In the Spirit of Compromise....

[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.......................