In the Spirit of Compromise....

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by pm203

If the safety of the children is the primary responsibility of the camps, shouldn't the camps restrict themselves to safer parts of the lake? Why should it be the other way around?

In the first place - The entire lake should be safe enough for children in a canoe! If it isn't then we need to take whatever step are necessary to make it so.

In the second place - A children's camp on the lake must send its boats out from its own waterfront. How would a camp on Bear Island, for instance, launch its canoes, sailboats etc. from another part of the lake. That is just plain silly.

Thirdly - The camps were here first. The Bear Island camps recently celebrated their 100th anniversary. I hope they can still be in operation in another hundred years. And that is what speed limits are REALLY all about.

Originally Posted by LocalRealtor

BI - Don't you think the camp directors would be more concerned about someone going say 20-40 mph and 100 feet or less from one of their boats, then say someone going may 50mph plus in the broads or in the an open area hundreds if not thousands of feet from the nearest boat?

You are getting hung up on the actual speeds involved. It's the cowboy atmosphere that is the problem. Not weather a given boat is going 25, 45 or 65.

In a perfect world a camp director wants to send his boats out on a tranquil empty lake. In the real world he looks out at the way the lake is on a summer weekend and makes a hard choice between sending the boats out or keeping them in.

I doubt any Captain Boneheads understand the hundreds and even thousands of children they are keeping off the lake by their antics. It is also true outside the camps. I know many parents, including me, think twice about letting the kids go out on days when the lake is buzzy.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

In the first place - The entire lake should be safe enough for children in a canoe! If it isn't then we need to take whatever step are necessary to make it so.

In the second place - A children's camp on the lake must send its boats out from its own waterfront. How would a camp on Bear Island, for instance, launch its canoes, sailboats etc. from another part of the lake. That is just plain silly.

Thirdly - The camps were here first. The Bear Island camps recently celebrated their 100th anniversary. I hope they can still be in operation in another hundred years. And that is what speed limits are REALLY all about.

You are getting hung up on the actual speeds involved. It's the cowboy atmosphere that is the problem. Not weather a given boat is going 25, 45 or 65.

In a perfect world a camp director wants to send his boats out on a tranquil empty lake. In the real world he looks out at the way the lake is on a summer weekend and makes a hard choice between sending the boats out or keeping them in.

I doubt any Captain Boneheads understand the hundreds and even thousands of children they are keeping off the lake by their antics. It is also true outside the camps. I know many parents, including me, think twice about letting the kids go out on days when the lake is buzzy.

It's been going on for quite some time from what I've read. Looks like the prisoners have taken over the prison.

See guys, BI and I agree on most of the points. He just holds out Hope that the law will do something, because apparently, nobody else on the lake will. Sounds like somebody's not been enforcing anything for quite some time.

[Kracken]

Not bad Acres Per Second.

You know some history.
You want to debate…lets debate.
But let’s make in constructive.

If “my” speed is endangering others isn’t that an accusation that needs to be proved? The legislature seems to thing so. That is why the speed limit law is temporary and it is being used to study the effects. Some people don’t want the results to be analyzed. They want the law made permanent before the facts can be studied. Ramming this law through before the sunset provision is over is irresponsible. Does this sound familiar to you? Adding a law that restricts individual’s action because of a perceived problem is wrong. Making it permanent before getting the facts is ludicrous.

The only true experts here are the marine patrol. They have stated speed is not the problem. If you ask a State Trooper what are the major contributing factors of highway accidents you will get the same answers anyplace in this country.

Alcohol and speed.

So my question to you Acres is simple.
Do you think the law should be made permanent before the facts are studied?

As for the cruiser’s wake, I am unfamiliar with that event.

A couple of questions come to mind.
Was the driver of the cruiser operating his vessel within the law?
Would a speed limit have prevented this accident?
Were the children in the canoe wearing PFDs?

[Chimi]

I will be filming all weekend, and will be sending the film to every state rep and senator. The film will be enlightening to these reps and senators that have never been on a boat, let alone spent the weekend on Winnipesaukee. The documentary will clearly show that the problem is not excessive speed GFBL boats, but rather will provide proof that there are far more serious problems, that jeopardize safety on the water. If these people are going to vote on something, they should vote on facts, not fiction created by a core group of people with an agenda. I'm going to document what really goes on out there and how dangerous these conditions are. If a GFBL boat passes too fast or too close, he'll get filmed too. It's time that the truth be told, and video does not lie.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Chimi

I will be filming all weekend, and will be sending the film to every state rep and senator. The film will be enlightening to these reps and senators that have never been on a boat, let alone spent the weekend on Winnipesaukee. The documentary will clearly show that the problem is not excessive speed GFBL boats, but rather will provide proof that there are far more serious problems, that jeopardize safety on the water. If these people are going to vote on something, they should vote on facts, not fiction created by a core group of people with an agenda. I'm going to document what really goes on out there and how dangerous these conditions are. If a GFBL boat passes too fast or too close, he'll get filmed too. It's time that the truth be told, and video does not lie.

Are you aware that some representatives and senators have homes on the lake? That some of them have worked professionally on the lake in commercial and law enforcement boats? That at least one is a former Marine Patrol Officer? That before voting on speed limits many of them were given rides on performance boats?

Who says video doesn't lie. You only see what the camera operator points the camera at. Even then you only see what they choose not to edit out. If you film all weekend you will have to edit out quite a bit. I have been interviewed on camera for up to an hour and then seen my words edited down to 20 seconds.

Even if you were to come up with a video that PROVES the problem is not excessive speed, the argument will be that your video proves the speed limit is working.

Originally Posted by Chimi

I will be filming all weekend, and will be sending the film to every state rep and senator. The documentary will clearly show that the problem is not excessive speed GFBL boats,

Chimi,
Sounds like you have already decided what the film that you have not yet taken is going to show. That's how Michael Moore sets out to make his "documentaries" too. I wonder if the editing will not help to make that point as well?
It would be telling if a full weekend of filming resulted in only fifteen minutes of violations. Now if you had filmed for 16 hours a couple of years ago before we had a speed limit, you'd have been able to make a real documentary 16 hours long and showing 16 hours of continuous mayhem.
I could surely film far less that "all weekend" and get plenty of footage of go-fast boats obeying the speed limit and other boats enjoying more passive activities as a result. If I do that, would you accept it as "the truth"?
And although I'm sure word has already been sent around to selected boaters telling them just where to go to misbehave and get on the film, it might be nice to post on the forum just where/when you will be filming so other people who want to give the impression that things are really bad out there this year can come by and wreak some havoc for the cameras as well. Of course, this might attract a patrol boat or two, but isn't enforcement and safety, and getting these "captain boneheads" off the lake what we all want anyway?
PS: You might also want to tell your friends to be sure they drape a towel over their bow numbers during filming.

[Kracken]

Originally Posted by elchase

Chimi,
Sounds like you have already decided what the film that you have not yet taken is going to show. That's how Michael Moore sets out to make his "documentaries" too. I wonder if the editing will not help to make that point as well?
It would be telling if a full weekend of filming resulted in only fifteen minutes of violations. Now if you had filmed for 16 hours a couple of years ago befero we had a speed limit, you'd have been able to make a real documentary 16 hours long and showing 16 hours of continuous mayhem.
I could surely film far less that "all weekend" and get plenty of footage of go-fast boats obeying the speed limit and other boats enjoying more passive activities as a result. If I do that, would you accept it as "the truth"?
And although I'm sure word has already been sent around to selected boaters telling them just where to go to misbehave and get on the film, it might be nice to post on the forum just where/when you will be filming so other people who want to give the impression that things are really bad out there this year can come by and wreak some havoc for the cameras as well. Of course, this might attract a patrol boat or two, but isn't enforcement and safety, and getting these "captain boneheads" off the lake what we all want anyway?
PS: You might also want to tell your friends to be sure they drape a towel over their bow numbers during filming.

WOW,

I actually have to agree with Elchase.
But I have to admit, He had me at Michael Moore comment.

[Chimi]

Originally Posted by elchase

Chimi,
Sounds like you have already decided what the film that you have not yet taken is going to show. That's how Michael Moore sets out to make his "documentaries" too. I wonder if the editing will not help to make that point as well?
It would be telling if a full weekend of filming resulted in only fifteen minutes of violations. Now if you had filmed for 16 hours a couple of years ago before we had a speed limit, you'd have been able to make a real documentary 16 hours long and showing 16 hours of continuous mayhem.
I could surely film far less that "all weekend" and get plenty of footage of go-fast boats obeying the speed limit and other boats enjoying more passive activities as a result. If I do that, would you accept it as "the truth"?
And although I'm sure word has already been sent around to selected boaters telling them just where to go to misbehave and get on the film, it might be nice to post on the forum just where/when you will be filming so other people who want to give the impression that things are really bad out there this year can come by and wreak some havoc for the cameras as well. Of course, this might attract a patrol boat or two, but isn't enforcement and safety, and getting these "captain boneheads" off the lake what we all want anyway?
PS: You might also want to tell your friends to be sure they drape a towel over their bow numbers during filming.

Wow, the truth video might actually prove that your blessed speed limit was really just your way of ridding the lake of a certain type of vessel. Nice Michael Moore comment by the way. You know, I never thought of having my friends come by and perform dangerous acts, just so I could manipulate the video. Thanks for the ideas though! I have hours of footage from the weekend, showing every type of vessel involved in dangerous, bonehead moves. Yet there was hardly an occasion where a GFBL boat was either speeding or violating the 150' rule. A jet ski can kill someone just as easy as a 40' boat. Where's the outrage over these bozos?

More filming to take place next weekend. Then the copies get made and sent to every rep and senator. I may even include a bag of microwave popcorn so they can enjoy the entertainment. Bye Bye speed limit - nice knowing ya...

[Kracken]

After reading through the speed limit threads it reminded me of a short story by Kurt Vonnegut. (Some of you might remember him from Rodney Dangerfield’s Back to School.)

Harrison Bergeron is a dystopian story that takes place in the year 2081. In the story, societal equality has been achieved by handicapping the more intelligent, athletic or beautiful members of society down to the level of the lowest common endowment. This is due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th amendments to the U.S Constitution. This process is central to the society, designed so that no one will feel inferior to anyone else.

If you want to check it out here is link: http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/hb.html

[VtSteve]

Now that BI has come back to engage in his rational voice.

The problems on waterways are well know to those that actually are out on the water, particularly weekends. There are other issues, of course. People should not be afraid to be on the water for fear of getting run over. The rules of the water used to be know by a majority of boaters. The last decade or more brought people into boating that may not have had any prior experience. We probably all forget this, as the water is second nature to some of us.

We have a group of people that thought a SL would be the proper solution to "fix" the problems. Many of us knew that wasn't the answer, but unfortunately, the debate focused only on the SL, and not on the problems.

BI laid out what I think is the single most important aspect of safety on the waterway. He's done that long ago. In doing so, it pinpoints the number one problem on the lake today. ENFORCEMENT. Yes, here I go again.
(To address our lurkers that are knashing their teeth now. Yes, ENFORCEMENT. Which does not mean crowding a boat traveling safely to get him to slow to headway speed. It doesn't mean harassment, not any of that. )

What it does mean is this. If I'm the head of the MP, I've either read about BI's complaints, or heard about them somewhere else. I've heard about some of my MP's doing things that I probably would prefer they don't do. So what's the solution?

Meeting time men, and women. Starting Friday night through Sunday afternoons, you will do the following. Unmarked boats will be around the summer camp areas, with camcorders rolling, and other MP's not that far off, but out of sight. Take notice of what's going on. If you see a boat traveling between canoes and other boats, or dangerously close to anything, STOP THEM. CITE THEM. Then repeat the process.

Guard the NWZ and the camps, and other boaters, like your job depends on it. IT DOES. If I see one of my men traveling at 3.0 mph through the Weirs channel, with dozens of boats floating sideways trying to stay behind, I'll have you picking up trash for the rest of the summer. Don't come back either. I want the BONEHEADS to know we mean business. Instruct them, don't harass them. If a boater is "somewhat" close to another boat, use some judgment. Is it in a narrower portion of the lake? Is he otherwise doing a good job, and not rampaging through the water? Use some common sense. Is he being arrogant? Beer cans?

Now men, we've all read BI's stories about the camps, and have heard directly from the camp directors themselves. I want the camp directors to be put at ease, and the children to be safe. I also want on my desk by the end of the month of August, every patrolman's personal experiences, as well as suggestions for any additional suggestions or rules they may feel would help out in the future.

You have your orders now, and I fully expect them to be followed.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

In the first place - The entire lake should be safe enough for children in a canoe! If it isn't then we need to take whatever step are necessary to make it so.

Maybe in a perfect world, but this will never be reality. There are too many conditions and situations to allow it. Just like every other place in the world, there are certain places children will always be in danger and shouldn't be exposed to .A lake or any body of water should always be of high concern. A speed limit does not address these concerns, as the data proves.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by pm203

A speed limit does not address these concerns, as the data proves.

A SL is just one (integral) part of the solution for improving conditions on the lake. No SL supporter would argue that it's the only solution. And as was said in an earlier post, we can't just go back to the less crowded conditions on the lake in 1960 when everyone could willy-nilly just do whatever they want on the lake. Times have changed and we have to change with them.
As far as voting out legislators who support the SL...I suspect that those who favor unlimited speeds on Lake Winnipesaukee as their major concern in NH politics represent such a tiny fraction of NH voters that "voting the bums out" is just a pipe-dream, especially if you keep in mind that many of the legislators who opposed HB 162 were voted out. Most NH voters have other bigger concerns than whether a few boaters can go as fast as they want.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by pm203

Maybe in a perfect world, but this will never be reality. There are too many conditions and situations to allow it. Just like every other place in the world, there are certain places children will always be in danger and shouldn't be exposed to .A lake or any body of water should always be of high concern. A speed limit does not address these concerns, as the data proves.

This is where our philosophies diverge. You think parts of the lake are not safe for children in a canoe. Therefore we should keep children in canoes away from those areas.

I think the answer is to do whatever is necessary to make the ENTIRE lake safe for children. My original idea has been a 300 horsepower limit. Other people favor a 45/25 speed limit.

You think that if the speed limit is unable to provide this safety then we should get rid of the speed limit. I believe we need to take increasingly drastic steps until the lake IS safe. If 300 HP doesn't work then we need a 200HP limit. If that doesn't work lets try a 100 HP limit. If 45/25 doesn't work we should try 25 mph day and night.

If we had a 100 HP 25 mph limit then the cowboy atmosphere would not exist. You know that, and I know that. I doubt that drastic a step in necessary, but I will support it if need be.

[pm203]

BI, no offense, but I think you are on the wrong lake for what you would like to see. And, I agree about the cowboy mentality, but that doesn't come from speed and go fast boats. It comes from too many ameteur captains with no regard for the law or respect for others. I see it almost every time I go out on the lake. And, I still don't feel that the whole lake should be made available to the camps. They should have a designated area or time of day deemed safe to be on the lake. The lake doesn't belong to any one group. And, no one group should have to suffer at the expense of the other.

Originally Posted by pm203

The lake doesn't belong to any one group. And, no one group should have to suffer at the expense of the other.

Sign this guy up. How do I make this my signature?

[BroadHopper]

I agree that the boneheads have a 'cowboy' mantality.

I agree that the lake should be safe for all recreational use of the lake.

We need to come up with laws that the MP needs to reign in these outlaws. Creating the speed limit law actually took away the effectiveness of the MP. We notice ther is less presence of the MPO this year and there was an article in the papers of limited fundings available for MP to do their job. Buying the laser guns and training added to the limited fundings and cut back manpower even more! If the law have address additional fundings then this shouldn't have happen.

If the speed limit law will scare away some of these 'cowboys', then it is working but does it have to be at the expense of those who speed reasonably and prudent? Why not increase the 150' rule to 300' to scare off some more cowboys? Then it will effect another group of boaters. Why not make the whole lake a NWZ to scare off the cowboys. That will really p.o. a lot of boaters. I don't think this is the answer.

If we are to enact new laws, we need to do it without putting a burden financially as well as use up the valuable manpower of the MP. A good law makes the MP more sffective not less.

Winnfibs actually made the comment at the Meredith public meeting that a goal to make the lake 'On Golden Pond' is the ultmatum. I think at this stage of lake development it will be impossible to go back 50 years. I'm sure everyone would love this to happen. But we need to be realistic.

We ned to think about the best solution without sacrificing the enjoyment of safe boating on the lake.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by pm203

BI, no offense, but I think you are on the wrong lake for what you would like to see. And, I agree about the cowboy mentality, but that doesn't come from speed and go fast boats. It comes from too many ameteur captains with no regard for the law or respect for others. I see it almost every time I go out on the lake. And, I still don't feel that the whole lake should be made available to the camps. They should have a designated area or time of day deemed safe to be on the lake. The lake doesn't belong to any one group. And, no one group should have to suffer at the expense of the other.

Children need to be safe on ALL lakes. If a cowboy mentality exists, you take whatever steps are required to control it.

Are you suggesting that children's camps and performance boats can't exist on the same area of the lake at the same time? If so then it is the performence boats that have to go. PERIOD!

The entire lake is BY LAW available to children's camps. The camps own considerable waterfront property and have every right to use the lake. They are also the "literal owners" of the lake area adjacent to the property they own. Suggesting that camps should be banned from parts of the lake is outrageous and indefensible. I will assume you made that comment without thinking it through.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

In the first place - The entire lake should be safe enough for children in a canoe! If it isn't then we need to take whatever step are necessary to make it so.

In the second place - A children's camp on the lake must send its boats out from its own waterfront. How would a camp on Bear Island, for instance, launch its canoes, sailboats etc. from another part of the lake. That is just plain silly.

Thirdly - The camps were here first. The Bear Island camps recently celebrated their 100th anniversary. I hope they can still be in operation in another hundred years. And that is what speed limits are REALLY all about.



You are getting hung up on the actual speeds involved. It's the cowboy atmosphere that is the problem. Not weather a given boat is going 25, 45 or 65.

In a perfect world a camp director wants to send his boats out on a tranquil empty lake. In the real world he looks out at the way the lake is on a summer weekend and makes a hard choice between sending the boats out or keeping them in.

I doubt any Captain Boneheads understand the hundreds and even thousands of children they are keeping off the lake by their antics. It is also true outside the camps. I know many parents, including me, think twice about letting the kids go out on days when the lake is buzzy.

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Children need to be safe on ALL lakes. If a cowboy mentality exists, you take whatever steps are required to control it.

Are you suggesting that children's camps and performance boats can't exist on the same area of the lake at the same time? If so then it is the performence boats that have to go. PERIOD!

The entire lake is BY LAW available to children's camps. The camps own considerable waterfront property and have every right to use the lake. They are also the "literal owners" of the lake area adjacent to the property they own. Suggesting that camps should be banned from parts of the lake is outrageous and indefensible. I will assume you made that comment without thinking it through.

I agree with you 100% BI. But I wonder why you went with this, considering the fact that the violations mentioned all occurred at lower speeds Part of the reason everybody isn't totally in agreement at one time or another is that facts that are known, are often not stated consistently in one post or another.

We also agree that "whatever steps are needed to control it" is the proper answer. Whomever the cowboys are, it's THEM that need to be dealt with. But since this discussion seems to be headed in the right direction.......

Appreciate your input, as always.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Children need to be safe on ALL lakes. If a cowboy mentality exists, you take whatever steps are required to control it.

Are you suggesting that children's camps and performance boats can't exist on the same area of the lake at the same time? If so then it is the performence boats that have to go. PERIOD!

The entire lake is BY LAW available to children's camps. The camps own considerable waterfront property and have every right to use the lake. They are also the "literal owners" of the lake area adjacent to the property they own. Suggesting that camps should be banned from parts of the lake is outrageous and indefensible. I will assume you made that comment without thinking it through.

Of course Children need to be safe on the lake. But, on the same breath, they should not be in the broads on a busy weekend. Or do you think that they should be?

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by pm203

Of course Children need to be safe on the lake. But, on the same breath, they should not be in the broads on a busy weekend. Or do you think that they should be?

Children's camps have a right to send their boats into the broads, buzzy weekend or no. Suggesting they should be banned from the broads is INSANE!

A responsible camp director may determine the broads to be unsafe for certain boating activity, but that is the director's decision, not yours, or mine.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Children's camps have a right to send their boats into the broads, buzzy weekend or no. Suggesting they should be banned from the broads is INSANE!

A responsible camp director may determine the broads to be unsafe for certain boating activity, but that is the director's decision, not yours, or mine.

I am not suggesting that anyone be banned. However, sending children into the broads on the weekend wouldn't be the most prudent thing to do. There are even certain adults that stay away from this area on the weekends. All I am saying is that there is a time and place for everything. Sending children into the broads on a busy weekend is wrong. They don't belong there. They belong in a more protected area for their own safety and enjoyment. A responsible camp director would see that.

[Kracken]

BEAR!!!!

I have read many of your posts and while I may not agree with you on most, I respect your point of view. Your logic seems well thought out and you state your opinions in an objective manner. With that being said…

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Children's camps have a right to send their boats into the broads, buzzy weekend or no. Suggesting they should be banned from the broads is INSANE!

You lost me on this one.

[NoRegrets]

Well put pm203.

Even though this world is shrinking, it is still full of places for the human spirit to explore, challenge, or conquer. The human spirit does not like to be constrained by artificial laws but society does need to insure one person’s freedom does not cause REAL harm to others. This is the fine line we are trying to reconcile.

Life can be or should be led in a manor that extends our conscious thoughts beyond the limits of our forefathers. Technical advances should be used to challenge us as adults. Children need to be “awakened’ into this vast world in a stepped process. They will get burned by the stove, skin their knees, fall off the bike, break the car, tip the canoe, run a jet ski into another boat, and so on. We all try our best to “tell’ kids to be careful but they stay invincible until they start getting personal experiences.

I do not think the speed limit for children’s safety is the pivotal point for deciding the SL issue. I also respect BI for his points made but the world should not slow down to the lowest common denominator.

All boats need to respect the 150’ rule and I think the suggestion on running the Marine Patrol for a few months the way VTSteve suggested is brilliant and is high on my list of actionable suggestions.

The density of population utilizing the lake will not return to past levels. Pedestrians do not play in the road like we did in the fifties or sixties anymore! Today’s children learn real fast that they need to go to the skate park or organized areas now. Shame on parents or designated responsible adults for allowing children to be placed in harms way and I think we should all try to find a solution for the Winni camps. They are important because they build memories and experiences away from tv’s and toys. It should be part of our social responsibility to make this happen.

As far as trying to file boneheads and presenting it to the politicians, I am afraid of them. They may outlaw boats altogether!

Sorry for rambling on but I am closing down so I can join the weekend commuters and head to the lake. Hope to see many of you out there this weekend.

[Dave R]

I think that the camp director decisions to keep kids ashore during busy boating periods are simply examples of good judgement.

When I was teaching my kids to ride their bikes, we went to a parking lot at a nearby state park. If we found the lot busy with cars (such as on a Summer weekend at mid-day), we did not let the kids ride and simply went back when the lot was empty.

I don't recall being upset by this, or ever thinking we needed laws to discourage people in cars from using the parking lot, even though bikes have been around a lot longer than cars, and cyclists have just as much right to use said parking lot as car drivers.

Just to be clear, there is absolutely no history of kids on bikes getting run over in the parking lot we used, even though at times it was pretty crazy with people in sporty cars, in big RVs, and on motorcycles all coming and going. Some people even let their kids bomb around the parking lot on bikes during these crazy times. Still, we felt it was better to wait until the place was empty. I think we were simply using good judgement.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

This is where our philosophies diverge. You think parts of the lake are not safe for children in a canoe. Therefore we should keep children in canoes away from those areas.

I think the answer is to do whatever is necessary to make the ENTIRE lake safe for children. My original idea has been a 300 horsepower limit. Other people favor a 45/25 speed limit.

You think that if the speed limit is unable to provide this safety then we should get rid of the speed limit. I believe we need to take increasingly drastic steps until the lake IS safe. If 300 HP doesn't work then we need a 200HP limit. If that doesn't work lets try a 100 HP limit. If 45/25 doesn't work we should try 25 mph day and night.

If we had a 100 HP 25 mph limit then the cowboy atmosphere would not exist. You know that, and I know that. I doubt that drastic a step in necessary, but I will support it if need be.

For real... So get ready to sell your boat BI. Where does the ludicrousness end? Are we all to drive 12 foot aluminum dinghy's with electric motors? At some point Parental responsibility trumps the whole argument. Or are you a subscriber to the "new" parenting style where everyone else is at fault but me? I give you the benefit of the doubt on this and say no. Seriously though would you send your kid out on a bicycle on I-93? No you wouldn't. Some roadways are not safe for bicycles, just like some parts of the lake. For you to say the "ENTIRE" lake should be safe for children is an extreme reach. Just like the "ENTIRE" world should be safe for children. If that were the case you need to put your 260HP Bowrider in the rack and kayak to and fro the Island. Let's keep this discussion real please. I agree with a bunch of your points and I think you do appreciate safety more than most SL supporters but I do think you have overreached on this point.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

For real... So get ready to sell your boat BI. Where does the ludicrousness end? Are we all to drive 12 foot aluminum dinghy's with electric motors? At some point Parental responsibility trumps the whole argument. Or are you a subscriber to the "new" parenting style where everyone else is at fault but me? I give you the benefit of the doubt on this and say no. Seriously though would you send your kid out on a bicycle on I-93? No you wouldn't. Some roadways are not safe for bicycles, just like some parts of the lake. For you to say the "ENTIRE" lake should be safe for children is an extreme reach. Just like the "ENTIRE" world should be safe for children. If that were the case you need to put your 260HP Bowrider in the rack and kayak to and fro the Island. Let's keep this discussion real please. I agree with a bunch of your points and I think you do appreciate safety more than most SL supporters but I do think you have overreached on this point.

As usual you are taking my comments a lot further than I ever intended.

There are many lakes where this "cowboy attitude" does not exist. Where 280 HP bowriders and canoes exist in relative harmony.

Many people on this forum think that is not possible on Winnipesaukee. They have "given up" and accept the cowboy mentality as inevitable and unalterable. This is pure BULL! I have not given up. This destructive attitude can and will be changed. I place "No Limits" on what we need to do to end this insanity.

I have given the extreme example to prove a point. If there were a 100 HP 25 mph limit on this lake then you would not have this cowboy atmosphere. Therefore it IS POSSIBLE to legislate away the cowboy attitude on this lake. My extreme example will not be necessary. However I am in favor of increased regulation and enforcement until things change. It seems your answer is to throw up your hands and say the task is impossible. I don't think that way. Besides, I love a good fight.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

As usual you are taking my comments a lot further than I ever intended.

There are many lakes where this "cowboy attitude" does not exist. Where 280 HP bowriders and canoes exist in relative harmony.

Many people on this forum think that is not possible on Winnipesaukee. They have "given up" and accept the cowboy mentality as inevitable and unalterable. This is pure BULL! I have not given up. This destructive attitude can and will be changed. I place "No Limits" on what we need to do to end this insanity.

I have given the extreme example to prove a point. If there were a 100 HP 25 mph limit on this lake then you would not have this cowboy atmosphere. Therefore it IS POSSIBLE to legislate away the cowboy attitude on this lake. My extreme example will not be necessary. However I am in favor of increased regulation and enforcement until things change. It seems your answer is to throw up your hands and say the task is impossible. I don't think that way. Besides, I love a good fight.

OK OK I took your post quite literally for sure. Still though there has to be some middle ground. Every activity we do outside sitting in a bubble has a risk to it. I believe in reducing that risk on this lake. I just don't believe that Speed was the risk. It is that Cowboy attitude we speak of. The carelessness of the average boater. While it is POSSIBLE to legislate away the cowboy attitude by limiting boats to 100hp it is ludicrous to even talk about it because it won't happen. Besides even at 100hp limit you could still put a bonehead behind the wheel of a 25hp dinghy and he could kill someone in a kayak.

While you think I may have taken your comments further than you intended I don't see how I could have read it any differently. You actually suggested we keep pushing until we have a 100hp limit and I feel my rebuttal was as extreme as your statement. Where does it end? 0hp? Wind and paddles only? By your own suggestion you have a "No Limit" attitude towards fixing the problem and I think the only true way to eliminate all risk is to wrap everyone in life jackets within 100 feet of water and only allow paddles and wind power and even THAT doesn't guarantee safety.

My focus is and remains on correctly addressing the problem and not throwing law after law at the problem to see what sticks. Lets step back use the data and make and enforce laws that actually target the dangerous drivers on the lake.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

OK OK I took your post quite literally for sure. Still though there has to be some middle ground. Every activity we do outside sitting in a bubble has a risk to it. I believe in reducing that risk on this lake. I just don't believe that Speed was the risk. It is that Cowboy attitude we speak of. The carelessness of the average boater. While it is POSSIBLE to legislate away the cowboy attitude by limiting boats to 100hp it is ludicrous to even talk about it because it won't happen. Besides even at 100hp limit you could still put a bonehead behind the wheel of a 25hp dinghy and he could kill someone in a kayak.

While you think I may have taken your comments further than you intended I don't see how I could have read it any differently. You actually suggested we keep pushing until we have a 100hp limit and I feel my rebuttal was as extreme as your statement. Where does it end? 0hp? Wind and paddles only? By your own suggestion you have a "No Limit" attitude toward fixing the problem and I think the only true way to eliminate all risk is to wrap everyone in life jackets within 100 feet of water and only allow paddles and wind power and even THAT doesn't guarantee safety.

My focus is and remains on correctly addressing the problem and not throwing law after law at the problem to see what sticks. Lets step back use the data and make and enforce laws that actually target the dangerous drivers on the lake.

A 100HP lake is unlikely but not impossible. A few years ago a lot of people said a speed limit was impossible. The entire lake has been made "no wake" a few times. And if you will remember it worked. There were very few violations. And although it was a pain getting to and from the island at that time, the lake was a beautiful, tranquil thing to experience during those times. Don't be to quick to say what is impossible. A HP limit is coming.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

Maybe the "Broads Free Zone" or "65 Zone" could look like this?

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

There are many lakes where this "cowboy attitude" does not exist. Where 280 HP bowriders and canoes exist in relative harmony.

I hate to ask you to back up this one.................

The only one I know is Lake Dillon in Colorado. It is so frigging cold up there, there is hardly any boating.......................

[jrc]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

In the first place - The entire lake should be safe enough for children in a canoe! If it isn't then we need to take whatever step are necessary to make it so....

I agree with BI. With obvious exceptions:

This is a two way street, as long as we have large vessels (up to Mt Washington scale) we must contend with the fact that all vessels must follow some rules of the water. Large vessels cannot stop or turn very fast. If a canoe paddles out in front of the Mt Washinton at 150 feet there will be a problem.

Canoes are not very stable. If you paddle your canoe in a busy area or during high winds, you should be safe from collision but waves and wakes are another matter. No law can fix the wind, and short of banning all boats no law can make a canoe stable.

Finally, just because the lake is safe for children to canoe, it doesn't mean that the lake has to be safe for children in a canoe, when they are not there. For example, on the road school zones are 20 mph when children are present, it doesn't mean that every road is 20 mph all the time. If I see a canoe near my path I slow down, I don't slow down because someday someone might want to canoe.

[Irrigation Guy]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

You are getting hung up on the actual speeds involved. It's the cowboy atmosphere that is the problem. Not weather a given boat is going 25, 45 or 65.

In a perfect world a camp director wants to send his boats out on a tranquil empty lake. In the real world he looks out at the way the lake is on a summer weekend and makes a hard choice between sending the boats out or keeping them in.

I doubt any Captain Boneheads understand the hundreds and even thousands of children they are keeping off the lake by their antics. It is also true outside the camps. I know many parents, including me, think twice about letting the kids go out on days when the lake is buzzy.

I think you may have just agreed with many in opposition of the SL. It's not the speed it's the Captain BH not being careful and giving room properly to those that they should. The existing rules do address those issues and just aren't being enforced, a SL isn't gonna change that.

[VtSteve]

Case in point. It's going to be a crazy weekend out there because it's the first weekend of summer

I just witnessed something new here on Lake Champlain. Coming back at twilight, through 15 minutes past sundown, many, many boats heading through the bay. It's about six miles out to the broad lake. Coming in, at 21.5 mph.

I saw

1) six PWC's at full clip (no lights, law says no PWC's) off my port bow.

2) four different boats, no lights, willy nilly, too close, no right of way, etc...

3) worst of all, at the beginning of my return from pizza eating at sunset....

Two boats off my starboard bow, closing quickly. I was apparently in the middle My lights were on, none from theirs. One was a Sea Doo small craft Boat, the other was a quai GF boat around 25/26'. The Sea Doo saw me. I might have actually made a mistake by immediately slowing to headway speed. (I was wondering if I should just turn around and gun it). The other larger boat?

He never changed course, never slowed down, AND NEVER EVEN SAW ME He was standing in the center of the boat, head turned starboard towards the read, TALKING TO A PASSENGER!!!!

Both were doing probably around 35 to 40 mph.


But wait, it gets better.

A POLICE BOAT witnessed the boats and PWC's out at dark with no lights. He just kept going, and HE was too close to me.

Sad, so sad.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

A POLICE BOAT witnessed the boats and PWC's out at dark with no lights. He just kept going, and HE was too close to me.

Sad, so sad.

I have witness similar episodes on Lake Sebago in ME. Lake Webster in MA. Lake George in NY, Lake Norman in NC, The intercoastal in FL. No wonder the Boneheads are from out of state!

We just need a law to make sure our MPs are fully funded and have the latest technology to enforce the current laws. Not more laws to burden the MPOs

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I have witness similar episodes on Lake Sebago in ME. Lake Webster in MA. Lake George in NY, Lake Norman in NC, The intercoastal in FL. No wonder the Boneheads are from out of state!

We just need a law to make sure our MPs are fully funded and have the latest technology to enforce the current laws. Not more laws to burden the MPOs

It won't happen. I sort of share BI's frustration in this. Many pretty much knew that funding wouldn't increase, and enforcement wouldn't be very good either. So, they reasoned that the SL law might cut down on cowboys and boat traffic, and have some positive impact.

Maybe they're not wrong.

But this is the reason that I'm not out there shouting about heroics on the water either. Some good is done, but bad as well.