Maine Marine Patrol.

Fetterman told USA Today he supports legislation to require kayakers to take courses that teach them the basics of water safety.

No government agency tracks the number of kayak-related rescues nationally each year but the U.S. Coast Guard does track boating fatalities. Twenty-seven people died kayaking in 2006, the most recent year for which numbers are available, USA Today says.

Experts says one of the reasons for the sport's popularity is that kayaks are relatively inexpensive and can be hauled and used with ease."
VtSteve is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 03:25 PM   #5
Seaplane Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 664
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
Default

You know, every time I'm on an on-ramp to a major highway in NH (Rt. 93, 95, 89) I see a sign that says something like: No horses, bicycles, scooters, etc. They put these signs up for safety reasons. Now, in my opinion, Winnipesaukee is the lake equivalent of a major highway, and kayaks, canoes, paddle boats, etc., are the water equivalent of scooters, bicycles and horses. Therefore, I believe that we should ban the use of kayaks, canoes and paddle boats on Winnipesaukee (for their own safety) and force them to utilize the lake equivalent of secondary roads, i.e smaller lakes and ponds. This sounds logical and fair to me. Time to contact the Senators and Reps to have them introduce a bill. The precedence is certainly in place for this to pass.
Seaplane Pilot is offline  
Sponsored Links
Old 05-07-2008, 03:57 PM   #6
B R
Senior Member
 
B R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot View Post
You know, every time I'm on an on-ramp to a major highway in NH (Rt. 93, 95, 89) I see a sign that says something like: No horses, bicycles, scooters, etc. They put these signs up for safety reasons. Now, in my opinion, Winnipesaukee is the lake equivalent of a major highway, and kayaks, canoes, paddle boats, etc., are the water equivalent of scooters, bicycles and horses. Therefore, I believe that we should ban the use of kayaks, canoes and paddle boats on Winnipesaukee (for their own safety) and force them to utilize the lake equivalent of secondary roads, i.e smaller lakes and ponds. This sounds logical and fair to me. Time to contact the Senators and Reps to have them introduce a bill. The precedence is certainly in place for this to pass.
a compromise might be to have a 150' law in place. for their own safety and the safety of others, they cannot go more than 150' from shore. boats can't go more than headway speed when that close to shore so no fear of speeding boats.
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know"
B R is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 06:35 PM   #7
Cal
Senior Member
 
Cal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Pitman , NJ
Posts: 627
Thanks: 40
Thanked 21 Times in 12 Posts
Default

That makes too much sense
__________________
Paddle faster , I think I here banjos
Cal is offline  
Old 05-08-2008, 08:18 AM   #8
Evenstar
Senior Member
 
Evenstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool You guys are sooo self-centered!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot View Post
Now, in my opinion, Winnipesaukee is the lake equivalent of a major highway, and kayaks, canoes, paddle boats, etc., are the water equivalent of scooters, bicycles and horses.
That's that problem! We have let high-speed power boaters turn our largest lake into the "equivalent of a major highway."[/quote]

Quote:
Therefore, I believe that we should ban the use of kayaks, canoes and paddle boats on Winnipesaukee (for their own safety) and force them to utilize the lake equivalent of secondary roads, i.e smaller lakes and ponds. This sounds logical and fair to me. . . The precedence is certainly in place for this to pass.
And what precedence would that be??? The risk of injury or death for powerboaters is much higher than for paddlers. My sea kayak is made for large bodies of water - not for ponds. Name some small lakes and ponds in NH whern I can paddle 20 miles without going around in circles.

My kayak doesn't polute, moves through the water nearly silently, doesn't create damaging wakes - and I am not a risk to others on the lake. And you guys want to ban us!

Quote:
Originally Posted by B R View Post
a compromise might be to have a 150' law in place. for their own safety and the safety of others, they cannot go more than 150' from shore. boats can't go more than headway speed when that close to shore so no fear of speeding boats.
That's not a compromise. And I have had speeding boats violate my 150 foot zone when I've been within 150 feet of shore - since they can travel at unlimited speeds at 151 feet from the shore.

Other than being at risk from powerboats, how is my paddling on the lake unsafe for me - and I would love to know how my kayak and I are making the lake unsafe for others. Please explain that statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal View Post
That makes too much sense
That makes absolutely no sense and is probably unconstitutional - you can a type of vessel from a recreational body of water, just so others can continue to travel at unlimited speeds.

A speed limit however makes total sense - and doesn't ban anyone.
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
Evenstar is offline  
Old 05-08-2008, 10:53 AM   #9
Seaplane Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 664
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
Default

Gee, maybe we should just shut down the major interstate highways as well. Let's go back to horse and buggy travel on dirt paths and cross the oceans in sailing vessels vs. airplanes. It's called progress.
Seaplane Pilot is offline  
Old 05-08-2008, 12:04 PM   #10
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default What's good for the goose is good for the gander!

Quote:
Originally posted by Evenstar
That makes absolutely no sense and is probably unconstitutional - you can a type of vessel from a recreational body of water, just so others can continue to travel at unlimited speeds.
Actually here is a link to a list of recreational bodies of water in New Hampshire that are restricted for use by particular types of vessel etc. So if it's okay to ban or limit various boats that are propelled by an engine why is it unconstitutional to do the same with human powered vessels?

http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/s...estricted.html

Oh, btw when I printed this out it was 20 PAGES LONG!
Airwaves is offline  
Old 05-08-2008, 03:03 PM   #11
Evenstar
Senior Member
 
Evenstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot View Post
Gee, maybe we should just shut down the major interstate highways as well. Let's go back to horse and buggy travel on dirt paths and cross the oceans in sailing vessels vs. airplanes. It's called progress.
And progress often requires new regulations - the laws have changed / are changing.

There is nothing old-fashioned about me or my kayak. My sea kayak is made out of a high-tech, light-weight composite material, called Airalite - that wasn't even available a few years ago. Even my paddle is high-tech. And, when the water is cold, I wear a high-tech breathable drysuit.

Perhaps you are the one who needs to adjust the this new eco-friendly world. Gas-gusseling high-speed boats are so out there. High-tech paddling is the new in thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by B R View Post
i remember naked people in a canoe just last year (not 30 or 40 years ago) that endangered a boating family last year. if this were law, that probably doesn't happen.
That's really stretching things - as far as I know, it is just as possible to be naked in a powerboat or to be naked within 150 feet of shore. And how was the boating family actually "endangered" by this? In all my paddling, I have never once encountered a naked paddler.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hazelnut View Post
Not only are YOU self centered but you fail at comprehension. I'll slow it down for you. A speed limit does not equate to attention. A boat traveling at 45, 35, or 25 operated by an inattentive operator is 100 times more dangerous than a boat operating at 75MPH with an attentive operator. You obviously have ZERO high speed boating experience so there is absolutely no way you could or would ever comprehend how it works. I'll try to spell it out. Boaters operating at high speeds usually focus all of their attention on the task at hand and keep the sharpest of sharp lookouts. Casual boaters cruising at or around 25-30MPH are much more likely to take a casual approach and get lulled into a sense of security while they carry on and converse, sightsee, etc and end up failing to keep a sharp watch.
Haselnut, are you just on this forum to insult others?

Excuse me; I have no trouble at comprehension. I’m likely smarter than you, so don’t treat me like an idiot just because I happen to disagree with you.

Now let me explain something to you. Inattention above 45 mph is more dangerous than intention at slower speeds – simply because you are traveling faster – anyone with any sense at all knows that. Show me any scientific evidence that proves that higher speeds actually increase a person’s attention span. A person who is inattentive at 35mph will still be just as inattentive at 70mph.

How many powerboat operators have Attention Deficit Disorder? How many consume alcohol while they are boating? How many have less than perfect vision? If all high-speed operators are so acutely attentive, why don’t they see me in time to stay clear of my 150 foot zone?

I contend that slowing down increases your ability to see better – if that isn’t true, then why can I see other kayaks a mile off, while operators of boats traveling at high speeds seem to have so much trouble seeing me?

Quote:
Sorry I'll never ever agree that kayaking in the broads is wise speed limit or no speed limit. I think it is dumb actually. Tell me you can't get a good workout hugging the shoreline? Comparing your craft to powerboats is absolutely ridiculous. Your profile in the water is much closer to a swimmer. If you can't understand that there is no point in even discussing rational thoughts with you. Just like swimming in the broads alone is stupid, so is kayaking in the broads. There is a place for everyone on the lake to do their favorite activity.
Hazelnut, you’re not “sorry,” so please quit posting that you are. But you are a powerboat snob, if you actually think that it isn't “a real boat" unless it has a motor! My kayak is actually more sea worthy than many powerboats.

There is nothing “stupid” about taking a SEA KAYAK across the Broads – my kayak is designed to handle large waves, and I’m very experienced – and have all the proper gear. Have you ever even been in a sea kayak? Do you even know what one looks like? “You obviously have ZERO” sea kayaking “experience so there is absolutely no way you could or would ever comprehend how it works.”

Quote:
You think everyone else is selfish yet you are the only one trying to take away somebodies activities. Coves are for skiing, shoreline for kayaks, paddleboats and canoes, large open spaces for speed boats. How is that not sharing.
Who gave you the right to divide up the lake, and to exclude others from using ‘your part’??? The main lake is not and never will be the private domain of powerboats.

All a speed limit does is make you slow down to what the state has determined is a safer speed for others on the lake – it doesn’t kick you off the lake, of permit you from using any part of the lake – and you think that is unfair, while stating that paddlers should not be able to use the entire lake just so you can travel at unlimited speeds on it. Others, who I was replying to here, have stated outright that kayaks should not even be permitted on the lake at all!
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
Evenstar is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 08:28 AM   #12
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 508
Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
Haselnut, are you just on this forum to insult others?
Excuse me; I have no trouble at comprehension. I’m likely smarter than you, so don’t treat me like an idiot just because I happen to disagree with you.
Now let me explain something to you. Inattention above 45 mph is more dangerous than intention at slower speeds – simply because you are traveling faster – anyone with any sense at all knows that. Show me any scientific evidence that proves that higher speeds actually increase a person’s attention span. A person who is inattentive at 35mph will still be just as inattentive at 70mph.
How many powerboat operators have Attention Deficit Disorder? How many consume alcohol while they are boating? How many have less than perfect vision? If all high-speed operators are so acutely attentive, why don’t they see me in time to stay clear of my 150 foot zone?
I contend that slowing down increases your ability to see better – if that isn’t true, then why can I see other kayaks a mile off, while operators of boats traveling at high speeds seem to have so much trouble seeing me?
Hazelnut, you’re not “sorry,” so please quit posting that you are. But you are a powerboat snob, if you actually think that it isn't “a real boat" unless it has a motor! My kayak is actually more sea worthy than many powerboats.
There is nothing “stupid” about taking a SEA KAYAK across the Broads – my kayak is designed to handle large waves, and I’m very experienced – and have all the proper gear. Have you ever even been in a sea kayak? Do you even know what one looks like? “You obviously have ZERO” sea kayaking “experience so there is absolutely no way you could or would ever comprehend how it works.”
Who gave you the right to divide up the lake, and to exclude others from using ‘your part’??? The main lake is not and never will be the private domain of powerboats.
All a speed limit does is make you slow down to what the state has determined is a safer speed for others on the lake – it doesn’t kick you off the lake, of permit you from using any part of the lake – and you think that is unfair, while stating that paddlers should not be able to use the entire lake just so you can travel at unlimited speeds on it. Others, who I was replying to here, have stated outright that kayaks should not even be permitted on the lake at all!
Yeah that's it You're smarter, and stronger than everyone on this forum
Evanstar you are so far gone down the Self Centered highway you can't even see how Self Centered you are. I do Kayak, actually I do it often. I also powerboat often. My point was that the lake is such a large resource that there is enough room for everyone. But you are so blinded and narrow minded you fail to yield the point that you could keep to the shores and allow power boaters their space. Just as I don't tear around coves when people are water skiing. I also steer well clear of sailboats, whether in groups or alone.

All I'm saying is that this lake is unique in that it offers recreation for all. You can't handle that though, you want want want. You also think you will be all of a sudden magically safer after the speed limit. I continue to stand by my post that it is dumb to kayak in the broads speed limit or no speed limit. And you're right about that I make zero apologies about that statement. As for me being a power boat snob, laughable. I love canoing and kayaking, there is no better way to see the lake. I just do it safely, for my safety and that of the power boaters. You are a power boat hater so you think your rights trump everyone else's.

Just a bit of advice Mr He-man Smartypants, there will always be someone who is smarter, stronger, faster than you. That attitude will get you in some pretty big trouble some day. You know nothing about most of these posters and I've seen you insult them regularly, most recently:

... so I’m probably in better shape that most of you.
and
I’m likely smarter than you,


All that sounds like is that you still live at home and have a lot to learn.
hazelnut is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 09:19 AM   #13
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Isn't youth grand?

No comments on this one?


http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_New...kayaking/7360/


Rescuers cite need to regulate kayaking

Published: April 30, 2008 at 10:24 AM



We just had a couple of overturned kayakers rescued this week, they were drunk.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 10:29 AM   #14
EricP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Default I'd like to propose a bill

I'd like a law that states if you're going to kayak across the broads, or other large congested areas of the lake, you must have a flag that sticks up 3' from either the bow or stern of your kayak so you can be seen from further than 150' away by other recrerational users of Lake Winnipesaukee.
EricP is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 11:13 AM   #15
Mashugana
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 73
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thumbs up A flag for kayaks is a great idea

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricP View Post
I'd like a law that states if you're going to kayak across the broads, or other large congested areas of the lake, you must have a flag that sticks up 3' from either the bow or stern of your kayak so you can be seen from further than 150' away by other recrerational users of Lake Winnipesaukee.
What a great idea EdicP. A flag with it's base at least 3 feet above the kayak would be excellent. Evenstar would be seen from even further away with a flag like that. That certainly would help her feel safer. An excellent solution.

I wonder how they will toss out your idea. They will say that it won't work. Then they may call it or you idiotic and make HB847 appear to be the only solution.

I say good for you. EricP should get an award for such a great idea. A flag for kayaks so they can be seen from a longer distance.

By the way, does Evenstar represent the average kayaker on the big lake?
Mashugana is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 11:32 AM   #16
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,573
Thanks: 753
Thanked 354 Times in 266 Posts
Default Seriously

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashugana View Post
What a great idea EdicP. A flag with it's base at least 3 feet above the kayak would be excellent. Evenstar would be seen from even further away with a flag like that. That certainly would help her feel safer. An excellent solution.

I wonder how they will toss out your idea. They will say that it won't work. Then they may call it or you idiotic and make HB847 appear to be the only solution.

I say good for you. EricP should get an award for such a great idea. A flag for kayaks so they can be seen from a longer distance.

By the way, does Evenstar represent the average kayaker on the big lake?
This should be proposed, it is a great idea and safe for eveyone, not trying to be a jerk here. They want to be seen and be safe and we want to know where they are and it will not cause any problems to the kayak, I might just do that to mine
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries"
AC2717 is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 11:37 AM   #17
codeman671
Senior Member
 
codeman671's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,486
Thanks: 221
Thanked 810 Times in 486 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashugana View Post
What a great idea EdicP. A flag with it's base at least 3 feet above the kayak would be excellent. Evenstar would be seen from even further away with a flag like that. That certainly would help her feel safer. An excellent solution.

I wonder how they will toss out your idea. They will say that it won't work. Then they may call it or you idiotic and make HB847 appear to be the only solution.

I say good for you. EricP should get an award for such a great idea. A flag for kayaks so they can be seen from a longer distance.

By the way, does Evenstar represent the average kayaker on the big lake?
It has been brought up a few times before and Evenstar was not a fan...
codeman671 is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 12:16 PM   #18
EricP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by codeman671 View Post
It has been brought up a few times before and Evenstar was not a fan...
Yes, But I am.
EricP is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 12:40 PM   #19
codeman671
Senior Member
 
codeman671's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,486
Thanks: 221
Thanked 810 Times in 486 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricP View Post
Yes, But I am.
I agree with it as well, no arguments here.
codeman671 is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 02:17 PM   #20
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,944
Thanks: 544
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by codeman671 View Post
I agree with it as well, no arguments here.
As do I. In fact, I haven't seen any opposition since it was recently proposed. It appears to have 100% support.
brk-lnt is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 12:51 PM   #21
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricP View Post
Yes, But I am.

I'd have to say that I am as well. In this day and age of high premiums and boat congestion, we can't afford to have anything in the water that isn't easy to see.


I feel that lakes need more regulations for sure.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 12:56 PM   #22
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

One thing has me worried. Would the speed limits have any impact on the NASWA Bikini Contest? I haven't even gotten over there yet.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 02:12 PM   #23
codeman671
Senior Member
 
codeman671's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,486
Thanks: 221
Thanked 810 Times in 486 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VtSteve View Post
One thing has me worried. Would the speed limits have any impact on the NASWA Bikini Contest? I haven't even gotten over there yet.
The one bonus I see is that at slower speeds it will be easier to be on bikini watch with passing boats
codeman671 is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 02:31 PM   #24
EricP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by codeman671 View Post
The one bonus I see is that at slower speeds it will be easier to be on bikini watch with passing boats
Being that it's held at the Naswa smack dab in the middle of a NWZ the only ramifications of HB847 passing is that the Naswa will have fewer customers and possibly even participants in the contest because it will take longer for them to get there to be on time. I think the Naswa needs to speak up against HB847 or risk less people frequenting their place. As a red blooded male it really concerns me that we may possibly have less bikinis present during the contest!

Oh my goodness, now I sound like FLL !!
EricP is offline  
Old 05-09-2008, 03:48 PM   #25
Evenstar
Senior Member
 
Evenstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricP View Post
I'd like a law that states if you're going to kayak across the broads, or other large congested areas of the lake, you must have a flag that sticks up 3' from either the bow or stern of your kayak so you can be seen from further than 150' away by other recrerational users of Lake Winnipesaukee.
EricP, why do you keep bringing this up? You just posted this same thing two weeks ago in the "HB 847 Meeting ..." thread, where I thought that I had explained why this is not a good idea - but you neglected to even respond to my reply. Here's exactly what I posted earlier:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
How many times do I have to explain this? Why don’t you people stick to what you know?

A sea kayak is long and narrow. My kayak is only 22 inches wide! I control it with thigh braces . . . and by leaning (which is called “putting it on edge”). Paddling a sea kayak is a constant balancing act.
A flag that would be large enough and tall enough to actually make a difference in my visibility would make my kayak very unstable – and it would make my kayak practically impossible to steer in even a moderate breeze, since it would make my kayak like a weather-vane.

My kayak is very visible – its upper hull is bright red and its lower hull is white. My friend’s kayak it bright yellow. My paddle blades are bright orange and my PFD is red.

We are extremely visible!

Yet some high speed boats have still violated our 150 foot zone – in the middle of a sunny afternoon – because they were going too fast and they didn’t see us in time. That is the problem.

In decent visibility I can spot most other kayaks up to a mile away – but I’m only going about 5 mph.This is not about me being unsafe or doing unsafe things - this is about high speed boat operators who will not slow down to a safe speed without the state enacting a speed limit.
I'll also add that a flag would make rolls, and self-rescues impossible to do. And I never go out on the main lake when visibility is not good. Oh, and my bikini is bright blue - maybe I need to get a fluorescent orange one, with strobe lights. (Sorry, but I just completed a 2-hour international law final, so I'm a bit giddy right now.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashugana View Post
What a great idea EdicP. . . . By the way, does Evenstar represent the average kayaker on the big lake?
Probably not, but there's no way of knowing, since most are not going to post on such a hostle forum. (read what I posted above, for why a flag isn't a "great idea"

Quote:
Originally Posted by hazelnut View Post
Evanstar read the title of YOUR post #189 posted just yesterday at 9:18am. It speaks volumes about your character.
No it doesn't - I was responding directly to three people who posted that kayaks should either be banned from the lake or prevented from venturing more than 150 from shore. In my opinion, their only reasoning was so that they could continue to travel at unlimited speeds on the lake - this is a pretty selfish reason to ban any type of boat (and before you jump all over me again - a speed limit doesn't ban any type of boat).

I have kayaked on a lake with an enforced speed limit - it's not perfect, because there are always people who violate laws, but there's a huge difference in the safety factor for paddlers.

I am not a selfish person, but I will stand up for my right to use the entire lake - since there is no reason that an experienced sea kayaker should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where I can paddle for 20 miles without going around in circles.
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
Evenstar is offline  
Old 05-10-2008, 03:47 PM   #26
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 508
Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
I am not a selfish person, but I will stand up for my right to use the entire lake - since there is no reason that an experienced sea kayaker should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where I can paddle for 20 miles without going around in circles.

But you DO have the right to paddle anywhere on the lake. Nobody has told you that you can't. I've told you I think it isn't smart but neither is swimming across the broads. I equate the two activities as similar. This is a direct quote from YOU:

In a sit in kayak, you actually sit below the water line and your top speed is maybe 5 MPH.

So if you are sitting below the water line how can you compare that activity to power boating and not swimming. Don't you agree that swimming in the broads is stupid? If so, how is kayaking the broads ANY different??? It is an activity that has some risk associated with it. It will always have risk associated with it speed limit or no speed limit. I know that you will never see it that way so we can agree to disagree. Anyway using your activities as a REASON for a speed limit is ridiculous. Why should anyone have to alter their activities for somebody who wants to risk their life? This is even WITH a speed limit in place.
hazelnut is offline  
Old 05-10-2008, 09:32 PM   #27
Evenstar
Senior Member
 
Evenstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by hazelnut View Post
But you DO have the right to paddle anywhere on the lake.
Come on, you know very well what I meant! The key here is that I should be able to do this safely - without having high-speed power boats violating my 150 foot zone, because they were traveling faster than their ability to see smaller boats.

Quote:
So if you are sitting below the water line how can you compare that activity to power boating and not swimming. Don't you agree that swimming in the broads is stupid? If so, how is kayaking the broads ANY different???
Now you're just being argumentive - trying to annoy me. If this is the best your side can do in trying to dispute the need for a lake speed limit, you're in real trouble.

There is NO comparison between paddling a kayak and swimming. It's not just me outhere alone - I'm in a BOAT!!! And I'm in a very visible boat - I can literally spot another kayak a mile a way - I cannot spot a swimmer a mile away. An inch or two of my butt might be below the waterline, but the rest of me isn't - including my RED PFD - and more than half of my 16-foot-long BRIGHT RED KAYAK is above the waterline. And the BRIGHT ORANGE blades of my paddles extend 4 to 5 feet above the waterline.

Quote:
It is an activity that has some risk associated with it. It will always have risk associated with it speed limit or no speed limit. I know that you will never see it that way so we can agree to disagree. Anyway using your activities as a REASON for a speed limit is ridiculous. Why should anyone have to alter their activities for somebody who wants to risk their life? This is even WITH a speed limit in place.
I agreed to disagree with you months ago, but you won't give it a rest and you keep tearing apart my replies to others - because you can't stand the fact that I and many others here disagree with your totally illogical reasoning.

There's a risk to almost any recreational activity, but allowing powerboats to travel on our lakes at unlimited speeds create a totally unnecessarily high risk to paddlers. An enforced speed limit will greatly lower that risk.

I can reduce the risk of paddling on Winni by using a kayak that is designed for the conditions found on a large lake, by having a kayak that is very visible, by paddling with my best friend (who has an equally visible kayak), by being an excellent swimmer, by wearing a PFD, by knowing how to do self-rescues, by taking coursing in CPR, advanced paddling techniques, and coastal navigation, by wearing the proper clothing when the water is cold, by having extra gear with me, by being experienced in paddling in large waves, by paying attention to the weather, and by being in the best shape possible.

My only real risk comes from the power boats - and mostly from the ones that are traveling at speeds beyond their ability to see smaller boats. The only "risk to my life" out there on any part of the lake is from some of the powerboats.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brk-lnt View Post
I will stand up for the right for powerboats to use the lake without an enforced speed limit - since there is no reason than an experienced power boater should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where a powerboat can travel at speeds greater than 40MPH without going around in circles.
The reason is that you are putting others at risk - that's a pretty good reason. Winni is only 20 miles long, so if you are traveling at high speeds on it, you will be going in circles. And the faster you go, the more you'll be traveling in circles. Maybe you need to go to the ocean.
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
Evenstar is offline  
Old 05-11-2008, 07:41 AM   #28
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,944
Thanks: 544
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post

The reason is that you are putting others at risk - that's a pretty good reason.
No, re-read my post. Experienced boaters operating safely are no different than experienced kayakers operating safely. The two can coexist easily.

If one or the other operates unsafely (and both groups are equally guilty of this), then all bets are off. You, quite obviously, feel that for reasons that are significant to you and your interests, that boaters should compromise to make you feel happier and safer.

You can wear the brightest colors imaginable, but height above waterline is a greater contributing factor to visibility than colors.
brk-lnt is offline  
Old 05-11-2008, 09:06 AM   #29
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brk-lnt View Post
No, re-read my post. Experienced boaters operating safely are no different than experienced kayakers operating safely. The two can coexist easily.

If one or the other operates unsafely (and both groups are equally guilty of this), then all bets are off. You, quite obviously, feel that for reasons that are significant to you and your interests, that boaters should compromise to make you feel happier and safer.

You can wear the brightest colors imaginable, but height above waterline is a greater contributing factor to visibility than colors.
It's already been stated that there are better places to do some paddling, without fear apparently. If I resided on a smaller lake, I'd be boating accordingly. On Champlain, my 22 footer is almost too small. I'd feel stupid in my old little bowrider asking for a law that prevented cruisers from making wakes. I'd also feel pretty stupid asking for speed limits so I could paddly the 13 miles or so across the lake, or the over 100 miles north to south.

When something seems inappropriate in a given situation, it probably is. As kids, we always knew that when in the canoe, we travelled along the shore, free of the main passageways. Even as kids, it made sense to us all.

On a congested body of water, common sense is the big thing that makes it all work. Unfortunately, common sense isn't in play for many. The current laws are not enforced, if they were, you'd not have as many issues with idiots that violate the distance law, the BWI laws, and kayakers in the middle of the lake living in fear. But common sense goes both ways. I'd no more take my boat to a little pond and tear things up as I would paddle my way over to NY state to see what's up.

We live in a day and age, a continuation from the 90's, where many of the new rules and regulations are worse than what they seek to limit.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 05-11-2008, 09:17 PM   #30
Chris Craft
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 120
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Evenstar: my problem with your argument is this. Today you are looking to add a speed limit so that you can take your ocean kayak out on lake winni. Well to me the next step for you will be to look for the same speed limit so that you can take your ocean kayak in the ocean. Seems that it is OK for me to not be able to use the lake in a safe responsible manner but if that is put on you then..... Why are your rights more important then mine?
Chris Craft is offline  
Old 05-12-2008, 05:31 AM   #31
Lakegeezer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 1,677
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 354
Thanked 639 Times in 290 Posts
Default Let's look at the law again

The first paragraph of the existing law is enough to satisfy the rights mentioned in RSA 270:1:II, the one Evenstar expresses concerns about. Safe and mutual enjoyment comes with speeds that are reasonable and prudent under existing conditions.

We are currently living under a good rule that we all should be able to agree on. It does not allow unlimited speed. The debate should be about enforcement of existing law, not extensions that create legitimate disrespect for the law.

From HB 0847: 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. <-- Good enough!

The reason there is a public outcry against the proposed law is that it defines what is not reasonable or prudent, removing the responsibility and freedom from certified boat pilots. To imply that going over 45 mph is unreasonable or not prudent when it is 7AM in the broads, on a Tuesday in May, with no boat in sight; is just plain wrong. Yet, that is what the law is implying.

(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.
__________________
-lg
Lakegeezer is offline  
Old 05-11-2008, 08:09 PM   #32
Evenstar
Senior Member
 
Evenstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by brk-lnt View Post
No, re-read my post. Experienced boaters operating safely are no different than experienced kayakers operating safely. The two can coexist easily.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brk-lnt View Post
If one or the other operates unsafely (and both groups are equally guilty of this), then all bets are off. You, quite obviously, feel that for reasons that are significant to you and your interests, that boaters should compromise to make you feel happier and safer. You can wear the brightest colors imaginable, but height above waterline is a greater contributing factor to visibility than colors.

The problem is that not everyone who operates at high-speeds does so safely. And visibility becomes more of a problem at higher speeds.

Your idea of a compromise is to ban sea kayaks from using the main lake – others on this forum want to ban all paddlers from the lake completely. Those aren’t compromises – a speed limit is a compromise, because it will better allow all boaters to use the lake – without banning any type of vessel from the lake or from any part of the lake.

New Hampshire RSA 270:1:II states: “In the interest of maintaining the residential, recreational and scenic values which New Hampshire public waters provide to residents of the state and to the promotion of our tourist industry, and in light of the fact that competing uses for the enjoyment of these waters, if not regulated for the benefit of all users, may diminish the value to be derived from them, it is hereby declared that the public waters of New Hampshire shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses, both from the shore and from water-borne conveyances.”

I contend that a speed limit is needed to “provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses, both from the shore and from water-borne conveyances.” All other factors being equal, slower speeds are proven to increase safety. Again – if I can see other kayaks as far as a mile away, why can’t some powerboat operators see me before they violate my 150 foot zone? My argument is that they are traveling at speeds that are faster than their abilities. A speed limit will force the fastest boats to slow down, which will give them more time to see smaller boats – and will give smaller boats more time to get out of their way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VtSteve View Post
It's already been stated that there are better places to do some paddling, without fear apparently. … When something seems inappropriate in a given situation, it probably is. As kids, we always knew that when in the canoe, we travelled along the shore, free of the main passageways. Even as kids, it made sense to us all.

A sea kayak isn’t a canoe, and I’m not a kid. My sea kayak is designed for large bodies of water, not ponds. If I wanted to paddle on ponds I would have bought a small, much less expensive, recreational kayak. I’m using my boat for exactly what it was designed to be used for – and I am doing so responsibly. There is nothing inappropriate about taking a sea kayak out on the main lake. I have the skills and the proper equipment to do so and I could do so safely if power boats were required to slow down to reasonable speed (so that they would see me).

I live 3 miles from a 10 mile long lake, where I do most of my paddling, and yet it is safer to kayak on Squam (which is a larger lake) on weekends, because Squam has a speed limit. So going to smaller NH lakes is not the answer, unless that smaller lake has a speed limit. This bill was not supposed to be just about Winni – it was originally written to cover all NH lakes.
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
Evenstar is offline  
Old 05-12-2008, 07:11 AM   #33
Skipper of the Sea Que
Deceased Member
 
Skipper of the Sea Que's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: 1/2 way between Boston & Providence
Posts: 573
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 32
Thanked 55 Times in 22 Posts
Thumbs up Being seen in a Kayak and more anti new speed limit stuff

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
The problem is that not everyone who operates at high-speeds does so safely. And visibility becomes more of a problem at higher speeds.
The same can be possible for ANY boaters regardless of speed. Not all boaters do so safely including boats going 45 mph or slower. Enforcing current laws is the answer here. The visibility factor is a relative issue (see below).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar
if I can see other kayaks as far as a mile away, why can’t some powerboat operators see me before they violate my 150 foot zone? My argument is that they are traveling at speeds that are faster than their abilities. A speed limit will force the fastest boats to slow down, which will give them more time to see smaller boats – and will give smaller boats more time to get out of their way.
You, in your low to the water kayak, can see another low kayak, "As far away as a mile". It follows that boat operators who are up much higher than you are can see further than you can see from your low kayak. If you can see a kayak as far away as a mile then the power boater with a higher vantage point can see the same kayak from even further away than a mile. Pretty good visibility. So from a mile away a boater at 60 mph has 58 seconds (almost a full minute) to avoid your 150' safe passage zone. That is more than sufficient time to react to your kayak. If that is not enough time in your opinion then the boater must be violating other rules which can be enforced. Such illegal boating jeopardizes everyone, not just Evenstar's Kayak and should be addressed by stricter enforcement of existing rules. I picked 60 mph because it makes the numbers easier to understand. 60 mph = 1 mile per minute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar
There is nothing inappropriate about taking a sea kayak out on the main lake. I have the skills and the proper equipment to do so and I could do so safely if power boats were required to slow down to reasonable speed (so that they would see me).
We differ on this point. You would increase your visibility with a safety flag. You don't have ALL the proper equipment without a kayak flag. If you are truly concerned about being seen better than you are now, then get the proper equipment. Specifically a kayak flag. One made just for KAYAKS. You claim you can not kayak with these. I believe that with your skill you could handle a safety flag better than the average kayaker.

Here's a review of a kayak flag: "I have been looking for this for a long time! It sticks to the boat extremely well. It is very visible, yet doesn't get in the way. Easy to roll with too. I love it, especially with an after market pirate's flag addition. Thanks!" from This catalog.

Or this Kayakers safety visibility flag
The product description says: Be seen by power boaters & jet skis! The Paddler's Visibility Flag has a 4-foot pole topped with colorful streamers. This flag is suitable for use with sit-in-side kayaks and will not prevent Eskimo rolling. Flag is flexible enough for most rough landings and shallow water tip-overs. (Streamers can be substituted with a small flag. USCG suggests an American flag, but any flag, sports pennant, our your own "coat of arms" could be used.)



One of those "made for kayak" flags added to your bright colored kayak, with highly visible paddles, bikini and PFD, should make you even more visible from over a mile away regardless of reasonable (sometimes over 45mph) speed.

We all need to work together to make boating safe and fun for all. We do not need more speed related laws to do that.
__________________



Amateur HAM Radio What is it? You'll be surprised. When all else fails Ham Radio still works.
Shriners Hospitals providing specialized care for children regardless of ability to pay. Find out more or refer a patient.
Skipper of the Sea Que is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 11:28 AM   #34
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,938
Thanks: 2,205
Thanked 776 Times in 553 Posts
Cool No RECORD of Kayaks Being Run Over...

Quote:
Originally Posted by brk-lnt View Post
"...You have failed to present any arguments that are truly compelling other than in your own little world...."
Besides kayaking, there is "the little world" of fallen windsurfers, capsized sailboats, kids on floats, people on land within 130' of the water's edge, ejected passengers, sunk/wrecked survivors, divers, canoes, swimmers and fallen skiers. (In addition to sailboats run over while sailing upright).

Quote:
Originally Posted by VtSteve View Post
"...Without funding, your laws are of no consequence..."
The NHMP already has trained radar officers AND radar tools have been provided—for free! How do you think the Speed Survey was accomplished?

Yes, I know...Woodsy cheers the Speed Survey at the same time touting THE FACT that radar doesn't work on water.
Quote:
"How would you enforce the new law? You cannot shoot a handheld radar gun at a speeding boat and get an accurate reading unless you are close to the same bearing."
—Woodsy
But Woodsy has previously vouched, "there are no records of kayaks being run over on Winnipesaukee".

Say, doesn't a run-over kayak need to be worth $2000 for a report to be legally required?

Yes...Let's give the MPs the means to spot extreme speeders more readily. Existing "Unsafe Passage" regulations are NH-only and clearly neither being observed nor enforced.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VtSteve View Post
"...You can also expend all of your brainpower and free time communicating and being all political, but in the end, it gets nothing accomplished..."
Because we don't know how aggressive the NHMP will be, we don't know how effective the outcome will be. I suspect that Bear Islander is correct, and that fewer Winnipesaukee cowboys will frequent the lake—even if radar isn't used at all!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashugana View Post
"...Unsafe speeds are not allowed here..."
It happens every hour: the wrong people refuse to see any unsafe speed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashugana View Post
"...Be seen with a flag and let MP enforce the laws we already have in place..."
1) Why put the burden on the kayaker minding his own business? Capsized kayaks, windsurfers, canoes or sailboats will be displaying zero flags.

2) While Dave R and I are on different sides of this law, both of us are on record here as saying "the invisible kayak" isn't the problem on the lake; but any capsized boat could be a problem. (Think of a certain sunken Cobalt—but at night).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipper of the Sea Que View Post
"...We all need to work together to make boating safe and fun for all. We do not need more speed related laws to do that..."
As we saw, Littlefield's boat rocketed through a giant loophole: that prompted Concord to make new laws in 2002—and we continue to need new laws.

Law enforcement continues to need every possible tool: why tie their hands?
__________________
Is it
"Common Sense" isn't.
ApS is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 05:04 PM   #35
Evenstar
Senior Member
 
Evenstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool Stop trying to blame the paddlers!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipper of the Sea Que View Post
The same can be possible for ANY boaters regardless of speed. Not all boaters do so safely including boats going 45 mph or slower. Enforcing current laws is the answer here. The visibility factor is a relative issue (see below).
Well, it could just be me – but this is one of the most confusing posts I have read on the forum. Here’s my interpretation of what you wrote:

1.) You agree that I can see another kayak up to a mile away in good visibility.

2.) You claim that powerboat operators can see further than me, which means that all powerboat owners can plainly see my kayak.

3.) Then you say that I need to increase my visibility (because being visible from a mile away isn’t good enough???) – by installing some silly little flag!!!????

And when that doesn’t help (which it won’t) then what?

Strobe lights?

Balloons?

Radar reflectors?

A fleet of MP to protect me???

The problem is not my lack of visibility – the problem is that some powerboat owners are traveling at speeds that are greater than their ability to see. And it has been my experience, that the number that do so is significant enough to create a real danger to people like me, who use smaller boats on the lake.

Here are the facts:
1.) Visibility has NEVER been a problem for me on Squam Lake – because there is a 40 mph speed limit which apparently keeps powerboat operators from traveling faster than their ability to see. So I’m almost certain that a 45mph speed limit on Winni with have a similar effect (although, personally I think that 40 mph is a better limit).

2.) Those little flags are nothing but gimics. They are not large enough to increase visibility to an significant amount. Go to the site and look at the actual photo of that little streamer mounted on a kayak – it is barely visible. The surface area of one of my bright orange paddle blades is greater then any of those flags you linked to – and my moving paddle blade extends higher above the water! Yet when I stated that the most visible part of a kayak is the moving paddles, people here jumped all over me. The problem is most of you haven’t even been in a sea kayak, yet you and others have all sorts of “good” advice for me.

3.) Almost everything sold on the internet has glowing reviews posted about how good it is. Don’t believe everything that you read on the Internet, because not everyone is being totally honest. If this flag is so good, where are the endorsements from major kayak and paddling organizations? Go to any sea kayak or paddling website and do a search on “flag” and all you’ll find is info on attaching a flag on your long sea kayak when you transport it on the roof of your car. Paddling.net is the largest paddling site – go there and check for yourself if you don’t believe me. No serious paddler uses these little flags because they are useless – and they do hinder rescue procedures – like rolling and self rescues – especially on windy days.

4.) Up in post #220 I wrote: “A flag that would be large enough and tall enough to actually make a difference in my visibility would make my kayak very unstable – and it would make my kayak practically impossible to steer in even a moderate breeze, since it would make my kayak like a weather-vane.” That is the truth. In order to increase my visibility to any meaningful degree, a flag would have to have a significantly larger surface area than my paddle blade and it would have to extend above the water higher than my paddle – such a flag would make my kayak totally unstable in any wind.

Stop trying to blame the dangerous conditions on us paddlers, when it doesn’t take a whole lot of common sense to see that high-speed powerboats are the ones putting us in danger.
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
Evenstar is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 08:19 AM   #36
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,944
Thanks: 544
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=Evenstar;70181]
The problem is that not everyone who operates at high-speeds does so safely. And visibility becomes more of a problem at higher speeds.

The problem is that not everyone who kayaks on the lake does so safely. For example, no kayakers seem to use a kayak flag to promote their visibility. And visibility becomes more of a problem when you have a low-height craft paddling in an area with high waves.

Every argument you make about speed limits and powerboat operators can be turned back around on you. You have failed to present any arguments that are truly compelling (other than in your own little world) .
brk-lnt is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 10:24 AM   #37
Pricestavern
Senior Member
 
Pricestavern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Valencia, Spain (formerly Rattlesnake Isle)
Posts: 389
Thanks: 135
Thanked 142 Times in 82 Posts
Default Kayak Safety

A kayaker needs to understand that they are inherently difficult to see and should take all precautions as if they were invisible. A speed limit will not make a kayaker safer and it should not be relied on to do so. I have been kayaking for quite some time now in a 16' sea kayak (bright red) and have come close to being run down by sailboats!
Pricestavern is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 03:00 AM   #38
Mashugana
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 73
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Lightbulb Same old lament with a twist

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
There's a risk to almost any recreational activity, but allowing powerboats to travel on our lakes at unlimited speeds create a totally unnecessarily high risk to paddlers. An enforced speed limit will greatly lower that risk.
You know better than that Evenstar. All your concerns are covered by existing laws. Unsafe speeds are not allowed here. Enforced existing laws will lower your risk more than concentrating on an additional new law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar
My only real risk comes from the power boats - and mostly from the ones that are traveling at speeds beyond their ability to see smaller boats. The only "risk to my life" out there on any part of the lake is from some of the powerboats.
Elsewhere you claim that your kind of kayaking is risky in the first place. All you have is your observation that fast boats can not see you in enough time to avoid your 150 foot safe passage space. No other proof tangable or otherwise. You say that it is not safe for you. If you are boating unsafely then that might be considered illegal for you to do.

Think of it like anchoring in a No Rafting Zone. You get there and set your anchor and take a nap. An hour later boaters make a raft 30 feet from your boat. Your boat is now anchored illegally. It is not your fault but you are still illegal. So too is boating unsafely. Since youbelieve that you can not boat safely on the lake you are then breaking the law by knowingly boating unsafely.

Several of the messages above clearly respond to your situation. The made for kayaks safety flag sounds like what you need. You can reduce your feeling of risk with the proper kayak flag. That would make it safer for you. Your excuse for not using a kayak safety flag is invalid. They are made for kayaks. We do not need to adjust everyone to accommodate you. Be seen with a flag and let MP enforce the laws we already have in place.

Kayak safely.
Mashugana is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 07:56 AM   #39
codeman671
Senior Member
 
codeman671's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,486
Thanks: 221
Thanked 810 Times in 486 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by evenstar
There's a risk to almost any recreational activity, but allowing powerboats to travel on our lakes at unlimited speeds create a totally unnecessarily high risk to paddlers. An enforced speed limit will greatly lower that risk.
I am not sure what planet the lake you kayak is on, but boats are not traveling at "unlimited" speeds" per se. When I hear you say "unlimited" it makes Winnipesaukee sound like boats are traveling at 100mph+ recklessly wherever and whenever they go. This is simply not the case. The average boat on the lake IMHO travels below 55mph. Sure, there are exceptions but rarely do you see boats flying around at 80mph+. It takes an ungodly amount of HP and money to break the 80mph mark, even though money is not an issue in the lakes region the number of boats capable of going that fast is limited. Silver Sands for instance dropped Fountain and only has 1 used boat that will exceed 80mph on the lot. I pick 80mph as it is the top speed of the typical twin engine big block powered (but stock) GFBL sold on the lake without serious mods.

At this point almost all the performance boat lines are not even being sold on the lake.
codeman671 is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 10:48 AM   #40
Island Lover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by codeman671 View Post
I am not sure what planet the lake you kayak is on, but boats are not traveling at "unlimited" speeds" per se. When I hear you say "unlimited" it makes Winnipesaukee sound like boats are traveling at 100mph+ recklessly wherever and whenever they go. This is simply not the case. The average boat on the lake IMHO travels below 55mph. Sure, there are exceptions but rarely do you see boats flying around at 80mph+. It takes an ungodly amount of HP and money to break the 80mph mark, even though money is not an issue in the lakes region the number of boats capable of going that fast is limited. Silver Sands for instance dropped Fountain and only has 1 used boat that will exceed 80mph on the lot. I pick 80mph as it is the top speed of the typical twin engine big block powered (but stock) GFBL sold on the lake without serious mods.

At this point almost all the performance boat lines are not even being sold on the lake.
Some of the opposition arguments are getting ludicrous. Why do you keep pretending there is some kind of speed limit already? Who are you trying to convince? There is no speed limit on Winnipesaukee! This is a fact. When you start talking about no wake zones and reckless operation regulations as if they were speed limits you make yourself look silly. And, in truth, very desperate.
Island Lover is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 12:12 PM   #41
Woodsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,965
Thanks: 80
Thanked 979 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Island Lover View Post
Some of the opposition arguments are getting ludicrous. Why do you keep pretending there is some kind of speed limit already? Who are you trying to convince? There is no speed limit on Winnipesaukee! This is a fact. When you start talking about no wake zones and reckless operation regulations as if they were speed limits you make yourself look silly. And, in truth, very desperate.
Island Lover...

Your ignorance of the rules & regulations is absolutely astounding!!

There are numerous rules and regulations pertaining to EXACTLY how fast a boat is ALLOWED to travel during CERTAIN situations! A NWZ is a SPEED LIMIT! The 150' Safe Passage Rule is a SPEED LIMIT! In fact the very definition of both of those rules SPECIFICALLY STATE a MAXIMUM SPEED OF 6 MILES PER HOUR. Sounds like a speed limit to me!

RECKLESS OPERATION laws are there to protect you from a Capt. Bonehead. It is an INTENTIONALLY BROAD STATUTE designed to cover a myriad of bad behavior.... For example, the MP witness a boat traveling at 45 MPH that violates your 150' bubble by a small margin, lets say they come within 100' of you. Thats a no brainer, they get pulled over and get a warning on the 150' rule...

Same Bonehead, same scenario but instead he violates your bubble by a big margin, lets say he is 15' away from you traveling at 45MPH... this is where the Reckless Operation Statute comes into play! Now he could possibly be arrested and punished in a far more severe manner!

Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.
Woodsy is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 01:13 PM   #42
codeman671
Senior Member
 
codeman671's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,486
Thanks: 221
Thanked 810 Times in 486 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Island Lover View Post
Some of the opposition arguments are getting ludicrous. Why do you keep pretending there is some kind of speed limit already? Who are you trying to convince? There is no speed limit on Winnipesaukee! This is a fact. When you start talking about no wake zones and reckless operation regulations as if they were speed limits you make yourself look silly. And, in truth, very desperate.
Desperate? I think not. I have no stake in this fight. It won't affect me a bit. I could personally care less at this point however think that enacting a speed limit is wrong and will not solve anything.

I am sick and tired of people making false claims that a speed limit IS necessary. The accident "data" does not support it, the speed limit survey did not support it, the survey here did not support it, the only thing that supports it is the campaign of lies and deceit that the supporters have put together to influence people that do not know better...
codeman671 is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 03:27 PM   #43
Skipper of the Sea Que
Deceased Member
 
Skipper of the Sea Que's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: 1/2 way between Boston & Providence
Posts: 573
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 32
Thanked 55 Times in 22 Posts
Exclamation It's a speed limit only when you want it to be.

Island Lover. Reasonable and safe speed is covered in the regulations. As for the lack of any speed limits on the Lake I'll let Bear Islander answer that one for you :

Quote:
Originally Posted by Island Lover View Post
Some of the opposition arguments are getting ludicrous. Why do you keep pretending there is some kind of speed limit already? Who are you trying to convince? There is no speed limit on Winnipesaukee! This is a fact. When you start talking about no wake zones and reckless operation regulations as if they were speed limits you make yourself look silly. And, in truth, very desperate.
Now let's look at Bear Islander message 134 above responding to chipj29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Sorry, perhaps you are not aware there is a speed limit in front of my cabin.
That's Bear Islander's cabin on Bear Island near the NWZ.

BTW, this is an interesting part but I don't have time to follow it all the way back. chipj29 and BI were talking about BI's observation that when an MP boat is around, boaters seem to behave. And in the above message BI quotes,
Originally Posted by chipj29 View Post
Gilligan stated that now (according to BI) , even without a speed limit, the presence of MP slows boats down. (from that Gilligan concludes) Imagine that...they are somehow enforcing a law that doesn't exist.

Better enforcement of the current laws just makes sense.
__________________



Amateur HAM Radio What is it? You'll be surprised. When all else fails Ham Radio still works.
Shriners Hospitals providing specialized care for children regardless of ability to pay. Find out more or refer a patient.
Skipper of the Sea Que is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 08:19 AM   #44
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashugana View Post
You know better than that Evenstar. All your concerns are covered by existing laws. Unsafe speeds are not allowed here. Enforced existing laws will lower your risk more than concentrating on an additional new law.



Elsewhere you claim that your kind of kayaking is risky in the first place. All you have is your observation that fast boats can not see you in enough time to avoid your 150 foot safe passage space. No other proof tangable or otherwise. You say that it is not safe for you. If you are boating unsafely then that might be considered illegal for you to do.

Think of it like anchoring in a No Rafting Zone. You get there and set your anchor and take a nap. An hour later boaters make a raft 30 feet from your boat. Your boat is now anchored illegally. It is not your fault but you are still illegal. So too is boating unsafely. Since youbelieve that you can not boat safely on the lake you are then breaking the law by knowingly boating unsafely.

Several of the messages above clearly respond to your situation. The made for kayaks safety flag sounds like what you need. You can reduce your feeling of risk with the proper kayak flag. That would make it safer for you. Your excuse for not using a kayak safety flag is invalid. They are made for kayaks. We do not need to adjust everyone to accommodate you. Be seen with a flag and let MP enforce the laws we already have in place.

Kayak safely.
Good post. Worth noting that the word "Enforcement" is vital to these discussions. It's pretty much the same problem all over, people want new laws so they can feel good about their efforts, but never properly address the enforcement of existing laws. Some people love to have a cause. Maintaining proper distance from other boaters and the shoreline has always been of paramount importance on the water. So is keeping a watch.

But there are several concerns going on at once on these threads.

1) Many want the GFBL boats to go away sooner rather than later, regardless of their speeds.

2) Some feel that they will never be safe unless boats are forced to slow down, regardless of existing laws.

3) Many feel that if existing laws were enforced, the lake would be safer, and would address many of the issues that brought the speed limit to the foreground.


From my perspective, I obviously agree with 3. But my opinion is also based on enforcement, which obviously isn't happening now. Nobody has been petitioning their representatives for more funding for the MP, and I've heard scant few comments about funding in general. Interestingly enough, enforcement of the speed limit would require, at least initially, a larger presence and more dedication from the underfunded MP. If they can't enforce the 150' rule, nor the NWZ rules, what the heck are they going to do with a speed limit law? (Note: For those that hate the GFBL boats on the lake, I understand your underlying motives).

Without funding, your laws are of no consequence.

As for the dreaded night time boating experience. Same as in daytime, only the nut cases are even easier to spot. The two primary accidents mentioned over and over again, would not have been impacted by a speed limit law. They most likely would have occurred regardless of the MP presence or funding in place. They were both pretty low speed accidents, and both involved negligence.

You can't legislate common sense and courtesy, but you can enforce both if that's what you want. Those that choose to pass additional laws and try to legislate bad behavior, do all boaters a disservice, and it's a direct insult to our intelligence. You can also expend all of your brainpower and free time communicating and being all political, but in the end, it gets nothing accomplished.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 05-10-2008, 04:21 PM   #45
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,944
Thanks: 544
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post

I am not a selfish person, but I will stand up for my right to use the entire lake - since there is no reason that an experienced sea kayaker should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where I can paddle for 20 miles without going around in circles.
I will stand up for the right for powerboats to use the lake without an enforced speed limit - since there is no reason than an experienced power boater should not be able to do so. There are only a couple of lakes in this state where a powerboat can travel at speeds greater than 40MPH without going around in circles.
brk-lnt is offline  
Old 05-13-2008, 10:15 AM   #46
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
I'll also add that a flag would make rolls, and self-rescues impossible to do. .
So after Evenstar has endlessly told us how safe and skilled a kayaker she is and has stated repeatedly how she cannot do a self rescue roll with a flag,we read this from catalogs.Which is it?OK now, I'm sure I'll be accussed of "picking" on her again by questioning her posts so fire away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipper
Here's a review of a kayak flag: "I have been looking for this for a long time! It sticks to the boat extremely well. It is very visible, yet doesn't get in the way. Easy to roll with too. I love it, especially with an after market pirate's flag addition. Thanks!" from This catalog.

Or this Kayakers safety visibility flag
The product description says: Be seen by power boaters & jet skis! The Paddler's Visibility Flag has a 4-foot pole topped with colorful streamers. This flag is suitable for use with sit-in-side kayaks and will not prevent Eskimo rolling. Flag is flexible enough for most rough landings and shallow water tip-overs. (Streamers can be substituted with a small flag. USCG suggests an American flag, but any flag, sports pennant, our your own "coat of arms" could be used.)
__________________
SIKSUKR
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 05-08-2008, 12:43 PM   #47
B R
Senior Member
 
B R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evenstar View Post
That's not a compromise. And I have had speeding boats violate my 150 foot zone when I've been within 150 feet of shore - since they can travel at unlimited speeds at 151 feet from the shore.

Other than being at risk from powerboats, how is my paddling on the lake unsafe for me - and I would love to know how my kayak and I are making the lake unsafe for others. Please explain that statement.


That makes absolutely no sense and is probably unconstitutional - you can a type of vessel from a recreational body of water, just so others can continue to travel at unlimited speeds.

A speed limit however makes total sense - and doesn't ban anyone.
i remember naked people in a canoe just last year (not 30 or 40 years ago) that endangered a boating family last year. if this were law, that probably doesn't happen.
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know"
B R is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.58200 seconds