Boating Accident/Death off Diamond Island

[RI Swamp Yankee]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

........ Hello Everyone - just saw this thread, and no it was not me who wrote and posted it in the Union Leader. .... fll

FLL, looks like a lot of people condemning others for jumping to conclusions .... were jumping to conclusions.

[kjbathe]

Originally Posted by kthy66

I came across Dr. Rock's story at the accident scene. Thank goodness he was there.

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/p...PAGE/806170304

A different story when it includes the human element... So sad...

[Seeker]

Thank God Dr. Rock was there. He possibly saved 2 lives.

[sa meredith]

Wow. If you read the story of Dr. Rock, no matter who you are, there is just no way your thoughts can turn to who to blame, or speed limits, or anything other than how tragic and sad that scene must have been. My heart bleeds for these girls and their families...

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Wolfeboro_Baja

DaveR, regarding your comment about speed being an issue since "obvious(ly) the boat was closer to Diamond Island than 150'," allow me to suggest to you that given the darkness, rain, fog and maybe an inaccurate GPS reading, Ms. Blizzard may have thought she was much further away from land than she actually was. We know GPS is not 100% accurate (it can vary as much as 50 ft) and there was also a report of another boater getting inaccurate readings in the same vicinity as this accident. There have been many comments about her abilities at the helm of a boat and I believe those comments; does anyone actually think a boater with that much experience would intentionally make a mistake like this?? I don't believe that. My thoughts are, she probably thought she knew exactly where she was, the only problem was, she was drastically mistaken. Yes, I know, I'm speculating myself. Enough said.

The boat could not hit Diamond Island unless it was closer than 150 feet so we know it was within 150 feet. If it was exceeding 6 MPH, it was going faster than the law allows. That's it. I wrote that in response to claims that speed was not a factor. I never implied that the operator was aware of her position, nor did I imply anything else.

[4Fun]

Originally Posted by Dave R

The boat could not hit Diamond Island unless it was closer than 150 feet so we know it was within 150 feet. If it was exceeding 6 MPH, it was going faster than the law allows. That's it. I wrote that in response to claims that speed was not a factor. I never implied that the operator was aware of her position, nor did I imply anything else.

Your point makes sense to me Dave. To the posters comparing a falling tree or a random rock kicked up on the highway those things are largely out of your control. This accident, while I am sure there were many contributing factors, was within the control of the boat operator.

Simply put she thought she was heading in a different direction or in a different spot. This is operator error plain and simple. I don't think this is jumping to a conclusion. What the contributing factors were that caused the confusion can be debated, but whether or not she is at fault how can you debate that???

I am very sorry to hear about the loss of a life and certainly don't think Erica should be condemed for life or smeared through the media. Discussing it to make a safer lake should be viewed as a positive not a negitive.

[NHDOLFAN]

4Fun

Very well said. My comments are not to cast judgement or identify fault. I simple stated that this tragic situation may have been prevented. Unfortunately for Erica, she will always live with this pain, regardless of the circumstances.

My hat goes off to Dr. Rock and his wife for their help in this situation, which may have saved some lives.

[sa meredith]

As I very recently stated, the only thing that matters is the fact the lives of the two survivors have changed forever, and another girl has lost her's. You have to feel for them. However, it seems people just want to talk about speed, and the definition of the word "accident".
My take is this....at some point, responsibility is going to be accessed by the proper authorities. A woman has died, after all. And the finding will not be "oh, just an accident". I'm sorry. That just won't be the case. As a precident, I would look to the incident (not accident) involving the son (as opposed to the daughter) of the owner of a Marina (Irwin or Channell, I forget) who ran over two people in Meredith Bay at night, killing one. He was held responsible for it. Yes, he was drunk. But if he was not drunk, I believe he still would have been held responsible for the "incident".
This is a terrible, terrible thing that has happened. But unless there is severe mechanical failure, someone will be held accountable. Simple truth.

[Bear Islander]

Here is the information on donations in the event someone is interested. I can tell you first hand that donations like this will mean a lot to the family.


For those who wish, the family suggests expressions of sympathy in Stephanie's name may be made to the American Cancer Society-Making Strides Against Breast Cancer, c/o Eileen Willet, 2 Commerce Drive, Suite 110, Bedford NH 03110, on memo line of check please insert MSABC-Laconia-Laconia Clinic Team-In Memory of Stephanie D. Beaudoin, or visit www.cancer.org/stridesonline or to the New Hampshire Humane Society, PO Box 572, Laconia NH 03247, or visit www.nhhumane.org.

[SIKSUKR]

Thank you BI for posting that info.

[Bear Islander]

By a strange coincidence Phillip, the Bear on Bear Island came up in another thread. When our son died many years ago we asked that donations go to the Bear Island Conservation Association. The money donated was used by the association to have the Bear carved, put in place, and a plaque at the base. Over the years it has been wonderful to see children get a kick out of that bear.

I mention this by way of passing along the idea that a living, working memorial is the best kind. It can be a park bench, playground equipment or a wooden Bear.

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by kthy66

I came across Dr. Rock's story at the accident scene. Thank goodness he was there.

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/p...PAGE/806170304

Wow, they just can't help but weave the speed limits bill into the article. "News" publications with such an obvious agenda are really irksome. Add the Concord Monitor to the list of tabloid trash reporting.

[BroadHopper]

Stephanie Beaudoin is my second cousin. Please respect the wish of the family and cut the chase with the speed limit crap!

[Lexxi]

Please leave these families alone. I am sure there are many thoughts and prayers being said at this time for all involved.
May God be with all the families and friends at this time of sorrow.

Accidents are just that accidents !!!

[Cal]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Dave nailed it here, 6 MPH was the limit.

It is a shame that this tragedy occurred- my prayers are with all of the familes involved.

You and Dave R should both use your heads with this 150' 6mph thing.
What would you bet SHE DIDN'T REALIZE THE ISLAND WAS THERE?
That doesn't take rocket science to figure out.


My condolences to all involved.

[wildwoodfam]

Originally Posted by brk-lnt

Wow, they just can't help but weave the speed limits bill into the article. "News" publications with such an obvious agenda are really irksome. Add the Concord Monitor to the list of tabloid trash reporting.

I thought the article was well written - and was / is a contradiction to otherwise reguallry reported news articles which do focus more on agenda issues. This article really gives you a true sense of Dr. Rock's heroic actions at 2:30am in the morning. How many of us can say we'd have jumped into action - how many would have simply rolled over and shrugged it off to lightning or "someone elses problem." The mention of the speed limit bill was appropriately placed with context, and was not out of place in this article.

Just my opinion....

[Silver Duck]

Getting back to what matters, does anybody have any recent info on Ms. Blizzard's condition?

Some of the news reports had her listed as "critical"; it would be nice of friends of the family kept the rest of us updated on how she's doing.

Silver Duck

[sa meredith]

Originally Posted by Cal

You and Dave R should both use your heads with this 150' 6mph thing.
What would you bet SHE DIDN'T REALIZE THE ISLAND WAS THERE?
That doesn't take rocket science to figure out.


My condolences to all involved.

Cal...of course she didn't realize it was there!!!! To believe she did would mean she intentionally killed someone. And the time for all this is certainly not now. But, as has been discusssed on this forum countless times after boating mishaps...the captain is responsible for EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING!
First and foremost the safety of all passengers. It was her responsibility/job/obligation to know exactly where she was. The only way this comes out OK is if they find severe mechanical failure. see my earlier post

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Cal

You and Dave R should both use your heads with this 150' 6mph thing.
What would you bet SHE DIDN'T REALIZE THE ISLAND WAS THERE?
That doesn't take rocket science to figure out.


My condolences to all involved.

Obviously. Please use your own head and read between the lines.

[SAMIAM]

ITD and RI SWAMP YANKEE.....are you really buying FLL's denial ?? That post is right in line with his previous postings. So, some stranger just happened to dream up the name FL Less and make a post that is very typical of his views.
Sorry....I don't buy it FLL......GUILTY AS CHARGED

[pats fan]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

As I very recently stated, the only thing that matters is the fact the lives of the two survivors have changed forever, and another girl has lost her's. You have to feel for them. However, it seems people just want to talk about speed, and the definition of the word "accident".
My take is this....at some point, responsibility is going to be accessed by the proper authorities. A woman has died, after all. And the finding will not be "oh, just an accident". I'm sorry. That just won't be the case. As a precident, I would look to the incident (not accident) involving the son (as opposed to the daughter) of the owner of a Marina (Irwin or Channell, I forget) who ran over two people in Meredith Bay at night, killing one. He was held responsible for it. Yes, he was drunk. But if he was not drunk, I believe he still would have been held responsible for the "incident".
This is a terrible, terrible thing that has happened. But unless there is severe mechanical failure, someone will be held accountable. Simple truth.

I was not there when the Littlefield accident occured a few years ago, however, Mr. Littlefield was found NOT guilty of being drunk. It can be your opinion that he was, but you should refrain from stating that he was drunk. Right now is probably not the time for the peanut gallery to be deciding that Erica needs to be held responsible in any legal manner. At this point she is still in critical condition and putting up the fight of her life. Could she have been impared? Speeding? Operating in an unsafe manner? Perhaps. But right now I think it is very disheartening to hear people beating her up when she is in the physical condition she is in. She will have terrible mental and physical scars to deal with from this and right now she needs the community to pray for her speedy recovery and pray for Steph and her family. There are evil people who do horrible things. Erica is a good person who had a horrible thing happen to her, weather she inadvertantly contributed to it or not.

[Waterbaby]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

Getting back to what matters, does anybody have any recent info on Ms. Blizzard's condition?

Some of the news reports had her listed as "critical"; it would be nice of friends of the family kept the rest of us updated on how she's doing.

Silver Duck

SD, I can't say this for a fact, I was wondering myself how she is doing, but I did see a link to the Concord Monitor article a bit earlier in the thread. Erica's dad, Paul, is quoted as saying

"From there, Blizzard was taken to Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon, where her father, Paul Blizzard, said she was being kept unconscious by doctors yesterday. He said that his daughter was in stable condition, and that there was no indication of brain damage."

"Tell your readers to pray for her," he said.

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

ITD and RI SWAMP YANKEE.....are you really buying FLL's denial ?? That post is right in line with his previous postings. So, some stranger just happened to dream up the name FL Less and make a post that is very typical of his views.
Sorry....I don't buy it FLL......GUILTY AS CHARGED

Honestly, who cares? I've yet to see "Less" string together a coherent thought, and on the random occasions something intelligible escapes his keyboard it is juvenile and non-value-add.

It is either his own post, or a spot-on impression of him. Either way my personal opinion of him is cast and he is not worth the effort to debate with, or consider.

I urge you to simply ignore him, and/or his "imposters".

[Skip]

Originally Posted by pats fan

... Mr. Littlefield was found NOT guilty of being drunk. It can be your opinion that he was, but you should refrain from stating that he was drunk...

Out of sympathy and respect for the individuals and families affected by this collision I will refrain from comment about the original topic under discussion, except for offering my sincerest condolences.

As to your assertion quoted above, it is obvious that you have not read the original court transcript or the opinion of the NH Supreme Court which heard the Littlefield appeal.

I have covered this topic in the past, provided links to the transcripts and posted pertinent passages numerous times. The regular reader is clearly familiar with the evidence I have covered previously.

The jury found ample evidence of Littlefield's impairment by alcohol the night of his crime, and found that intoxication was one of the leading factors that led to his inability to maintain a proper lookout, with death resulting.

On appeal, the Justices of the NH Supreme Court acknowledged that the jury could consider, did consider and rightfully concluded from ample & credible testimony of Littlefield's impairment. That is a matter of fact, not opinion, clearly annotated in both Court decisions.

Littlefield was not found guilty of the higher of the two homicide charges simply because the coward fled the scene and verifiable evidence of the level of his intoxication could not be introduced, for obvious reasons.

Additionally, ample evidence of his intoxication played a significant factor in the awards given during the subsequent civil proceedings.

Mr. Littlefield was intoxicated, a coward and remains a convicted felon for the rest of his life.

Cowardice is the only subject up for debate, but clearly is indicative of my opinion then and now.

Finally, given what little is actually known about the tragedy that just occurred, it is highly inappropriate and extremely irresponsible to be drawing any conclusions or references between the two events.

Skip

[pats fan]

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...WS02/709126805


Skip,
See paragraph 3 of the above Citizen article. I don't disagree with your comments above about Mr. Littlefield, but it certainly does seem to me that he was aquitted of being drunk. Do I think he probably was? Sure. But I think he was not found guilty of that charge.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by pats fan

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...WS02/709126805


Skip,
See paragraph 3 of the above Citizen article. I don't disagree with your comments above about Mr. Littlefield, but it certainly does seem to me that he was aquitted of being drunk. Do I think he probably was? Sure. But I think he was not found guilty of that charge.

PF, please don't take my previoius post as a personal criticism.

The trial and appeal were very technical, and the transcripts lengthy. One paragraph in the local paper by an underpaid reporter cannot substitute for the actual gist of the charges.

It would take me several pages of legal jargon to explain the technical differences of the two homicide charges Littlefield was charged with, and how (legally) a not guilty finding of the higher charge does not mean he was not intoxicated.

In the end it is neither your's nor my opinion that matters, it was what the jury concluded and what the NH Supreme Court opined in the matter. And a reading of the transcripts clearly shows that they both came to the conclusion that Littlefield was intoxicated. The inability to show to what technical degree is what allowed him to escape a lengthier stay in the State prison system.

Like someone once said...."you could print volumes of what they don't tell you in the papers!"...

[robmac]

you people are rediculous! First off who and why are you being a jury in an already settled situation? why are you assuming that the two accidents are the same? Let the families and the professionals(not you rank ametuers) determine what happened and who's at fault.The web master should put a stop to this assault on situations and unknown facts and let families grieve and wait to see what the final outcome is.

[Belmont Resident]

First let me say that you people who keep bring up the 150' headway speed thing are really ignorant. Do you honestly think that if someone knew they were heading for an island they would not have taken action to avoid hitting it?
Even though someone sells a particular model of boat doesn’t automatically mean they know everything about every boat in that model line.
Now lets say the operator was on a brand new boat, one that they had just purchased and were out on for the first time, one they were not totally familiar with and therefore were not using GPS but rather relying on there life long knowledge of the lake to guide them.
Now for all you boaters, where do you keep your right hand when operating your boat?
Not sure but I believe 90% would say that it was resting on the controls.
What direction propels the boat forward?
If I was operating a boat and it came to a stop unexpectedly there might be a good chance I would push the throttles full forward thus adding to the boats forward momentum.
Granted this is only hypothetical but a scenario that very well could have played out this past weekend.
So please have a little respect for those who were involved and let the facts come out before you show so much disrespect for the families by assuming the people involved had to have done something wrong.
We take our lives in our hands each and every day. To say that someone should not have been boating in those conditions is ridiculous. Who are you to say what optimum conditions to boat in are? As for the GPS, anyone who is a real boater knows that GPS is only a backup system. If you cannot navigate a body of water without a GPS then you do not belong out on it.

[tis]

I don't know how many of you have been caught in a thunderstorm at night, but I can tell you from experience, the lake can be very, very dark and you cannot see an inch in front of you. You can't even see the buoys. It is very scary. We are seasoned boaters and were out there many years ago in that situation. We got lost and took three and a half hours to find our way home. We just couldn't tell where we were.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

ITD and RI SWAMP YANKEE.....are you really buying FLL's denial ?? That post is right in line with his previous postings. So, some stranger just happened to dream up the name FL Less and make a post that is very typical of his views.
Sorry....I don't buy it FLL......GUILTY AS CHARGED

Yeah, I buy it and I believe him. The guy is out in left field sometimes and he does like to stir up the pot, but for the most part I think he is a good guy. I think if he had actually done it, he would be man enough to own up to it. It would be pretty easy to post under someone else's name in another venue, in fact I think if I look back I could find some admissions of people posting clandestinely in an off shore forum, collecting information.

I think the person who did it is lower than low and should be hiding like the little wuss they are............

[Orion]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

As for the GPS, anyone who is a real boater knows that GPS is only a backup system. If you cannot navigate a body of water without a GPS then you do not belong out on it.

That's exactly right. There is a lesson here for all boaters, and that is really the intent of the so-called "criticism" and hypothesizing. All boaters need to understand that when they are navigating at night on Lake Winnipesaukee, they are already in a SERIOUS condition that demands total attention of the captain. If you don't know exactly where you are, you should be at headway speed. Headway speed does not cause the damage shown, but I'm not speculating it was over 25 mph either. As far as navigation is concerned, you need to employ backup systems. The depth sounder, chart, eyes, spotlights, ears, and GPS all complement each other. In aviation, you don't rely on one instrument, but correlate all other indicators where possible. If you are heading across a certain area of the broads and expect 80' depth and the bottom is rising rapidly, cut the throttle until you figure out what's going on.

Let's all learn something from this mishap.

[HUH]

My sincere condolences to all involved. Accidents happen whether in a kayak or power boat. Life is fragile
To all those who brought up the speed issue or any other factors in a speculative manor, " IM DISGUSTED"

[Phantom]

Let me start by saying that I love this site. For years I have used it to keep up with resturaunt reviews, what's new on the lake, and for timely news that can not be found from any other source at a place (Winni) that I can't get up to enough times during the season. With that said:

I am Disgusted & Appalled, saddened actually, when reading through this thread. So Much Garbage about indivial expert "Opinions" as to wether or not speed was a factor/wether the boat had electronics/inside the 150' rule/wether FLL posted in the UL or not ........ on and on and on. KNOCK IT OFF !! a young adult died and two others were (and remain) seriously injured. Have a little respect Forum members ..... it coulda been your daughter out there!!

I hope that future posts will stick to advising and informing us of new "facts" as they surface and not speculation or opinions. For example: I for one, until reading the Monitor article could not figure out in my feeble head why Erica (whom I do not know personally) was headed Southeast as first reported in the news (here in Mass). After reading the article -- a great post and the type I have come to expect of this crowd -- I now know she was headed back from her dad's house towards a cabin on Sleeper Isl. To which makes all the sense in the world NOW (to me) why she was even near Diamond at 2:30am heading in a "Southeast" direction.

As a father of 3 girls in Erica's age group my heartfelt Sympathy go out to each of the families. May they find a way to bear through this tragic time.

[4Fun]

Originally Posted by Orion

That's exactly right. There is a lesson here for all boaters, and that is really the intent of the so-called "criticism" and hypothesizing. All boaters need to understand that when they are navigating at night on Lake Winnipesaukee, they are already in a SERIOUS condition that demands total attention of the captain. If you don't know exactly where you are, you should be at headway speed. Headway speed does not cause the damage shown, but I'm not speculating it was over 25 mph either. As far as navigation is concerned, you need to employ backup systems. The depth sounder, chart, eyes, spotlights, ears, and GPS all complement each other. In aviation, you don't rely on one instrument, but correlate all other indicators where possible. If you are heading across a certain area of the broads and expect 80' depth and the bottom is rising rapidly, cut the throttle until you figure out what's going on.

Let's all learn something from this mishap.

Good points Orion. Does anyone know what the contour of the bottom looks liike there? Does it go from 50' to 0' is short order or gradually come up to the shore?

Phantom, I don't understand why we can not dicuss what happend and ALL learn a little something from it while still being respectful to the people involved? All of the issues brought up in this thread are important. All the critics and theorys will sit in peoplels memory to help avoid MANY different situations in the future.

[2Blackdogs]

Originally Posted by tis

I don't know how many of you have been caught in a thunderstorm at night, but I can tell you from experience, the lake can be very, very dark and you cannot see an inch in front of you. You can't even see the buoys. It is very scary. We are seasoned boaters and were out there many years ago in that situation. We got lost and took three and a half hours to find our way home. We just couldn't tell where we were.

I wouldn't go there.

BoatEd.com is discussing this incident, and they are being very critical of operating in fog. One reason I hope the discussion moves on with the "nuts and bolts" of the incident to another thread...NOT this one.

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by 4Fun

Phantom, I don't understand why we can not dicuss what happend and ALL learn a little something from it while still being respectful to the people involved?

4Fun -- I have absolutely no issue with discussion ...... your absoultely correct .... we all can learn from it. I simply shake my head when it is purely "speculation and conjecture" or worse, off topic (example the short discussion of the definition of an accident).

[joanna616]

Originally Posted by 4Fun

I don't understand why we can not dicuss what happend and ALL learn a little something from it while still being respectful to the people involved? All of the issues brought up in this thread are important. All the critics and theorys will sit in peoplels memory to help avoid MANY different situations in the future.

Because it is just too soon.

[kthy66]

Boat driver's condition unchanged

[SIKSUKR]

Here's an update from the Laconia Citizen.

Boat driver's condition unchanged

[4Fun]

Originally Posted by joanna616

Because it is just too soon.

I couldn't disagree more. This discussion is not about the people involved in the accident. It is about the accident itself. I don't think anyone has said anything but prayers for anyone involved.

I firmly beleive ALL the speculation guessing will have an impact on everyone involved in this discussion. While we have no idea what the factors were that caused the accident we have discussed many that will stick in the minds of us and help us make better decisions in the future.

Patchy fog, watching the contour on a depth finder, using GPS, just plain being more aware are all things that we will pay more attention to when faced with a situation on the lake. We are a species that LEARNS from mistakes. This is a good discussion.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Come on, spare us your self righteous indignation. This is the whole point...the so called speed limit crowd has called attention to these risks all along. People debate speeding/DWI/weapons violations and such after any tragedy because there is a need for serious reform now, not next week, month, or year. This is not a mark of disrespect for the dead/injured but rather concern that these tragdies are not repeated. You are the one who is making this an issue of pro/con speed limits. Investigations over the coming weeks will shed light on the circumstances.

Then why not wait for the investigations to prove yourself less than brilliant? Seriously. Who knows or cares how fast the boat was going? I'm sure you do, but whether they were going 25mph or 45mph, the force of impact would still be significant. "These Tragedies", please spare us all your lack of facts and understanding, not to mention the lack of numerous Tragedies there.

If this sad accident had involved an 18' bowrider going 22 mph, and the head of a pro speed limit group was injured, you'd probably shut your mouth. Biased ignorance knows no bounds apparently, and at least 2-3 of you people have shown your complete lack of respect, not to mention complete lack of compassion or class. Your statement to the contrary does not cover up your own personal, compelling need to justify your position. IMO, it reflects poorly on you.

Boating used to be a fraternity, regardless of boat or type of boat. Any boating accident is to be taken seriously, and I've read many stories of such accidents around the country. As such, I offer my condolences to families and friends of people I've never met, never knew. Because as boaters, they are all part of my extended family.

Reform This Turtle.

[Ropetow]

Just got caught up with the forum, and it looks like I was in error stating that FLL made that post to the Union Leader. My regrets for my apparent error.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Then why not wait for the investigations to prove yourself less than brilliant? Seriously. Who knows or cares how fast the boat was going? I'm sure you do, but whether they were going 25mph or 45mph, the force of impact would still be significant. "These Tragedies", please spare us all your lack of facts and understanding, not to mention the lack of numerous Tragedies there.

If this sad accident had involved an 18' bowrider going 22 mph, and the head of a pro speed limit group was injured, you'd probably shut your mouth. Biased ignorance knows no bounds apparently, and at least 2-3 of you people have shown your complete lack of respect, not to mention complete lack of compassion or class. Your statement to the contrary does not cover up your own personal, compelling need to justify your position. IMO, it reflects poorly on you.

Boating used to be a fraternity, regardless of boat or type of boat. Any boating accident is to be taken seriously, and I've read many stories of such accidents around the country. As such, I offer my condolences to families and friends of people I've never met, never knew. Because as boaters, they are all part of my extended family.

Reform This Turtle.

And if this sad accident had involved an 18' bowrider going 22 mph, and the head of a pro speed limit group was injured,this forum would have lit up like a Christmas tree. So when is a good time to hear something you dont want to hear? I refer you to Winnipesaukee's excellent post this AM on the speed limit thread. He discusses when it's appropriate to discuss the war in Iraq after another soldier has died...immediatly. The driver in this accident was a spokesperson for an anti speed limit organization, in other words she was political. Politicizing this accident? It's like someone being accused of politicizing the Iraq war. As alluded to in other forums, clearly this subject additionally touches a nerve for the GFBL no speed limit crowd because after this accident, any remaining shred of credibility for this group vaporized (see links below).
Mr. Beaudoin is quoted as saying that he didn't know why they were going so fast. Are you going to tell him to shut his mouth too?
For another perspective on how people view some of these recent events, check out the thread under boatered.com; even more revealing are the comments/letters section in today's Union Leader following the article about the accident. I think you may be surprised at some of the comments that appear in forums that are not so predominantly weighted by the GFBL/no limits crowd.
Given the tone of your angry diatribe, you will of course minimize the fact that people on the speed limit side have and continue to offer condolences (including myself) to the victim(s). And a fitting tribute to Ms. Beaudoin would be to decrease the chances that this happens again.
So VtSteve...please check out these links
Reform This VtSteve...see how silly this looks

[Woodsy]

Turtle Boy... and others!

Your way off base here. Until the experts weigh in on the accident, there is no proof that the Formula was exceeding the nighttime limit of 25MPH as proposed by HB-847.

If the accident reconstruction team determines that she was in fact traveling less than the proposed 25 MPH limit, then essentially a speed limit would have done nothing to have prevented this tragedy.

At this point in time, this accident is just that... an accident! The causes of this tragedy will no doubt play out in a VERY public fashion.

Woodsy

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Turtle Boy... and others!

Your way off base here. Until the experts weigh in on the accident, there is no proof that the Formula was exceeding the nighttime limit of 25MPH as proposed by HB-847. In fact I am willing to bet that the boat was more than likely traveling at speed less than 25 MPH. The Formula is a 15,000 lb fiberglass boat striking a 6' high vertical wall!

If the accident reconstruction team determines that she was in fact traveling less than the proposed 25 MPH limit, then essentially a speed limit would have done nothing to have prevented this tragedy.

At this point in time, this accident is just that... an accident! The causes of this tragedy will no doubt play out in a VERY public fashion.

Woodsy

Exactly. Like others, I would "expect" the damage to even more severe if the boat was going fast, but what the heck do I know?

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

If the accident reconstruction team determines that she was in fact traveling less than the proposed 25 MPH limit, then essentially a speed limit would have done nothing to have prevented this tragedy.

Though in reality if a boater as experienced as Erica Blizzard misses the channel between Diamond and Rattlesnake at night at 25 MPH, how does that bode for the average (less experienced)boater going 25 MPH at night? Some feel that 25 MPH was too high a compromise for night time and that 20 MPH(Squam) or less (some other states) would be more appropriate to consider after HB 847 sunsets.
Anyway, thankyou (seriously) for your calm, measured, polite reply..TB

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Though in reality if a boater as experienced as Erica Hazzard misses the channel between Diamond and Rattlesnake at night at 25 MPH, how does that bode for the average (less experienced)boater going 25 MPH at night? Some feel that 25 MPH was too high a compromise for night time and that 20 MPH(Squam) or less (some other states) would be more appropriate to consider after HB 847 sunsets.
Anyway, thankyou (seriously) for your calm, measured, polite reply..TB

Thank YOU for your detailed conclusions on the events that transpired. No need to wait for the official investigation now. Case closed. All Hail HB847.

[VtSteve]

Turtle, everything posted here and elsewhere is conjecture, pure and simple. This was a larger boat, apparently off course, and hitting a large object above the waterline. It resulted in loss of life and severe injuries.

We can all speculate about what happened. My initial thoughts are of no valid concern, but they are of genuine horror. This type of accident can happen to anybody, anywhere. We'll probably find out the facts as they become available. For now, I prefer to think it is a terrible tragedy that happened to friends and fellow boaters. I prefer to assume nothing other than a simple accident occurred, because that's just the way I am.

I don't know whether your knee-jerk reaction about the "other" thread is simply because you care so gosh darn much about people, or maybe there's something else going on here. All I know is that Sunday was Father's day, and there some pretty miserable, heartbroken parents out there.

I'm not a GFBL boater, and I'm probably a bit more anal about being cautious than average. Most of us care deeply about friends and family, and take our role and responsibilities as Skipper pretty seriously. I've read the thread over at BoaterEd. Much more civil, but no more informative.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Though in reality if a boater as experienced as Erica Hazzard misses the channel between Diamond and Rattlesnake at night at 25 MPH, how does that bode for the average (less experienced)boater going 25 MPH at night? Some feel that 25 MPH was too high a compromise for night time and that 20 MPH(Squam) or less (some other states) would be more appropriate to consider after HB 847 sunsets.
Anyway, thankyou (seriously) for your calm, measured, polite reply..TB

The laws currently provide that everyone is responsible for piloting their boats in a manner that is safe in the given conditions. I know many like solid numbers, laws, tables and data. Too fast for given conditions is a common citing in many accidents. It can be as slow as 1 mph as far as I'm concerned. I'm not scared about night boating, but I am scared about boaters without lights, kayaks on moonless nights, fog, I'm just cautious. But many seem to need a special law.

It appears from the data so far that it was at least very dark, likely raining, "possibly" foggy. I'd be going slow on a night like that. I'd probably not go out on the lake if I didn't have to. If those very conditions existed at the time of the accident, then the you know what would have been superseded by the old laws anyway. And I think you know that.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

The laws currently provide that everyone is responsible for piloting their boats in a manner that is safe in the given conditions. I know many like solid numbers, laws, tables and data. Too fast for given conditions is a common citing in many accidents. It can be as slow as 1 mph as far as I'm concerned. I'm not scared about night boating, but I am scared about boaters without lights, kayaks on moonless nights, fog, I'm just cautious. But many seem to need a special law.

It appears from the data so far that it was at least very dark, likely raining, "possibly" foggy. I'd be going slow on a night like that. I'd probably not go out on the lake if I didn't have to. If those very conditions existed at the time of the accident, then the you know what would have been superseded by the old laws anyway. And I think you know that.

And I do see your point and am grateful that the tone here has ratcheted down a notch (mine too). My concern is that on a dark foggy rainy night, to do the damage I saw on that boat, 25 MPH would not fit the "reasonable and prudent" criteria. We'll just have to wait and see.
And I'm sorry if it seemed I was belittling your earlier post. What strikes a nerve with me is that on this forum the speed limit people have often been portrayed as being pure evil. I know (all) of you don't believe this. I''m very protective of my small family and do not want to wake up at 2:30 AM with a 37' formula boat in my grandson's bed on top of him, or for him to be hit in the open water as happened to that man in '02 in Meredith.
Anyway,thanks...TB

[kjbathe]

Against my better judgment, here goes...

No speed limit, no matter how high or low it's set, is going to be a magic prevent-all for accidents. Short of banning human presence on the water's surface, there is nothing that will prevent an operator from accidentally missing a marker, hitting a shoal, or running into an island. It might help minimize the damage if one does those things at a lower speed, but we can't legislate away the fact that accidents can and will happen.

That being said, all we know right now is enough to fuel conjecture and speculation. We can only guess at speed. We don't know for certain who was at the helm (although we think we have an idea based on press reports). We've heard conflicting reports about the weather -- was it foggy, rainy, had it cleared, was there some moonlight? Those reports came from different observations around the lake at differing times on the night in question. I've looked across that part of the lake from the shore on a mostly clear night and viewed only inky darkness over the water where I knew a Diamond and a Rattlesnake Island should be, but darned if I could see them. Multiply that 10-fold trying to figure it out while under way. We just don't know.

Now, also against my better judgment, I'm going to hazard a semi-educated guess at speed and do so based solely on the weight, position and damage of the boat shown in the photo above and some common references. I'll admit my marine structural engineering experience comes from designing nuclear-powered underwater weapons platforms with advanced materials and not the composite-layup pleasure boats being discussed here, but the fundamental engineering principles don't change. (Great.... more speculation.... )

Last year a boat ran aground on Eagle Island and ended up ON EAGLE ISLAND, well into the trees. That wasn't the case in this accident. And in looking at the photos, the damage is limited to the first 20% or so of the length. What looks catastrophic at first seems to be fairly well contained. It appears the top portion of the bow remains intact although disconnected, possibly sheared horizontally where it came in contact to what appears to be a roughly 90-degree edge of the rock in the Channel 9 video. That seems reasonable on the surface. In addition, the rest of the hull appears to have split and peeled back along the keel line. Those are what the two flaps of hull hanging down look like to me. This also seems like a reasonable mode of crack propagation and failure for perpendicular contact of the rigid axis of the hull to a stationary surface. In the photo, the lift harness is compressing the deck and hull and some delamination of the deck/hull interface seems to be present. I don't know if this is a result of loading/unloading of the boat by crane after the designed structural integrity of the vessel had been compromised, or if that was a result of the collision itself, but for the sake of speculation, I'll guess the latter.

What I'd really like to know is how heavy the anchor is and how far away the summer camp is that allegedly got nicked by the anchor. Putting those two pieces together would give us an approximate idea of the momentum present and required to get the anchor from the boat to the building, thus yielding an approximate speed of the boat at the point of anchor departure. But even then, that calculation quickly gets complicated by whether or not the anchor was mounted, how much drag there was on the winding mechanism, blah, blah, blah, but it would be nice to know.

Anyway, that the boat reportedly came to rest in the water and not ON the island, that the hull structural failure is limited to the front of the boat and that it appears to be relatively well contained separation and delamination, and that we can't currently account for the cause of the hull/deck separation (although I'd be comfortable assuming initially that this is where much of the collision energy may have been dissipated, also accounting for the reported loud noise), I'm guessing (emphasis on guessing) that people will be surprised at the speed with which this collision took place. I'm way way way out here on this limb speculating based on many assumptions and one photo, but I don't think the speed at impact is going to be nearly as high as people think it was. But time will bear that out.

We now return to our regularly-scheduled agenda-driven finger pointing...

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy
Though in reality if a boater as experienced as Erica Hazzard misses the channel between Diamond and Rattlesnake at night at 25 MPH, how does that bode for the average (less experienced)boater going 25 MPH at night?

Originally Posted by Ryan

Thank YOU for your detailed conclusions on the events that transpired. No need to wait for the official investigation now. Case closed. All Hail HB847.

There are no conclusions here, only the statement that if a boater as experienced as Ms. Blizzard can miss this channel, what are we to expect of less experienced boaters.
Your rather nasty, bitter, and sarcastic response is something I've referred to in the past on this forum, that some posters diminish any semblance of civilized and intellectual discourse. Other (former) posters on this forum have contacted me saying this is what made them stop posting here...this near rabid attack against anything at all pro speed limit. What you have left is a forum where nearly everybody has the same opinion. Refer to the posts at boatered.com and after today's article on the accident in the Union Leader if you want to see some other opinions. Don't you think you could do better than this Ryan?

[B R]

TB,

The difference here is you are trying to promote an agenda and Erica is the one paying the price. When Mr Hartman was tragically killed, no one on this forum tried to do anything but write sympathies to the families. When the trial tried to bring up the "there was no light on his boat at the time" theory, no one here used that and promoted it as even a remote possibility. A lot of us don't see the same sympathy coming from the pro-speed limit crowd. We see them using this tragic accident to promote their cause and I personally find it very distasteful.

Go ahead, attack!!!

[SAMIAM]

Just a note to the speed limit folks whom are gleefully waiting for charges against Erica for exceeding the speed limit and BWI.......Erica rarely drinks and if she does it is a social glass of wine.I'm guessing that there are some who visualize a drunken,crazed, go fast boater ripping through the broads at 2 o'clock in the morning.But, what you will find,I believe,is a girl and her friends who went out to play a fathers day trick on her dad and simply missed a marker in the fog.
Please don't act indignant.....some of your posts speak for themselves.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by B R

A lot of us don't see the same sympathy coming from the pro-speed limit crowd.

I think you are not looking hard enough!

The "leaders" of the pro-speed limit side has been either silent or extremely sympathetic. I did a quick check and find that the four members you are talking about have 30, 36, 32 and 5 posts. I don't think they represent our movement.

My heart goes out to the families involved. This is not the time for idle speculation.

[2Blackdogs]

BR:

Oh, you can say that Erica is paying the price all right, and sympathies did abound back then, but your memory of the outrage during Mr Hartman's tragic death tells us "You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know".

This forum ranted for days even before we learned who the perpetrator was and where his boat was hidden away. The white stern light was indeed used as a good defense by some still posting here.

Years later, the legal team of Sisti & Twomey was criticized by one of the same posters as being inadequate for Pamela Smart's successful murder of her husband, "so what could Littlefield have expected when he hired the same New Hampshire legal team?"

The outrageous support continues.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by B R

TB,

The difference here is you are trying to promote an agenda and Erica is the one paying the price. When Mr Hartman was tragically killed, no one on this forum tried to do anything but write sympathies to the families. When the trial tried to bring up the "there was no light on his boat at the time" theory, no one here used that and promoted it as even a remote possibility. A lot of us don't see the same sympathy coming from the pro-speed limit crowd. We see them using this tragic accident to promote their cause and I personally find it very distasteful.

Go ahead, attack!!!

Now now. What is not very helpful is that the PSL crowd refuses to acknowledge anything other than a simple speed limit law.

In each and every case presented, time after time, probably this one as well, existing laws were broken, or, it was just an accident due to human misjudgment.

They simply cannot deal with not having a neat little legislation package to feel good about. I know these accidents frustrate many, especially the ones that have been discussed many times. The 28 mph accident was infamous for misunderstanding the problem. In areas of increased enforcement all around the country, accidents go down over the long run, and best of all, repeat offenders get thrown out.

It's not a perfect world, and stuff happens.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy
Though in reality if a boater as experienced as Erica Hazzard misses the channel between Diamond and Rattlesnake at night at 25 MPH, how does that bode for the average (less experienced)boater going 25 MPH at night?

Referring to her as Erica Hazzard is just plain rude and uncalled for, especially given the circumstances. For whatever the reasoning may be, she probably has more boating experience than you or most on this forum. She grew up in the industry. Put your head back in your shell or go troll elsewhere.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by B R

TB,

The difference here is you are trying to promote an agenda and Erica is the one paying the price. When Mr Hartman was tragically killed, no one on this forum tried to do anything but write sympathies to the families. When the trial tried to bring up the "there was no light on his boat at the time" theory, no one here used that and promoted it as even a remote possibility. A lot of us don't see the same sympathy coming from the pro-speed limit crowd. We see them using this tragic accident to promote their cause and I personally find it very distasteful.

Go ahead, attack!!!

But wait a minute. I respectfully want to point out my post from 4:33 PM today. My "agenda" is that I would not want this 37 foot Formula boat to be landing in my grandson's bedroom at 2:30 AM. Clearly the GFBL/ no speed limits people have an agenda too. "Promote my cause"?...Sure...my cause is that I don't want a boat similar to the one involved in the fatal accident this past weekend to kill one of my family members. I would find that to be very distasteful. And as my previous posts infer, what the speed limit proponents also find distasteful is the premise made by people like you that this "agenda" of concern for their family is so inherently evil and self-serving.

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

.Sure...my cause is that I don't want a boat similar to the one involved in the fatal accident this past weekend to kill one of my family members.

Then stay FAR away from the lake. Anything less greatly increases your risk of being involved in a random accident.

All the legislation in the world won't make the lake "safe". Legislating to get as close as reasonably possible goes against most of the founding principles of this country and only serves to dumb down society.

Next you'll be recommending that we all take a gramme Soma...

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Referring to her as Erica Hazzard is just plain rude and uncalled for, especially given the circumstances. For whatever the reasoning may be, she probably has more boating experience than you or most on this forum. She grew up in the industry. Put your head back in your shell or go troll elsewhere.

Go back to my origional post and you will see that this was quickly (and I thought) quietly corrected. I was reading the post to my wife and realized the mistake and said, "oh boy, give me the lap top, they'll go nuts over this one". However, if you check the phone book, you probably will find that Blizzard and Hazzard are both equally uncommon surnames. Truly no offense was intended by this mistake.
As far as your rude and prickley comment about putting my head in my shell or go troll elsewhere, I put forth my inference from earlier that it is sad that one of your most visible spokespersons tacitly became one of ours last weekend. Yes, the last shred of credibility of the GFBL/no limits crowd vaporized with this accident. Very sad

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

But wait a minute. I respectfully want to point out my post from 4:33 PM today. My "agenda" is that I would not want this 37 foot Formula boat to be landing in my grandson's bedroom at 2:30 AM. Clearly the GFBL/ no speed limits people have an agenda too. "Promote my cause"?...Sure...my cause is that I don't want a boat similar to the one involved in the fatal accident this past weekend to kill one of my family members. I would find that to be very distasteful. And as my previous posts infer, what the speed limit proponents also find distasteful is the premise made by people like you that this "agenda" of concern for their family is so inherently evil and self-serving.

I fully understand your agenda. However this is not the time or the place to push that agenda. You are doing your cause more harm than good in my opinion. Give it a rest for now.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I fully understand your agenda. However this is not the time or the place to push that agenda. You are doing your cause more harm than good in my opinion. Give it a rest for now.

Please refer to Winnipesaukee's post on the speed limit thread from earlier this am

[Turtle Boy]

in fact, here it is

As the U.S. Constitution says, the press (i.e. truth telling) is absolutely necessary in order to have a free state. When we allow the press to take steps away from truth-telling, it affects us all.

Where in the Constitution does it say anything remotely close that? The First Amendment guarantees the press freedom to publish information (whether truthful or not--it doesn't specify, nor does it need to) without the government interfering with it or censoring it in any way.

This forum is a form of the press and its users have the freedom of expression on it--although the Webmaster has a right to censor, but is very good about keeping it a medium for the free exchange of information.

The 1A was created to protect both the popular views of the majority AND the unpopular views of the minority. Anyone here is free to discuss the speed limit debate with regard to the recent accident and that discussion should be respected. There is already a thread of everyone sending their condolences to the families involved.

Given that, it is both healthy and beneficial to the Winnipesaukee community for there to be a thread about this. There was no "grieving-period wait" to discuss the politics of 9/11. We continue to discuss the politics of the conflict in Iraq, and do not "wait" a period of time every time a soldier dies. Yes, we all feel terrible about the accident and wish the families the best. But there is more to discuss.

[Bear Islander]

And I have the right to MY opinion. At this time people are in shock, angry, frustrated or emotional. You are not going to change any minds in this environment. You can only push both sides farther apart.

In this life there is a time to speak up, and a time to shut up, this is the latter.

[RI Swamp Yankee]

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

... Sorry....I don't buy it FLL......GUILTY AS CHARGED

I am still not ready to jump to conclusions and you are free to believe what you want.

[HUH]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Go back to my origional post and you will see that this was quickly (and I thought) quietly corrected. I was reading the post to my wife and realized the mistake and said, "oh boy, give me the lap top, they'll go nuts over this one". However, if you check the phone book, you probably will find that Blizzard and Hazzard are both equally uncommon surnames. Truly no offense was intended by this mistake.
As far as your rude and prickley comment about putting my head in my shell or go troll elsewhere, I put forth my inference from earlier that it is sad that one of your most visible spokespersons tacitly became one of ours last weekend. Yes, the last shred of credibility of the GFBL/no limits crowd vaporized with this accident. Very sad

Wow.. ive never heard anyone sensationalize anything so much.. Your what I would call the quitisential finger pointer "See, SEE what can happen" when not only do you have no facts to base your rediculous rantings on you show absolutly no empathy for the families who have actually lost a family member.

[flyry49]

Originally Posted by Dave R

If she was exceeding 6 MPH/no wake, speed was a factor. It's obvious the boat was closer to Diamond Island than 150'.

" Well maybe if she saw the no wake sign or "the island" she would have slown down", and by the way the headway speed law is 300 feet from shore not 150. nice try tho

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by flyry49

" Well maybe if she saw the no wake sign or "the island" she would have slown down", and by the way the headway speed law is 300 feet from shore not 150. nice try tho

300' only if you are on a 2 person ski craft.

[Skip]

According to this article in today's on-line edition of the Union Leader, Blizzard's condition has been upgraded. Additionally, the Marine Patrol continues to investigate a number of possibilities surrounding the collision.

[B R]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I fully understand your agenda. However this is not the time or the place to push that agenda. You are doing your cause more harm than good in my opinion. Give it a rest for now.

Thank you.

We'll have facts at some point and I'm sure it will be discussed fully then. For now, everything is pure speculation and nothing more.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by flyry49

" Well maybe if she saw the no wake sign or "the island" she would have slown down", and by the way the headway speed law is 300 feet from shore not 150. nice try tho

Wow, great post. Some corrections are needed though...

There are no "no wake" signs near Diamond Island. The closest is at Smith's Point, more than a mile away and not at all relevant,

"Slown"? Not a word I'm familiar with.

Excerpts from NH law:

270-D:1 Definitions

VI. "Headway speed'' means 6 miles per hour or the slowest speed that a boat can be operated and maintain steerage way.


270-D:2 General Rules for Vessels Operating on Water

VI. (a) To provide full visibility and control and to prevent their wake from being thrown into or causing excessive rocking to other boats, barges, water skiers, aquaplanes or other boats, rafts or floats, all vessels shall maintain headway speed when within 150 feet from:
(1) Rafts, floats, swimmers.
(2) Permitted swimming areas.
(3) Shore.
(4) Docks.
(5) Mooring fields.
(6) Other vessels.

There are circumstances where this particular law does not apply, but not being able to see an island at night is not one of them.

Simply put: If this one simple law had been obeyed, this accident (and nearly every other tragic accident on the lake, including the one that killed Mr. Hartman) would not have happened.

[HUH]

Originally Posted by Dave R

Wow, great post. Some corrections are needed though...

There are no "no wake" signs near Diamond Island. The closest is at Smith's Point, more than a mile away and not at all relevant,

"Slown"? Not a word I'm familiar with.

Excerpts from NH law:

270-D:1 Definitions

VI. "Headway speed'' means 6 miles per hour or the slowest speed that a boat can be operated and maintain steerage way.


270-D:2 General Rules for Vessels Operating on Water

VI. (a) To provide full visibility and control and to prevent their wake from being thrown into or causing excessive rocking to other boats, barges, water skiers, aquaplanes or other boats, rafts or floats, all vessels shall maintain headway speed when within 150 feet from:
(1) Rafts, floats, swimmers.
(2) Permitted swimming areas.
(3) Shore.
(4) Docks.
(5) Mooring fields.
(6) Other vessels.

There are circumstances where this particular law does not apply, but not being able to see an island at night is not one of them.

Simply put: If this one simple law had been obeyed, this accident (and nearly every other tragic accident on the lake, including the one that killed Mr. Hartman) would not have happened.

An accident is pelotudo called Peteneitor a specific, identifiable, unexpected, unusual and unintended external event which occurs in a particular time and place, without apparent or deliberate cause but with marked effects. It implies a generally negative probabilistic outcome which may have been avoided or prevented had circumstances leading up to the accident been recognized, and acted upon, prior to its occurrence.
No law can prevent an accident!
You and others that continualy talk about this long list of tragic accidents ?
Please list them off for us. I know of the Hartman case (27 mph I believe and the driver was convicted of BUI and served time)
And this one which is still under investigation and looks to clearly be a tragic accident and nothing more !
This perponderence of tragic accidents thats continualy repeated is pure sensationalism and un called for at this time !

[AC2717]

I noticed there were no bow numbers on the hull, unless it was white or bright letters below the rubrail. If that was a dealer HIN, meaing the plaquard that is put in the windshielf when you go test drive a boat by the dealer, Lakeport could be in serious trouble and that is not a good thing for marina. Let's hope this is not taken into conderation.

Sorry to bring this up but there are these type of people out there, not saying the familys of who got hurt are. DO NOT TAKE THIS IN ANY OTHER WAY BUT AS A MERE POINTING OUT WHAT I SAW IN THE PHOTO

[LDR4]

I have been reading some of these posts regarding this terrible accident over the past few days and have resisted writing my own because I was sure that all of this would eventually die down and did not want to add fuel to the fire. Unfortunately there are way to many people with way too much time on their hands (see turtleboy) that have already been able to conclude the cause of this accident was excessive speed and therefore find it acceptable to use this forum as a place to become Judge and Jury and convict someoneone of something that she has not even had a chance to defend herself of.

Yes I opposed the speed limit bill. I also do not have a boat that will go above 30 mph so it does not, and will not affect how I boat on the lake. I am against the bill because I think that the effort and money that has been put into this debate (by both sides) would be much better served being directed towards things like increased Marine Patrol presence on our lakes (all of them not just Winni) and stricter boater education requirements.
People are going to exceed 45 mph and 25mph whether there is a speed limit in force or not, and the Marine patrol does not, and will have the resources to effectively prevent that.
I don't know whether that boat was doing 20 mph or 50 mph that night. The only people that do (or will) are the people who survived the accident and the officials charged with the responsibility of determining the cause.

There will be plenty of time for everyone involved in the speed limit debate to get in their "I told you so's" once all the facts are determined.
This is still the United States, and we are still all "Innocent until proven Guilty"

Until we hear from those parties, I would suggest that we put this discussion on hold and pray for those recovering and for Stephanie and her family.

[sa meredith]

DaveG
While I certainly agree with the spirit of your post, I believe (as stated earlier), that other than mechanical failure, it really does not matter what the cause is. The captain is responsible for everything that takes place on his/her boat. Everything. And, as has been stated in this forum COUNTLESS times, the first order of reponsibility of the captain, is the safety of his/her passengers. I feel for Erica, as, no matter what, her life had changed forever.
But a girl has died, and there is a reason. I'm sure her family will want answers to all of their questions. And, utimately, I believe the captain will be held responsible for what occured on her boat.

[parrothead]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

DaveG
While I certainly agree with the spirit of your post, I believe (as stated earlier), that other than mechanical failure, it really does not matter what the cause is. The captain is responsible for everything that takes place on his/her boat. Everything. And, as has been stated in this forum COUNTLESS times, the first order of reponsibility of the captain, is the safety of his/her passengers. I feel for Erica, as, no matter what, her life had changed forever.
But a girl has died, and there is a reason. I'm sure her family will want answers to all of their questions. And, utimately, I believe the captain will be held responsible for what occured on her boat.

But until the investigation is completed it does no one any good to speculate on what happened in that boat. Until that time we should offer support to the family and friends of these women. I can't imagine what they must be going through, and don't think we should make it worse by trying to pass blame. Just let the investigators do their job.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Skip

According to this article in today's on-line edition of the Union Leader, Blizzard's condition has been upgraded. Additionally, the Marine Patrol continues to investigate a number of possibilities surrounding the collision.

Great news Skip, thanks for the update.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

I wouldn't go there.

BoatEd.com is discussing this incident, and they are being very critical of operating in fog. One reason I hope the discussion moves on with the "nuts and bolts" of the incident to another thread...NOT this one.

I'm sure you told them all of your personal weather observations from that night. Remember, the full moon and clear skies? Seems it was pretty easy to see the outline of the shore and all that?

[SIKSUKR]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

And I have the right to MY opinion. At this time people are in shock, angry, frustrated or emotional. You are not going to change any minds in this environment. You can only push both sides farther apart.

In this life there is a time to speak up, and a time to shut up, this is the latter.

Thanks BI.Erica Hazzard huh?This clown is way out of line.Just incredibly brutal.I hope you never have to read crap like this about one of your friends.

[parrothead]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

But wait a minute. I respectfully want to point out my post from 4:33 PM today. My "agenda" is that I would not want this 37 foot Formula boat to be landing in my grandson's bedroom at 2:30 AM. Clearly the GFBL/ no speed limits people have an agenda too. "Promote my cause"?...Sure...my cause is that I don't want a boat similar to the one involved in the fatal accident this past weekend to kill one of my family members. I would find that to be very distasteful. And as my previous posts infer, what the speed limit proponents also find distasteful is the premise made by people like you that this "agenda" of concern for their family is so inherently evil and self-serving.

I don't think that the either group would like to see a boat land on anyone. This was an accident, there is a set of circumstances that caused it to happen, and we don't know what those circumstances are. You talk about what could happen, a boat hitting your house and landing in your Grandson's bedroom. At this time you thankfully don't have to deal with a tragedy. You don't think that it is self-serving to use this tragedy to further your agenda? People on this forum know the families, and are in pain. There is a time and a place for debate and this isn't one of them. Let the authorities complete their investigation before yo pass judgment.

[wildwoodfam]

Originally Posted by AC2717

I noticed there were no bow numbers on the hull, unless it was white or bright letters below the rubrail.

DO NOT TAKE THIS IN ANY OTHER WAY BUT AS A MERE POINTING OUT WHAT I SAW IN THE PHOTO

You didn't see the numbers because - THERE WAS NO BOW REMAINING!!!

I continue to read these posts - many while shaking my head, some get my attention enough to call someone else over to read the post to make sure I am not misreading or misunderstanding.....SURELY you are kidding about the bow numbers?????

Unbelievable!!

[secondcurve]

The facts surrounding this tragedy will come with time. However, the accident serves as an unfortunate reminder that we all should have adequate insurance on our boats and also anyone with significant assets should have an umbrella policy. If a lady with as much boating experience as Ms. Blizzard can get into this type of accident it can happen to most anyone.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by HUH

You and others that continualy talk about this long list of tragic accidents ?
Please list them off for us. I know of the Hartman case (27 mph I believe and the driver was convicted of BUI and served time)
And this one which is still under investigation and looks to clearly be a tragic accident and nothing more !
This perponderence of tragic accidents thats continualy repeated is pure sensationalism and un called for at this time !

I have never mentioned any "long list of tragic accidents". I do know there has been more than the two you mention though. There are many dumb and shockingly benign accidents in the lake's past that would have been avoided by simply following the 150' law too. That's not sensational, it's simply common sense.

[HUH]

Originally Posted by Dave R

I have never mentioned any "long list of tragic accidents". I do know there has been more than the two you mention though. There are many dumb and shockingly benign accidents in the lake's past that would have been avoided by simply following the 150' law too. That's not sensational, it's simply common sense.

Sorry, I did misread your post and thought it read that a speed limit would have eliminated this accident. I see that you were referring to the 150 rule and agree 100%. First thing that popped into my mind when I read about the accident was that they were off course.

[RI Swamp Yankee]

With all the comments about "safe speed" I came accross this on boat-ed.com which sounds almost exactly like what I learned in a USCG boating course I took many years ago.

Safe Speed

A safe speed is a speed less than the maximum at which the operator can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and stop within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.

In establishing a safe operating speed, the operator must take into account visibility; traffic density; ability to maneuver the vessel (stopping distance and turning ability); background light at night; proximity of navigational hazards; draft of the vessel; limitations of radar equipment; and the state of wind, sea, and current.

[flyry49]

Originally Posted by Dave R

Wow, great post. Some corrections are needed though...

There are no "no wake" signs near Diamond Island. The closest is at Smith's Point, more than a mile away and not at all relevant,

"Slown"? Not a word I'm familiar with.

Excerpts from NH law:

270-D:1 Definitions

VI. "Headway speed'' means 6 miles per hour or the slowest speed that a boat can be operated and maintain steerage way.


270-D:2 General Rules for Vessels Operating on Water

VI. (a) To provide full visibility and control and to prevent their wake from being thrown into or causing excessive rocking to other boats, barges, water skiers, aquaplanes or other boats, rafts or floats, all vessels shall maintain headway speed when within 150 feet from:
(1) Rafts, floats, swimmers.
(2) Permitted swimming areas.
(3) Shore.
(4) Docks.
(5) Mooring fields.
(6) Other vessels.

There are circumstances where this particular law does not apply, but not being able to see an island at night is not one of them.

Simply put: If this one simple law had been obeyed, this accident (and nearly every other tragic accident on the lake, including the one that killed Mr. Hartman) would not have happened.

sorry if u dont like how i spell words, this forum isnt about writing formal essays so if it bugs you 2 damn bad. but u know exactly what it means. and you totally reached my point when i said if she saw a no wake sign. i know this island is terribly marked which also makes it hard to see it at night in the "rain" yes we all know she was moving faster than headway speed and breaking that law. im sure if she saw the island she would have tried to obey the headway speed law. so until you can prove how fast she was going stop talking about it

[AMekler]

Originally Posted by wildwoodfam

You didn't see the numbers because - THERE WAS NO BOW REMAINING!!!

I continue to read these posts - many while shaking my head, some get my attention enough to call someone else over to read the post to make sure I am not misreading or misunderstanding.....SURELY you are kidding about the bow numbers?????

Unbelievable!!

there were no bow numbers on the boat. there was a dealer plate on the boat.
AMekler

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by flyry49

sorry if u dont like how i spell words, this forum isnt about writing formal essays so if it bugs you 2 damn bad. but u know exactly what it means. and you totally reached my point when i said if she saw a no wake sign. i know this island is terribly marked which also makes it hard to see it at night in the "rain" yes we all know she was moving faster than headway speed and breaking that law. im sure if she saw the island she would have tried to obey the headway speed law. so until you can prove how fast she was going stop talking about it

When you are trying to make a convincing argument, good spelling and grammar help make your argument seem more credible. Your spelling and grammar are an excellent match for your argument.

[kthy66]

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...320/-1/CITNEWS


Lets keep things in perspective

[woodswalk]

My wife and I often look to this forum for information. last night while she was on line I asked her to see what the winni site had to say about this recent incident. her response from the other room was simply "oh my god".

Shame all over you!!!- not all, (and you know who you are).
After looking through some of these posts, Me thinks a good portion of the boating crowd ought get their own know-it-all website and let the winni site do what it does best-
be a source one can go to to find out valuable information.

[NHKathy]

I have to say, I agree with Woodswalk - this should really stop. This thread has gotten WAY out of hand...
I also agree that this site is where to go for a source of valuable info about the Lakes Region, but every day when I log in lately, this thread is always there on top as having the newest post, and it's just back and forth arguing - no new info (such as updated conditions of those injured).
My condolences go out to the families involved, and prayers for recovery to the 2 women that were injured.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by kthy66

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...320/-1/CITNEWS


Lets keep things in perspective

That was a great tribute to her, sounded like a great woman.

[kthy66]

Yes she really did..
So sad for her parents and siblings. May god grant them serenity and peace in this time of need.

[wildwoodfam]

Originally Posted by AMekler

there were no bow numbers on the boat. there was a dealer plate on the boat.
AMekler

I dont recall reading anything about this being a dealer boat from Channel.

Not that it matters - if she had the dealer plate - there is still no issue. My point was - post on not seeing bow numbers was pretty obvious considering there was no bow left.

[AMekler]

I was on the island after the event sunday morning and noticed a dealer plate near the passenger side windshield. I'll check my pictures.
AMekler

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by wildwoodfam

I dont recall reading anything about this being a dealer boat from Channel.

Not that it matters - if she had the dealer plate - there is still no issue. My point was - post on not seeing bow numbers was pretty obvious considering there was no bow left.

This was not a dealer boat from Channel...???

It was from Lakeport Landing, the family dealership. It is listed on their site for sale.

[AMekler]

see the photo attachement

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by AMekler

see the photo attachement

The picture depicts just in front of the windshield area, not the front/side of the bow where a number would be found. ???

If there was a dealer plate it would most likely be placed on the dash however could be tossed anywhere with that hit.

[pmj]

No that it matters, but boats do not need to show bow/registration numbers if they have USCG documentation. That said, most lake boats probably do not apply for documentation but you never know


it's a totally moot point.