How has the lake changed????

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

BI, what good will it do to pass another feel good law when there is no monetary support for enforcing the rules. Just heaping more rules on the MP to enforce is not going to help- it will hinder.

The problem that I have with your version of problem solving is that it will not work- forcing people to do things via a law will only result in the law abiding doing those things. ...
.

So I think you are saying that if a HP limit becomes law, people will simply ignore it, and the Marine Patrol will be helpless to enforce it.

You think EVERY owner of an illegal boat will openly flaunt the law and take the risk of their boat being impounded?

That the Marine Patrol will throwing up their collective hands in frustration and admit they can not read a boat registration?

A horsepower limit must be one of the easiest laws to enforce. If the HP on your registration is more than allowed you boat is impounded. See you in court. It will be just that simple. Violations will be rare, mostly by someone that launches a boat without getting the word.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I see things differently Steve.

Several years ago some people, starting on Bear Island, perceived a problem. They stood up, got together, raised money, and started working for a speed limit solution. You may think their solution was misguided, but at least they stood up and DID something.

The other side believed standing around talking about the problem, or posting about the need for more education and enforcement etc. was the answer. But it's just talk. There is no money for that.

I am proud that I was part of a movement that actually took a stand and made a difference. Even if it does get us called terrorists.

If someone else has a better idea than speed or horsepower limits, I recommend they stand up and actually do something productive. Because Skip is correct, if speed limits don't do the job then we will be looking for another solution. Probably one you will not like.

Some people will look at a problem, throw up there hands and say it can't be solved. I'm not built that way. It can be solved, it WILL be solved, tho it might take decades. Tough problems require tough solutions. Unpopular solutions.

If, as you say, a 300 HP limit will not solve the problem then we may need to try a 200 HP solution. Or 100 or 50 or 25. Eventually, somewhere along the process, the cowboy mentality will cease to be a problem. After all, a cowboy in a kayak is just not that scary.

It looks to me like I outlined it pretty well BI. The people "perceived" a problem, and started working on a speed limit solution. Yes, they Did do something. It sounds to me like people found out there were fish in the lake, and they all went out and bought tennis rackets?

Can you imagine what your approach would be like on the roadways? There seems to be problems everywhere, aggressive drivers, drunk drivers. So let's make everyone buy a Smart Car.

If I read your post correctly, you outline it as a Cowboy problem. I just can't believe that a man of your obvious intellect, could possibly offer up such half-baked "solutions" that don't even address the nature of the problem. You're proposing a scatter gun approach that isn't even aiming at the target This kind of thought process doesn't even make it at the Government level (most of the time). I think maybe even a lot of SL supporters had a bewildered look on their faces when reading your last post.

I know one solution that would work just fine. Ban boating entirely. Then you can start working on the mainland.

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

It looks to me like I outlined it pretty well BI. The people "perceived" a problem, and started working on a speed limit solution. Yes, they Did do something. It sounds to me like people found out there were fish in the lake, and they all went out and bought tennis rackets?

Can you imagine what your approach would be like on the roadways? There seems to be problems everywhere, aggressive drivers, drunk drivers. So let's make everyone buy a Smart Car.

If I read your post correctly, you outline it as a Cowboy problem. I just can't believe that a man of your obvious intellect, could possibly offer up such half-baked "solutions" that don't even address the nature of the problem. You're proposing a scatter gun approach that isn't even aiming at the target This kind of thought process doesn't even make it at the Government level (most of the time). I think maybe even a lot of SL supporters had a bewildered look on their faces when reading your last post.

I know one solution that would work just fine. Ban boating entirely. Then you can start working on the mainland.

VT, I agree with you 100%. I have another idea...vote every bleeding heart, nanny state liberal out of office whenever possible. Elect people with brains of their own that can see through the smoke and mirror agendas. It reminds me of the famous speech by Howard Beale in the movie Network. "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore".

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/Movi...hnetwork2.html

Whatever happens, I am not leaving - neither is my boat.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Ryan

...Stopping every boat that they 'believe' might be exceeding your HP limit will only lead to probable cause issues (Skip) and takes away MP resources from policing the ACTUAL issues on the lake, not those perceived issues...

Please folks, if you are going to drag me into the conversation and throw about legal terms at least know what you are talking about.

You do not need "probable cause" to stop a boat. You need "probable cause" to effect an arrest.

You only need "articulable suspicion" to stop and temporarily detain a boat operator.

There is a significant legal difference between these two legal concepts.

Thank you....

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

So I think you are saying that if a HP limit becomes law, people will simply ignore it, and the Marine Patrol will be helpless to enforce it.

You think EVERY owner of an illegal boat will openly flaunt the law and take the risk of their boat being impounded?

That the Marine Patrol will throwing up their collective hands in frustration and admit they can not read a boat registration?

A horsepower limit must be one of the easiest laws to enforce. If the HP on your registration is more than allowed you boat is impounded. See you in court. It will be just that simple. Violations will be rare, mostly by someone that launches a boat without getting the word.

Just do something... even if it's wrong.

The scary thing is that you could traverse the state and ask people if they think 300 HP in a boat is too much (now remember Ma'am your minivan parked there has a little over 170 HP) and the answer by the uninformed would be absolutely. Well maybe if they had headlights...

I saw one of those little hydrofoil type boats out the other day, it was maybe 18', had probably 1/2 the 270HP my 46 MPH BR packs but could easily break the SL by 30 MPH. 300 HP is not about cowboys. Any racer knows it is about weight and HP.

So explain what you are really after. The HP limit does not solve your cowboy problem, because a kayaker that gets run over by a boat going 70 is not going to care that it was an 18' boat with a 135HP engine on it.

I have gone on the record on numerous occasions explaining that I do not own a performance boat nor do I own a boat with greater than 300HP. With all due respect to Pastor Martin Niemöller:

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Performance Boaters
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Performance Boater.

THEN THEY CAME for the 300plusHP boaters,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a 300plusHP boater.

THEN THEY CAME for the Big Cruiser boaters,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Big Cruiser Boater.

THEN THEY CAME for me (the Bowrider Boater)
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

[VtSteve]

I know what you guys mean. BI is laughing out loud at those of us promoting safety, freely acknowledging that the SL he supports was in now way designed to stop the problems on the lake. That would have been an interesting addition to the old SL discussions. To those that supported the SL, how would this have sounded?

"You should support the speed limit, it won't really solve anything, but it's something we can get passed. We know you'll go along with it because it sounds Safe. So even though we lie about our reasons, we're really not bad people, so please don't try to hurt our feelings. We are working on many rules, regulations, and some outright bans that may actually do something in the future.

So don't let all these mean-spirited people dissuade you from supporting whatever law we decide may pass. Some people actually think we care whether or not the MP actually enforces these silly laws we come up with, We Don't. Every time we pass a new law, and the MP cannot or does not enforce it, we'll just come up with another law, and then another, and yet another.

We just can't stop ourselves. Every time a boat wake hits shore, it hurts our feelings. We like our own powerboats, of course. But this is about ridding the lake of other people's boats, not yours. Picture a wave-free lake, with all boats having small, 25 hp engines. Except for the camp boats with their monster wakes, of course.

We don't expect anything to really come of these laws, except fewer people (hopefully) will be boating on Winni after awhile. So keep up the good work Safe Boaters, inspecting vessels, pushing for enforcement, and all that really silly stuff. We're Really doing things, making laws, rubbing elbows with legislators that want votes, really neato stuff. We don't really know what's next on the agenda, but it will likely be something boaters don't like."

[Skip]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

...Skip says to avoid any talk of safety issues at all, because the lawmakers and do-gooders will simply come up with more laws and more restrictions, because they aren't smart enough to do anything else...

Well there you go Steve.

I had to sit back for a few hours before I replied to your post.

Let me start by saying you just answered a question you posed to me off line as to why I don't offer my opinion in these threads.

I never, ever said to avoid any talk of safety issues. I never said legislators aren't smart. You have attempted to paraphrase me and in doing so have taken me completely out of context.

Hmm, who have I heard complain loud and clear about the same thing in other threads? Why you, of course.

If you want to have an intelligent and adult debate about this issue, then stick to the legislation. There's an old adage in political debate; debate the issue and not the man. Its also the core concept around Robert's Rules of Order.

It is apparent that there are still too many people related to this subject that cannot stick to the debate but have to degrade themselves into personal attacks of their opponents or their opponent's motivation.

That is why with thousands of registered members here, all of who must have some opinion of this issue, 99% of them refuse to partake in this discussion.

That is why Don had to moderate the boating thread, not because of the subject at hand but because of the handful of posters that couldn't, and still don't, debate like adults.

Here's the bottom line. Whether I support speed limits or not I am completely convinced that they are here to stay. I am completely convinced that the Lake is nowhere near as dangerous as some here continually portray it. And I am completely convinced that speed limits will move to other bodies of water.

There will be no huge new influx of cash to the NHMP. They will continue to do the job that they do with the limited resources they are given. I happen to think they do a damn fine job and as a taxpayer and boater I DO NOT want to see the agency taken over by the State Police, or expanded to such a degree that there's an officer in every nook & cranny of the Lake. I do not need to be babysat by the Government when I am relaxing. If the Lake becomes too crazy for me I will simply boat elsewhere, knowing that my perception of craziness is bliss to the boater that takes my place.

Oh, and I'm bowing out of these threads for good with the final observation:

There are a handful of pro speed limit supporters that act and post like juveniles.

There are a boatload of anti speed limit supporters that act and post like juveniles.

After having followed this debate closely for a number of years I have come to the final conclusion: In my book you win Bear Islander. Not because you are necessarily correct on the subject, but you have taken the high ground with thoughtful, provocative but always on subject debate since day one. You sir are a gentleman and a fantastic debater. I tip my hat to you and give you my blessings as I know you still have a little fight left in you here!

And with that I bid a fond adieu...I'll see everyone over on the adult section of the website!

[VtSteve]

Before you run off Skip. Please tell me if I took this post of yours out of context.

On the flip side of the coin a number of folks here opposed to speed limit legislation continue to state that the regulation has had no effect, and give numerous examples of how the Lake, in their perception, remains as or more dangerous. A negative effect usually results in the State not rolling back legislation, but in increasing more and more layered legislation to force people into compliance. It is the nature of politics.

Without taking sides in the debate, if I was a legislator with little or no ties to the Lake (like many are) and I viewed this website as an authoritive source of information (to which many here argued when the boating thread was temporarily moderated) I could easily be convinced that additional legislation is warranted. A lobbyist may not have a hard time convincing me of same.

I'm not taking sides in the debate but just offering an insight as to not only how the speed limit legislation was passed, with all its additional riders (dmv points, all water bodies subjected to General Boating requirements) but how Bear Islander's predictions could easily pass the Legislature in future sessions.

Interesting corners, in my humble opinion, that some folks may be painting themselves in to!

So if the lake is not safer because of one law that didn't address the issues, more laws will be forthcoming. Yes, I guess I did paraphrase you, which is the most logical meaning to be derived from your statement. You certainly don't give Legislators any credit for looking at facts, or even past history. OK, you didn't Say they were stupid. But you've certainly painted them as pretty easy to sway, and not very hard to fool. That's My opinion. While you've not adopted a stance one way or the other, you make a good case as to why no big time enforcement should be requested. Point taken there.

As BI said, this is all a win-win for him in the end, you've simply stated why and what the Legislators would do if the lobbyists lobbied for more. I fully understand what you're saying, I really do. What I was trying to point out, is that there are many SL supporters that didn't think ahead in this manner, and thought the campaign was all on the up and up. All very good things to bring up in public, don't you think?

You brought up an interesting Catch-22 argument in your Painting themselves into corners argument, which is not very far from the truth, actually.

OK BI, Skip says you win. I might as well help you draw up plans for the 50 HP limit, at least that way people can keep small Whalers or something like that. You win.

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

If, as you say, a 300 HP limit will not solve the problem then we may need to try a 200 HP solution. Or 100 or 50 or 25. Eventually, somewhere along the process, the cowboy mentality will cease to be a problem. After all, a cowboy in a kayak is just not that scary.

Huh??

First, We would have to agree that there is a problem.

In your mind BI, what specifically is the problem?

Second, one would have to agree what causes the problem. Lack of experience, lack of common sense, lack of ability, lack of training?

Some people with a lot of training, a boating license and a lot of experience will just attain the rank of Captain Bonehead. They just were not meant to operate a boat. How will you fix that?

So anyone with over 300 HP is a cowboy? The family of 5 that enjoys the lake on their 32 Carver aft cabin, or any boat that requires more than 300 HP to move it must be operated by a cowboy? (Just curious: Do you think that anyone on route 93 that is not driving a Prius has too much horsepower)?

There are many families that cannot afford lakefront property and buy cabin cruisers in the 30 to 40 foot range so they and their families can have the chance to be on the lake. Would you deny them the opportunity?

PS. You still have not answered my question about the loss of tax revenue to all of the cities and towns. As a matter of fact, you didn't answer any of my questions. (When confronted with specifics you fold up fast)!

[VtSteve]

It's good to give it another rest. I'd love to see the 99% that don't participate give an opinion or ideas if they have any. No rebuttal necessary on my part anymore. Everyone enjoy the rest of the summer.

The only reason I continued with these threads, is because I care. I've seen other areas where the boating life has had the life ripped right from it. These are areas that some would like to copy the rules from, but they are areas that have from 2-8 times the accident rates as well.

I'm far from a cowboy, probably too careful if one can be. I don't like reckless, and I don't like hot dogs on the water. There are many that don't care that much about boating, but love to just look at the lake. I love both, and they coexist just fine. I just hope those that choose not to post read the comments carefully in these forums. I'm no politician, and will never run for office

Everybody should rethink their boating world and just look at some of the proposals and wishes that are on the table here.

Special message to the adolescents and cowboys on the lake. This is what happens when you don't listen, and cannot control yourself. Your bad manners have not gone unnoticed, anywhere. You probably have several more years left to make complete donkeys out of yourself, and be the arrogant cusses you are. If up to me, you'd be tracked down on the lake, then swept off it. Be thankful that the legislative-happy bunch takes years to deal with anything.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

Huh??

First, We would have to agree that there is a problem.

In your mind BI, what specifically is the problem?

Second, one would have to agree what causes the problem. Lack of experience, lack of common sense, lack of ability, lack of training?

Some people with a lot of training, a boating license and a lot of experience will just attain the rank of Captain Bonehead. They just were not meant to operate a boat. How will you fix that?

So anyone with over 300 HP is a cowboy? The family of 5 that enjoys the lake on their 32 Carver aft cabin, or any boat that requires more than 300 HP to move it must be operated by a cowboy? (Just curious: Do you think that anyone on route 93 that is not driving a Prius has too much horsepower)?

There are many families that cannot afford lakefront property and buy cabin cruisers in the 30 to 40 foot range so they and their families can have the chance to be on the lake. Would you deny them the opportunity?

PS. You still have not answered my question about the loss of tax revenue to all of the cities and towns. As a matter of fact, you didn't answer any of my questions. (When confronted with specifics you fold up fast)!

I answered all your questions in post #84. The fact that you do not like or will not accept my answers, does not mean I have not made them.

I don't see any significant loss of revenues to the towns. Taxes are on real estate. Marinas are not going to go out of business. They might have to alter a few slips now and then to convert from large boats to small. All this will take place over many years. How does that involve a crippling tax loss? Please be specific or give an example.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

...

There are many families that cannot afford lakefront property and buy cabin cruisers in the 30 to 40 foot range so they and their families can have the chance to be on the lake. Would you deny them the opportunity? ...

I don't know what a 40 foot cabin cruiser costs but I bet it is MORE than a modest waterfront property. 35 Bear Island is for sale and they are only asking $199k. It needs work but has a fantastic view of the mountains.

I also don't know what a slip costs for one of those things, 5k or 6k per year? But I bet that big slip will cost more than taxes plus utilities for an island home.

Even if you add a new bow rider and valet service an island home is cheaper.




http://www.newenglandmoves.com/real-...f25a213394079e

[Woodsy]

BI...

Your a bit off base with your numbers! At first glance a $200K island property that needs work might seem like a bargain... especially to someone who can plunk down that much for a 6 minute weightless joyride. However, look at the true costs...

$200,000 for the island property
$50,000 in work (looks like septic might be an issue according to your link)
$2,500+ taxes yearly (based on $12.54 per 1000 tax rate) likely to increase
$15,000 (modest used bowrider in 20' range)
$2,500 (yearly valet fee for 20' boat)

$270,000 first year total with a minimum of $5000 recurring expenses (you get intrest write off on mortgage & prop taxes)

***************

$150,000 for 3-4 year old 38' cruiser ( i have seen them alot cheaper but figured I should aim high for the sake of argument)
$4,000 - Slip rental (Mountain View or equiv)

$154,000 first year total with $4000 recurring expenses. (you get intrest write off on boat loan)

You could purchase a slip @ Mountain View for $60,000-70,000 to secure your lake access, however with a rental fee of only 4,000 - 5,000 it will take 15 plus years to pay for itself... and you will be paying a yearly fee to the MVYC association....

Its still way way cheaper to go cabin cruiser than island property.... pros and cons to both.

Woodsy

[Bear Islander]

OK Woodsy

I will accept your figures. But you need to add maintainace costs and winter storage.

The big difference is that after 10 or 20 years the island home will be worth a lot more and the boat will be worth very little.

I do think they are in the same ballpark.

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I don't know what a 40 foot cabin cruiser costs but I bet it is MORE than a modest waterfront property. 35 Bear Island is for sale and they are only asking $199k. It needs work but has a fantastic view of the mountains.

I also don't know what a slip costs for one of those things, 5k or 6k per year? But I bet that big slip will cost more than taxes plus utilities for an island home.

Even if you add a new bow rider and valet service an island home is cheaper.




http://www.newenglandmoves.com/real-...f25a213394079e

For what it's worth, I've looked at that property and essentially the price reflects the lot, not the building which pretty much needs a wrecking ball taken to it. Retrofitting that place is not worth the effort. So now you're out the cost of demolition and removal, site work and at least a septic to get something reasonably usable. Granted how much is necessary to fix the place up is directly related to how elaborate a place you want, but even erecting a simple camp will push the price tag in my estimation out close to 300K and hit the tax bill pretty hard.

In the end it's worth what somebody is willing to pay for it, but I'd rather invest in property that will be more likely to gain value versus a boat that is guaranteed to loose value. Total cost of ownership is a wash in my book, both have similar reoccurring costs.

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

OK Woodsy

I will accept your figures. But you need to add maintainace costs and winter storage.

The big difference is that after 10 or 20 years the island home will be worth a lot more and the boat will be worth very little.

I do think they are in the same ballpark.

How do you know that the lot or house will be worth more in 10 or 20 years. Look at the last 5 years and see where we are going.

You can buy used cabin cruisers in the 35 foot range for under $100,000. If you own a slip in a marina your annual costs (fees and taxes) will be about $2,500. Great deal for those that can't afford a waterfront home.

As for your contention that a vessel would be worth substantially less in a few years: I owned a 35 foot cabin cruser on this lake that I purchased in 1996. I sold it in 2003 for more than I paid for it. Don't be so sure of yourself!

I know one couple that owns a 38 foot boat and live aboard it for the summer. In the winter they rent a condo in the area for $500 per month. Cheap living and they are right on the lake. Would you deprive them of this opportunity, or just tell them that they can't ever get a new boat and if they decide to sell their slip it will be worth 1/4 of what they paid because of a horsepower regulation?

In reference to your previous posts: The marinas will have to make adjustments? MVYC has 284 slips with individual owners. What adjustments do you make to a 44 foot slip?

You obviously have many uninformed opinions that scare people. Uninformed people get to vote. That is scary!

I will take a step on the wild side and assume that your Winnipesaukee home came about as a result of family money or inheritance. There is no way that someone whose thinking is as disfunctional as yours has been gainfully employed and earned enough money himself to own a second home on Winnipesaukee.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

I will take a step on the wild side and assume that your Winnipesaukee home came about as a result of family money or inheritance. There is no way that someone whose thinking is as disfunctional as yours has been gainfully employed and earned enough money himself to own a second home on Winnipesaukee.

Thank you... That really made me laugh out loud. My first inclination was to ignore it but then I figured... what the heck, I'll give you a little of my bio.

I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth into a three decker in Boston. Just a few blocks from the projects. My father managed a hardware store so the day I was 14 I applied for working papers to work with him for 85 cents an hour. After he died I drove a cab nights to put myself through 6 years of college. It took 10 years to pay off my student loans. Since Jr. high there was only one place I wanted to work. After college I got a job there as a temp. 34 years later I own the company.

It was all a lot of fun. I'd do it again in a heartbeat. I did inherit plenty from my family, just not any money.

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Thank you... That really made me laugh out loud. My first inclination was to ignore it but then I figured... what the heck, I'll give you a little of my bio.

I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth into a three decker in Boston. Just a few blocks from the projects. My father managed a hardware store so the day I was 14 I applied for working papers to work with him for 85 cents an hour. After he died I drove a cab nights to put myself through 6 years of college. It took 10 years to pay off my student loans. Since Jr. high there was only one place I wanted to work. After college I got a job there as a temp. 34 years later I own the company.

It was all a lot of fun. I'd do it again in a heartbeat. I did inherit plenty from my family, just not any money.

BI- that's a great story. All opinion differences aside, what you've done is quite remarkable and a great example of living the American dream.

[Woodsy]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

OK Woodsy

I will accept your figures. But you need to add maintainace costs and winter storage.

The big difference is that after 10 or 20 years the island home will be worth a lot more and the boat will be worth very little.

I do think they are in the same ballpark.

BI...

No question the island home is the better option... it will appreciate in value over time while the boat will depreciate. However, you have winter storage & maintenance for both boats, and while not equal, there isnt that much disparity. also the buy in is ALOT less for the boat/slip than island property. You will need at least $20,000 to put down on the island property to get financed nowadays, especially considering its seasonal nature. This doesnt take into account how your going to afford the $10,000 - $15,000 septic system that the property needs....

The buy in for the boat requires a much smaller downpayment, and the money needed to rent the slip....


Woodsy

PS: While we differ on opinions BI, you are the embodiment of the American Dream!

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

The single word answer to why we have a speed limit is fear. The fear of a camp director to send out his boats. The fear of a kayaker to come to this lake. The fear of an elderly couple to leave their island home on a weekend. That last one is VERY real. The fear of a parent to let their child take out a boat or canoe. The fear that our beautiful natural resource is being taken over by a small minority of "get out of my way" boaters.

Not to drag out an old post but BI is correct in that it was "fear" that drove the SL bill. But what was it that the above people were afraid of ? If it's getting runover by a too fast boat then the SL may be a solution. If it's some "cowboy behavior" (?) then I don't see it getting addressed by the SL. The question should be was this fear justified in the 1'st place and then whether a SL truthfully addresses it. That's why people cite the various stats as to accidents and boat speeds. To believe the SL will address the fear issue is to believe that an incredibly small number of "fast" boaters are causing all the problems listed. It's akin to having the Dalton gang in town and causing all the ruckus. Moreover it ignores the ill done to all the responsible people who aren't causing problems when boating in excess of the now posted SL. I prefer the sniper rifle to the shotgun for these problems. Go after the specific people who are causing the problems. Leave to non-problem people alone. I don't see this as being any harder or more costly to do than passing and enforcing a SL law.

Just an analogy for people to think about ... We all see moronic and dangerous driving while on the roads. It's not restricted to any class or type of vehicle, nor any age or gender or other type of driver, that I can see. Is the answer to reduce speeds, say on the highway, to some low limit in hopes that the more fleet of these drivers would go elsewhere ? I doubt people would allow that ... as it would actually affect them as well as the fast, moronic drivers ! And it only deters (at best) the "fast" moronic drivers, leaving the "slow" moronic drivers still on the road to cause accidents and generally sow dissatisfaction and aggrevation. I would agitate for a more comprehensive and fairer solution myself.

And now to the anti-SL people ... I continue with the above analogy. I note the roads we all drive on have some SL. We can argue whether it's the proper limit but arguing that there shouldn't be any limits; anywhere, anytime is a losing argument. You'd have been much better off (IMO) settling for limit(s) that have some demonstrable basis as being both safe and reasonable. You left open the possibility that some innocent kayaker, just sitting there in the Broads, could possibly be run over by a non CaptB boater just because he couldn't see and take action in time due to his (truely) excessive speed. Logic and reason rarely win the day in politics but you have a stronger position to argue from with them on your side. You needed to show, both in theory and in practice, just where the above fear is and isn't justified.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Thank you... That really made me laugh out loud. My first inclination was to ignore it but then I figured... what the heck, I'll give you a little of my bio.

I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth into a three decker in Boston. Just a few blocks from the projects. My father managed a hardware store so the day I was 14 I applied for working papers to work with him for 85 cents an hour. After he died I drove a cab nights to put myself through 6 years of college. It took 10 years to pay off my student loans. Since Jr. high there was only one place I wanted to work. After college I got a job there as a temp. 34 years later I own the company.

It was all a lot of fun. I'd do it again in a heartbeat. I did inherit plenty from my family, just not any money.

Too bad you didn't learn to get along with others. I find your views very disturbing.

[RTTOOL]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

It already HAS happened on other lakes and ponds in New Hampshire. How can something that has already happened be impossible?

Winni is large and the lakes that already have HP limits are small. But legally that makes no difference.

Boat manufacturers would not have a say in this. They can of course lobby against it. But it only requires the NH legislature and the Governors signature to put a HP limit on Winnipesaukee. It also could be accomplished by a Dept. of Safety administrative rule being adopted. Legislation is not even required if you go that route. Most of the HP limits on other lakes were done by administrative rule.

The federal government has nothing to do with this.

Nobody that I know of is actually trying to do this. This is just one man's idea, mine. I very much doubt we will see a HP limit on Winni any time soon. However in the long run I think additional limts of some kind will be coming.

If down the road things get worse instead of better, if we have a couple of more high profile accidents, then legislation could pass.

Or I could be wrong.

Maybe you and governor can run the world

[RANGER CANOE CO]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

VT, I agree with you 100%. I have another idea...vote every bleeding heart, nanny state liberal out of office whenever possible. Elect people with brains of their own that can see through the smoke and mirror agendas. It reminds me of the famous speech by Howard Beale in the movie Network. "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore".

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/Movi...hnetwork2.html

Whatever happens, I am not leaving - neither is my boat.

Primary day, so, do your home work in your districts and remove them. Law makers that pass unfounded redundent laws that take way your rights. That dont even own a boat or boat on the lake and side with non full time residents.

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by RANGER CANOE CO

Primary day, so, do your home work in your districts and remove them. Law makers that pass unfounded redundent laws that take way your rights. That dont even own a boat or boat on the lake and side with non full time residents.

Do it - get out and vote for people with brains. I know where my votes are going today.

[winni83]

I am not at all sure that the proponents of the Speed Limit Law and laws and regulations of a similar ilk are mostly liberals or that the opponents of such items are mostly conservatives. I, for one, am a moderate Democrat, and I guess that would make me a liberal, but I have always been opposed to such items and to the mentality which goes along with supporting these kinds of laws and regulations. I think there are ample opportunities properly to categorize the proponents of such laws and regulations without assigning political labels. I would hope that the opposition to these kinds of laws and regulations would transcend party or political labels.

[Seaplane Pilot]

For one, Rep. James Pilliod is a Republican and was a big supporter of speed limits. I am happy to report that I cast a vote against him (or did not cast a vote in favor of him) about 1 hour ago.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

For one, Rep. James Pilliod is a Republican and was a big supporter of speed limits. I am happy to report that I cast a vote against him (or did not cast a vote in favor of him) about 1 hour ago.

Excellent example of a voter doing his homework.

In Pilliod's race there are 8 Republicans vying for 7 spots on the ballot for Republicans in the General Election in November in the Town of Belmont. By not voting for Pilliod you greaten the chances that he does not survive the primary and hence does not appear on the ballot in November.

Hopefully many more voters like SP will scutinize their ballots in their respective communities as well!

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

For one, Rep. James Pilliod is a Republican and was a big supporter of speed limits. I am happy to report that I cast a vote against him (or did not cast a vote in favor of him) about 1 hour ago.

But again...he is a Republican, one of many supporting the SL. This is why those who project a huge Republican sweep in November will somehow enable the speed limit to be overturned are delusional. A speed limit may be the most overwhelming issue in the state to some on this forum but believe me it is not to most people in the state. And even if it were, with 9/10 people supporting the SL petition, an 80% agreement among polled voters that a SL was necessary, large bipartisan support in both houses...well you get the picture. Likewise, the people of the state will never allow the Broads to be exempted. People who use this area for fishing, sailing, or otherwise getting from one place to another will never allow these loud and fast behemoths to dominate and marginalize the families that want to boat there.

I have heard of proposals being discussed where boat registration fees will be based on HP, not length ... $1 per HP and that there will be a small fee to register kayaks and canoes. Does anyone have any more info on this?

[Shreddy]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

But again...he is a Republican, one of many supporting the SL. This is why those who project a huge Republican sweep in November will somehow enable the speed limit to be overturned are delusional. A speed limit may be the most overwhelming issue in the state to some on this forum but believe me it is not to most people in the state. And even if it were, with 9/10 people supporting the SL petition, an 80% agreement among polled voters that a SL was necessary, large bipartisan support in both houses...well you get the picture. Likewise, the people of the state will never allow the Broads to be exempted. People who use this area for fishing, sailing, or otherwise getting from one place to another will never allow these loud and fast behemoths to dominate and marginalize the families that want to boat there.

I have heard of proposals being discussed where boat registration fees will be based on HP, not length ... $1 per HP and that there will be a small fee to register kayaks and canoes. Does anyone have any more info on this?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA You got it wrong, they're charging a flat registration fee for any boat with thru-hull exhaust of $5,000 per year.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

People who use this area for fishing, sailing, or otherwise getting from one place to another will never allow these loud and fast behemoths to dominate and marginalize the families that want to boat there.

Hummm, Cant say that I have EVER seen anything like that going on Winnipesaukee, sure your not talking about somewhere else???

As for fast and loud, seems to me the most common fast boats are the fisherman in bassboats and the loudest are the classics that have old school marine engines with wide open above the waterline exhaust with no mufflers.

And to be 100% honest, I have NEVER had a problem with either!

As for the "behemoths" well my only observation has been if they can afford to pay for the gas, all the power to them,,, There not to my liking, and I dont see myself ever having a 30' plus Baja, Fountain, Formula, etc, but I dont begrudge anyone that does.

Regulating boats because based on appearance is just about as mindless as the incompetents that want to restrict guns because they look like “black military” rifles.

Fact is that my tiny CVX and most bassboats will easily blow past 75 MPH and are far more dangerous to the operator, the passengers and any other boat near them at that speed when compared to any of the “behemoths” you mention. And those same “behemoths” almost always have modern marine exhausts that include mufflers to ensure that they meet sound control standards, where as the classics that I could not ever think of banning most often have no such sound dampening devices nor a way to retrofit them.

The same mentality has been applied to gun control over the years, where a semi-auto AR-15 has been demonized even though its anemic .223 pales by comparison to any modern hunting rifle.

It’s sad to see the vocal opinionated self-absorbed and omniscient few lead the rest of the sheep to slaughter.

I for one am so happy I was born early enough to have seen the pinnacle of our society, because unless common sense is restored soon the future looks bleak and uncharacteristically un-American, where rules and laws are written to control every facet of our lives and individual choice and freedom are mere meaningless words of our ancestors,,,

[John A. Birdsall]

What I would like to know is how many speeding tickets on the lake were handed out, and what happened in court. (if it got there)

To me that would say what the difference in speed limit law has done.
With seeing people doing in excess of the speed limit almost all the time I do not concern myself. But those that are doing it within 150' that is what bothers me. I seen the mp GET buzzed by a jet ski with about 40' distance going perhaps full bore. The MP got the man, but what happened in court or how much of a fine did he pay?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

Fact is that my tiny CVX and most bassboats will easily blow past 75 MPH and are far more dangerous to the operator, the passengers and any other boat near them at that speed when compared to any of the “behemoths” you mention.

Some interesting developments have appeared, as there are now 74 defendants at the Candle Wood Lake crash last year. Three articles are above—the last being the better summary.

Regarding your view of how "harmless" bass boats are (and the differences between "Civil" and "Criminal" law), it would make for good discussions as a new thread somewhere.

Originally Posted by XCR-700

It’s sad to see the vocal opinionated self-absorbed and omniscient few lead the rest of the sheep to slaughter.

Among those who are "the self-absorbed and omniscient" one boater—convicted of manslaughter—attempted later to get a dial-tone at 90-MPH on the Interstate.

Originally Posted by Skip

In Pilliod's race there are 8 Republicans vying for 7 spots on the ballot for Republicans in the General Election in November in the Town of Belmont. By not voting for Pilliod you greaten the chances that he does not survive the primary and hence does not appear on the ballot in November. Hopefully many more voters like SP will scutinize their ballots in their respective communities as well!

Excellent example of a voter doing his homework.

Originally Posted by XCR-700

I for one am so happy I was born early enough to have seen the pinnacle of our society.

Years ago, we just "voted": the above is "Gaming the System", IMHO.

Originally Posted by John A. Birdsall

What I would like to know is how many speeding tickets on the lake were handed out, and what happened in court. (if it got there)

To me that would say what the difference in speed limit law has done.
With seeing people doing in excess of the speed limit almost all the time I do not concern myself. But those that are doing it within 150' that is what bothers me. I seen the mp GET buzzed by a jet ski with about 40' distance going perhaps full bore. The MP got the man, but what happened in court or how much of a fine did he pay?

Because the Legislature is skilled at raiding NHMP resources, the difference may never be measureable. The only measure I can envision is by the reduction of one-boat crashes involving "the usual suspects".

[Ryan]

Candlewood Lake: The Facts
Candlewood Lake Length: 16 miles
Candlewood Lake Width: 500 feet - 3.2 miles
Maximum Depth: Between 80-90 feet
Average Depth: 40 feet
Shore Line Length: 85-109 miles depending on the measure/criteria
Shore Line as Radius controlled by CL&P: 60+ miles
Surface Area: 8.4 Square Miles
Acres: 5,400
Elevation: 400+ feet
Candlewood Lake Watershed Area: 25,000 miles

Daytime Speed Limit: 45 mph

Night-time Speed Limit: 25mph

Speed Limit within 100ft of Shore, Boats, Docks, etc: 6 mph

[XCR-700]

Well how about a trip out the mouth of the Merrimack river on a modestly quiet weekend day,,,

Operating distance at speed from the hard rock jetty is often under 50’ and separation from other boaters operating at speed sometimes less than that, and as for what “operating speed” is, well it ranges from anchored/free drifting to as fast as they can go without loosing control and I have never seen an accident myself there nor seen any MP/CG/HM ticketing anyone, EVER!

Not that I would like to see that kind of madness on Winnipesaukee, but it sure makes me wonder how anyone ever survived without the 150' boat separation/distance from shore and 50 MPH speed limits,,,

And there are far busier inlets than this one out there,,,

So I say relevant, but keep things in perspective,,,

Originally Posted by Ryan

Candlewood Lake: The Facts
Candlewood Lake Length: 16 miles
Candlewood Lake Width: 500 feet - 3.2 miles
Maximum Depth: Between 80-90 feet
Average Depth: 40 feet
Shore Line Length: 85-109 miles depending on the measure/criteria
Shore Line as Radius controlled by CL&P: 60+ miles
Surface Area: 8.4 Square Miles
Acres: 5,400
Elevation: 400+ feet
Candlewood Lake Watershed Area: 25,000 miles

Daytime Speed Limit: 45 mph

Night-time Speed Limit: 25mph

Speed Limit within 100ft of Shore, Boats, Docks, etc: 6 mph

[ApS]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

Well how about a trip out the mouth of the Merrimack river on a modestly quiet weekend day...I have never seen an accident myself there nor seen any MP/CG/HM ticketing anyone, EVER...
Not that I would like to see that kind of madness on Winnipesaukee, but it sure makes me wonder how anyone ever survived without the 150' boat separation/distance from shore and 50 MPH speed limits,,,So I say relevant, but keep things in perspective,,,

Thank you for seeing it my way. But, like "the nocturnal-animals" mentioned elsewhere here, you're not going to see nocturnal accidents during the daytime.

The following example is taken from the night-time experience of five boaters: It's at night that waterways would appear entirely the same—regardless of their size or geography.

Merrimack Inlet is certainly different: there are many more islands and many narrow passages around Lake Winnipesaukee.

Our "150-foot barrier" keeps boaters away from most rocky shorelines.

Distanced from spar buoys, that "150-feet" keeps boaters away from the vast majority of the hazards that are remaining.

Tubers and waterskiers are prevented from striking one another—while passing—by virtue of their combined tow-lengths equalling less than 150-feet. For Lake Winnipesaukee, I see the concept as ingenious, and I'd not want the 150-foot law to be ignored by visitors—nor overturned by New Hampshire's "experts in safe boating".

Boaters who visit here from other lakes and salt water need to be aware that Lake Winnipesaukee is a location that is highly recreational.

(Some might substitute "highly" with the word: "extremely"!)

In the case of the Candlewood Lake collision, what follow are some comments—the first two being those from "oversize" boaters, who are generally sympathetic to the Formula 24 that was pierced through the bow by the fast-running bass boat—the "privileged-vessel".

The Formula 24 is further described here, as "a speedboat":

"24 Formula that the guy had for less than a month hit a triton bass boat at high speed. Driver and passenger in Formula died and a 3rd passenger (the firefighter) is in critical condition. Both Bass boat guys are OK. Steering wheel from Formula was found in the back seat."

PLEASE don't run at speed in the dark, folks. These accidents are far too common.

More comments—now from the Media—following the collision. Do any of these sound familiar?

"For too long, the lake has been like the Wild West, not patrolled or supervised, and for too long lake safety has been about finger-pointing, excuses and confusion,"

"Layton was at the wheel, located on the right side of the Formula, and Wanat was in the left-side passenger seat. Sullivan was sitting behind Wanat, witnesses said."

"As they left the restaurant dock, Layton gunned the 365-horsepower motor, and the Formula sped away through the "no wake" zone there at an estimated 35 miles per hour."

"The speedboat was going even faster as it roared past the Candlewood Lake Club, where retired Bethel police officer Ray Pacheco...on a security detail."

"I looked at my employee and said, 'Damn, that boat is hauling,' " Pacheco told EnCon police.

"Further up the lake, at Orchard Point, bass fisherman Richard Tomasini was alone in his boat when he heard a "loud speedboat" approaching."

"The vessel was traveling '45 to 50 knots' when it went past."

"Seconds later, the sound of crunching fiberglass, followed by the whine of a boat's propeller spinning out of the water, reached his ears."

"Back at the Candlewood Lake Club, Pacheco heard a sound 'like a shotgun bang.'"

"In her bedroom, Rasor described the noise as 'a large boom.'"

"The bass boat hit the Formula almost head on, its prow slicing into the speedboat and ripping through the hull directly into the cockpit area."

"The speedboat's momentum carried both vessels north another 150 feet, according to the DEP's Boating Accident Reconstruction Unit. The impact was so great that a mirror image of a Gatorade bottle label was imprinted into the fabric of Layton's seat."

"[The Formula's] Layton likely died instantly. [The Formula's] Wanat was also killed and thrown overboard."

"[The Formula's] Sullivan, sitting in the rear, remained in the boat but was critically injured and covered by wreckage."

"...10 months to the day after the accident, Environmental Conservation police issued their report on the crash."

"The investigation concluded that the [Formula] operated by Mr. Layton failed to yield to the [Bass Boat] vessel as required by the federal rules of navigation,"

"Investigators found no indications that [the bass-boaters] had been drinking, but there were 19 empty beer cans in the Formula. [The Formula of] Layton's blood alcohol level was 0.19, more than twice the legal limit for operation of a car or boat."

"The speedboat's [The Formula] throttle was also fully opened, meaning the engine was running at maximum speed."

"Contributing factors, DEP said, were the time of day, alcohol, and excessive speed."

Haven't we seen this before?

[XCR-700]

Oh sorry if you misunderstood in any way, I neither support the 150’ rule nor the speed limits, nor most of the “well thought out” restrictions.

As for the mouth of the Merrimack, well it can get a bit hairy, but I have NEVER had a problem, nor have most of the folks who travel through there,,,

Some distance buffer seams reasonable, but not 150’ you could land an aircraft with that much buffer. If you need 150' buffer to safely operate your boat, then I cant help but wonder if you are really capable of safely operating it. And speed limits in my mind are the point where you cannot safely operate the particular vessel, but I have no intention of arguing any of this, it is clearly a futile diatribe.

We can agree to disagree and go to neutral corners and act like adults. My corner will be the leave people alone to enjoy the world and then if their actions result in some negative impact to someone/something then hold them accountable as reasonable. Your corner can be the wrap the world in bubble warp and restrict the masses so much that there no negative impact to anyone or anything.

Sometimes the pen is mightier than the sword and sometimes the barbarians conquer the weak,,, and that pendulum swings back and forth. For the moment the pen rules, but very soon the barbarians will be mounted for battle,,,

Please don’t waste any time responding to me or quoting me, it really is not worth the space on the server and I’m not interested in thrashing this out just to fuel the flames.

There is fuel to be burned and I hope to spend more time exercising my tachometer than typing so I’m more than done on this thread,,,

Happy weekend all, and start thinking snow, sledding season is now just weeks away and I am counting the days until I can lay down a cloud of 2 stroke fun,,,

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Thank you for seeing it my way. But, like "the nocturnal-animals" mentioned elsewhere here, you're not going to see nocturnal accidents during the daytime.

The following example is taken from the night-time experience of five boaters: It's at night that waterways would appear entirely the same—regardless of their size or geography.

Merrimack Inlet is certainly different: there are many more islands and many narrow passages around Lake Winnipesaukee.

Our "150-foot barrier" keeps boaters away from most rocky shorelines.

Distanced from spar buoys, that "150-feet" keeps boaters away from the vast majority of the hazards that are remaining.

Tubers and waterskiers are prevented from striking one another—while passing—by virtue of their combined tow-lengths equalling less than 150-feet. For Lake Winnipesaukee, I see the concept as ingenious, and I'd not want the 150-foot law to be ignored by visitors—nor overturned by New Hampshire's "experts in safe boating".

Boaters who visit here from other lakes and salt water need to be aware that Lake Winnipesaukee is a location that is highly recreational.

(Some might substitute "highly" with the word: "extremely"!)

In the case of the Candlewood Lake collision, what follow are some comments—the first two being those from "oversize" boaters, who are generally sympathetic to the Formula 24 that was pierced through the bow by the fast-running bass boat—the "privileged-vessel".

The Formula 24 is further described here, as "a speedboat":
More comments—now from the Media—following the collision. Do any of these sound familiar?



Haven't we seen this before?

We certainly have, all over the country. In fact, some of us have pointed it out many, many times. What you've just pointed out, at least twice here alone, verifies that you concur with many things I've said, many times.

You have a lake, which has a speed limit, lesser at night than in daytime. At least one boat broke the night time speed limit, at least one, and the drive of the give away boat was intoxicated, to say the least. It's happened many times in many lakes, and in boats ranging from 16' outboards to huge speedboats to cruisers.

You "Think" (hard to believe), that this makes speed limits an issue, or go fast boats an issue. It doesn't. Anyone with the intelligence of an avocado can read the facts you portray, and come up with a reasonable explanation as to what needs to be done to prevent it.

Nope, MOT, it has nothing to do with "oversized boats", not even close. Even the Candlewood people knew the lake had not been patrolled, it's laws not enforced, you even quoted that. But in your zest to make a point, you basically proved my point. Yet another accident caused by a drunken driver, and even another that failed to see a collission that could have been prevented. AND the Formula was speeding recklessly in a No Wake Zone.

Do you even read what you post?

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Tubers and waterskiers are prevented from striking one another—while passing—by virtue of their combined tow-lengths equalling less than 150-feet. For Lake Winnipesaukee, I see the concept as ingenious, and I'd not want the 150-foot law to be ignored by visitors—nor overturned by New Hampshire's "experts in safe boating".

I am going on the record that SBONH is an ardent supporter of New Hampshire's Safe Passage law (AKA 150' rule) and the NH Marine Patrol's enforcement of said law.

It is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

I am going on the record that SBONH is an ardent supporter of New Hampshire's Safe Passage law (AKA 150' rule) and the NH Marine Patrol's enforcement of said law. It is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise.

You are hereby, "recorded on the record".

---------------------------

Is SBONH now claiming to be experts in safe boating?

By any chance, would that be individually—or collectively?

---------------------------

Your gripe isn't with me, anyway.

This is where your misdirection came from:

Originally Posted by XCR-700

I neither support the 150’ rule nor the speed limits, nor most of the “well thought out” restrictions.

You probably also disagree with his assessment of SBONH members:

Originally Posted by XCR-700

For the moment the pen rules, but very soon the barbarians will be mounted for battle,,,

Nice imagery!

---------------------------

The only thing that surprised me was that the Formula took a fatal hit from a Bassboat. (And that the two in the Bassboat survived the collision even though they were pushed backwards for such a great distance by the impact).

But any of us could have predicted this crash's fatal outcome.

[Bearislandmoose]

How has the lake changed? Since I am currently back in the discussion, I should weigh in on this:
I don't think there are any of you who have been on this lake as long and have spent as much time boating on it who will not instantly agree that the past two summers have been the most enjoyable for boating and other recreational activities that we have seen for maybe 20 years. While there are still enough cigarette boats to make it clear that nobody has been chased from the lake by the SL, there is now enough civility to make all boaters feel welcomed and safe. Anyone who says differently is either emotionally pre-pubescent or blind, or both, in my humble opinion.
The status quo is now simply heavenly. We have people on this forum (including the supreme "safe" boater) boasting about how the SL has not cramped their style one bit, and we have kayakers boasting about how they can finally enjoy the lake again. We have camp directors buying canoes again, and sailing clubs expanding activities and running schools again. We have poker races, and we have sailing regattas again.
How could life be any sweeter than it was these past two years? And nobody can blame it on rain anymore.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

The 'performance crowd' are now trading in their boats for the big yachts. The big wakes are eroding the shorelines and this is a bigger threat than SL.

Another tactic from the Democratic playbook; If everyone seems happy with the status quo, scare them into thinking it is just an illusion. They aren't really happy, they just think they are. "The man" is really working behind the scenes to undermine it all. Nice try.
You keep schpilling this tripe, but I've not seen one example where one of your small group of "get out of my way" cowboys has traded his Thunder Boat for a Carver and gone around swamping those "fat cat shore front owners" to punish them for the SL. Can you give us a few specific examples? And if they are doing so, its all the more reason to start adding more NWZs, isn't it?

Since you are referring to the playbook anyway, maybe you should go back and try that "but you're a poacher" ploy again. That worked so well for you last time.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

... I'm sick and tired of the Democrats from the southern states moving up here and telling NH natives what we can and cannot do.

I'm as sick of it as you are, but once Mr. Verdonck moved up here, he became an equal citizen of this state, and we have to respect that. I just wish he'd adapt to the way we do things up here. Calling your group "Safe Boaters" was the type of shady tactic you usually see in the politics "down there", not up here. Eventually he'll learn that the people up here are too smart for stunts like that...it backfires when it is done up here. It's like saying "I know you people up there in NH are a bunch of idiots (to use Hazelnut's term), so I don't have to be honest with you...you'll buy anything I sell you." I got very offended by that and know that many others around here did too.

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

I'm as sick of it as you are, but once Mr. Verdonck moved up here, he became an equal citizen of this state, and we have to respect that. I just wish he'd adapt to the way we do things up here. Calling your group "Safe Boaters" was the type of shady tactic you usually see in the politics "down there", not up here. Eventually he'll learn that the people up here are too smart for stunts like that...it backfires when it is done up here. It's like saying "I know you people up there in NH are a bunch of idiots (to use Hazelnut's term), so I don't have to be honest with you...you'll buy anything I sell you." I got very offended by that and know that many others around here did too.

Speak for yourself - there is no "WE". It's you and your ilk, period. Your agenda is so transparent and you and your entire group are imploding (just like the democratic party). You really need to find a new hobby. I heard candle making is quite nice

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

I'm as sick of it as you are, but once Mr. Verdonck moved up here, he became an equal citizen of this state, and we have to respect that. I just wish he'd adapt to the way we do things up here. Calling your group "Safe Boaters" was the type of shady tactic you usually see in the politics "down there", not up here. Eventually he'll learn that the people up here are too smart for stunts like that...it backfires when it is done up here. It's like saying "I know you people up there in NH are a bunch of idiots (to use Hazelnut's term), so I don't have to be honest with you...you'll buy anything I sell you." I got very offended by that and know that many others around here did too.

Ahhhh... it is so glad to have you back, I needed a good laugh!

I see you are back down in the basement again.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

...why are you all for initiating laws? ...

I'm not trying to initiate any laws. I like things just the way they are on the lake now, as do the overwhelming majority of the Lake's owners. I say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

And thank you for not insulting or calling me any names, that was refreshing.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

... once Mr. Verdonck moved up here, he became an equal citizen of this state, and we have to respect that...

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

Speak for yourself - there is no "WE". It's you and your ilk, period.

I don't agree. I think all of us have to accept the fact that a lot of people, like OCD, are moving north into NH and once they are here, they are NH citizens and have the same rights and privileges as you and me. While you may not like that, it is what it is. I just wish the people moving up here would be doing so because they like what NH is and has always been and want to enjoy that with us, not because they want to bring to NH what drove them out of MA, or wherever. And coming here and using the name "Safe Boaters" on a club started by a "Thunder Club" member for the stated purpose or repealing our safe boating laws is just so "MA", that I don't feel OCD knows what NH is really all about. He'll learn.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I think it did more harm than good.

I'm sure it did just that for a very few people. I know of at least eight of them. But those people were the ones who caused all this in the first place, so they have to live with what they wrought. And those are the people you should be mad at, not following. These people "thundered" around the lake at completely inappropriate speeds in completely inappropriate vessels, causing many of the lake's more appropriate users to stay home. Weekends especially had become a time for "regular folk" to leave their boats sitting at their docks, because it had become a free-for-all out there. How was that fair? These few loud aggressive boaters were on this very forum bragging about speeds like 80 or 90 MPH, on this lake! On the weekend! How in the world could that have been "safe"? And some of these same boaters had names on their boats that suggested no respect for others...suggested that they'd love an opportunity to run you down if you didn't get out of their way. And some of them would be on these forums and the other GFBL forums after those same weekends talking about all the time they had spent at Naswa, how much they had drunk over the same weekend they were boating so fast, and how big their heads were on Monday morning. How did they get home from the Naswa in that condition? Meanwhile, we have people being killed on the lake by some of these same drivers in some of these same boats, going too fast, and we are supposed to excuse it because "they were drinking"?
Then these same cowboys start an anti-SL club and name it "Safe" boaters??? And you guys fall for it???
I feel bad for the good, safe boater who likes the high speed thrill and who had bought an expensive offshore boat and used to like to put the throttle down now and then, when it was safe to others for him to do so (like on a Wednesday afternoon in late November). But he was not the object of that SL law, he is an unintended but necessary victim of it. And he needs to recognize who brought the law on him. It was not Warren or Ed or Sandy (assuming those are all not the same teenage boy). It was people like OCD. This is one of the very people who could not understand what Lake Winnipesaukee was to so many people and made the SL such an overwhelming favorite. Now you rally behind him and expect him to get it repealed for you? It's like hiring OJ Simpson as your spokesman in an anti gun control campaign. He might get the NWZ at the Barber's Pole repealed, but the fastest you'll ever be able to go through there (legally) is 45mph.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

He might get the NWZ at the Barber's Pole repealed, but the fastest you'll ever be able to go through there (legally) is 45mph.

Unless of course the get out of my way crowd continues to thumb their nose at reasonable limits. I could see this crowd pushing the likes of LeTourneau and Forsythe to push for a bill such that there would be no speed limit on the broads("hey, what have we got to lose"). In response, their opposition agrees that yes, the broads can have a faster speed limit(45 MPH) than the rest of the lake while the bays and coves would all have a SL of 30-35 MPH. One might easily argue that 45 MPH is too fast for Wolfeboro Bay, Winter Harbor(or even the Barber Pole). And then the people in the Barber Pole might not even need to pursue a NWZ! Funny how things sometimes work out.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

... don't preach to me or tell me what to do unless you decided to be civil.

Agreed. I am a big advocate of civility.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

What make you guys thank the lake is better off?

Thank you for not calling me any names.

To answer your question; I found boating much more enjoyable the past two years.
I found that plenty of the big performance boats were still around, they just seemed to have been going slower this year. I can't say whether they stayed under 45 all the time, but they certainly were not out there going 80 or 90 anymore, at least while I was out there.
While I saw just as many boaters on the lake this past year, I noticed a greater number of those were smaller "family" boats; 21-footers and such. Yet I felt a lot more respect and friendliness out there. Maybe it was just a coincidence, or maybe I just happened to be in the right place at the right time so often over the past two years, but that is what I saw.
While I do have a power boat that might be able to do 45 (not really sure), I typically spend my boating time trolling or sailing. I never had a single case this year or last where a big performance boat was thundering straight at me, way too fast, and I had to worry whether he was going to run me down. I never once had to say an Act of Contrition or think about jumping overboard. I cannot count the number of times in past years where I had such incidents. Maybe it was just a coincidence.
You might disagree...you might be seeing things differently. That is your right. You might have seen hundreds of former performance boaters now piloting Carvers and using them to terrorize the shore front owners with huge eroding wakes. But I did not see that...not once. You didn't see what I saw, I didn't see what you saw. No big deal. I don't think you are lying and I hope you don't think I am lying. I just saw different things than you did.

Isn't a civil debate fun?

Ed

[sunset on the dock]

The biggest thing we noticed this summer was a difference in our trip through the Broads to go to Wolfeboro. Same thing...no huge performance boats coming up behind you (we wondering whether our relatively small boat will be seen) then passing by you with a deafening roar. No boats tearing out through the inlet to Wolfeboro Bay at some ungodly speed. We were far more comfortable having the kids out in kayaks and our 11 y/o seemed so proud to have a little more independence which comes not only with age but our comfort level to let him venture further from the cottage. Our neighbors pretty much agree that the noise level was significantly less. The whole scenario seems more in tune to what people want when coming to the lake for recreation. And all this with businesses in the area (according to some article I read in the LDS or Citizen) reporting they are doing significantly better than last year.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

... passing by you with a deafening roar.

They call that "thundering". There are actually clubs for these people built around this activity. They are called "thunder clubs". And they have forums where they brag about who is the best "thunderer". I swear this is the truth. You can't make this stuff up.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

... Like loud mouth from George Diner flaunting the Meridith bay no wake. How about Rusty Maclear and his big resort? Dumping tons of phosphate and chemicals on his million dollar lawn? He's one of the founders. How about Brad Thurston and his looney renters. They are really bad. How come the founders can't show good examples of being good for the lake?

I can't speak for them, but anyone selfishly breaking our laws is a real idiot in my book (sorry for using such a harsh term, but sometimes it is called for). I don't know any of these people, but I think you should report them. I have no qualms about reporting illegal activity when I see it.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

So what is the Winfabs and the SL supporters doing to promote safety?

I can't speak for anyone else, but as for me; I am respecting all of our boating laws, respecting other boaters, making sure that my boating does not have any negative impact on anyone else, and not putting any other boaters at risk just so that I can have a thrill. I believe if we all did the same, there would be no problems on the lake.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I thought you guys were going to pass laws limiting size of boats and HP.

I'm not involved with anything like that. Where did you hear this? Was it from the same person who told you that Rusty McLear is dumping phosphates in the lake? Was it from the same person who told you all the performance boat owners are trading them for cabin cruisers and swamping the shore front owners to punish them for supporting the SL? Was it the same person who told you the BP lakefront owners are opposed to a NWZ there and that they were behind the effort to repeal it? We need to put a stop to all these stories if they are false, or start gathering more evidence so we can prosecute these perpetrators if these stories are true.
Please give more details and I will help you address these things. What, specifically, have you heard and from whom, specifically? The only thing I hate more than a polluter or an environmental terrorist is a liar.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

They don't respect the rights of the property owners as most of them are not voters. I'm one of few year round residents that do not tolerate laws telling us lake folks what to do.

The law tells lakefront residents that anyone can anchor in three inches of water directly in front of your place.

"The lake belongs to everybody".

How well are you tolerating that?

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I think it is Winfabs as most of their signature came from elsewhere in NH. Not from the lakes region. They had the legislatures fooled that they were signatures from the lake.

Why not elsewhere besides the lakes region?

"The lake belongs to everybody".

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

More laws. It will never end.

"The lake belongs to everybody", but look to SBONH-NHRBA to bring at least three more laws to the lake—this year alone.

If I were a resident, I'd be embarrassed for SBONH-NHRBA in their arrogance will attempt to "flip" hard-fought New Hampshire laws.

What must SBONH-NHRBA think of New Hampshire's legislators, that such years-long deliberations can be so readily overturned?

[Mark]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

The only thing I hate more than a polluter or an environmental terrorist is a liar.

Is a liar someone who makes a promise never to post here again but is back here again with numerous posts? Is that like a lie or just another exaggerated statement that is just one of many posted to mislead and go off topic?

I wish you would keep your promise. This web site was a nicer place for that short time without your constant character assassinations, personal attacks and skewed view. We know you dislike Scott, SBONH and performance boats. Pounding that message over and over again is getting sickening and ruining a great web site.

Have a nice life Bearisland moose (aka elchase and whomever) but take your lies elsewhere please. Honor your promise.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by Mark

Is a liar someone who makes a promise never to post here again but is back here again with numerous posts?

I am keeping my promise not to post on that moderated forum where I made that promise, and will only post on this unmoderated forum unless someone taunts me back over there...I promise.

Originally Posted by Mark

that is just one of many posted to mislead and go off topic?

Ironically, your post is misleading and off topic.

Originally Posted by Mark

I wish you would keep your promise.

I'm sure you would like all of the 86% of Granite Staters who favor the SL to shut up and let you guys turn this into another Winnilakers.com. Or you might enjoy the SBONH forum better... nobody is allowed to post there unless they are anti SL. Every post is given 7 "thanks". It's a mutual admiration society. But every post is also being screenshot for future reference

Originally Posted by Mark

We know you dislike performance boats.

I love performance boats...at 45MPH or less. Stop lying.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

The Church Landing pollution was published last summer in the Meredith paper. The free one available in Hannaford's.

I searched but cannot find anything where Rusty McClear was found dumping phosphates into the lake. I saw an article where there was run-off through the stream entering near Town Docks, but that was assumed to come form the Fire Station project. Can you give me a link to the story or tell me the date? I'm not saying that you are making this up, but I'd rather discuss it over the actual facts versus a vague recollection of them.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

As for the BP No wake, a number of my friends own property there. They never knew it was coming. That what pi**ed them off.

I'm confused. In most of your posts, you have expressed hatred of shore front owners. Now you are agreeing they have special rights? Anyway, the only person from SBONH-NHRBA that I am aware of that has come forward claiming to own waterfront property on BP is Hazelnut, and he has said he agrees with is neighbors and is in favor of the NWZ, though admitting that is for selfish reasons. Can you tell us who else you know who lives on the BP and is against the NWZ? I'd assume they have been making their opposition public, and signed the SBONH-NHRBA petition, so there should be no reason not to identify them. I'd just like to compare the names to the tax maps.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I was a member of Winfabs in the beginning. I thought it was a good thing.

I've just spoken to several of the "founders", and nobody remembers you or anyone who they think could be you. Can you tell me if you were using an alias? Where/when were the meetings you attended, and who exactly said they were going to push for HP and size limits? Please provide some evidence of your membership so we can show that these people are lying.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

As you can see, I'm not making these things up. Give your friend Sandy, Rusty, Merl or Brad a call if you want further clarification.

These are not my friends, and I am not calling you a liar, but as I said, I cannot confirm your account at all. Please give me more specifics and I will get to the bottom of this. If these things you are saying are true, I want to expose it as much as anyone.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I will be against any and all future laws that will tell me what I can do on the lake.

How about a bill that tells you that you have to let some stranger tie up to your dock overnight if he says he is drunk? Are you against that?

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

We are not going to give in to someone who is not a lake native or residence.

Like OCD (Scott Verdonck), who is from MA?

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

BTW I happen to enjoy all the pro and amatuer races we had on the lake. It's a thing of the pass, Thanks to you supporters.

But such permitted events are exempt from the speed limit. And those races stopped ten years before the SL for financial reasons. So what do the SL supporters have to do with that?

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

They moved the water ski events to Winnisquam and one pro water skier moved to Rocky Pond in Gilmaton. A pro wakeboarder move to Lake Norman in NC. Thanks to all the hostilities brewed on this lake.

These events moved from Winni, one to NC, because of the SL supporters...ten years before the SL? If that is what they are telling you, then I think they are pulling your chain. Don't you?

[sunset on the dock]

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, " martini " in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"


In light of the alcohol tainted reputation of your movement, isn't it time for a new signature?

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Sandy, Rusty, Merl and Brad are the founders. So obviously you are spinning something! I'm outa here!

You throw out all these wild accusations about people, make unsubstantiated claims that you were part of Winfabs until you "found God", and tell all these unbelievable tales, then when asked for some details to back up any of it all, you accuse the asker of "spinning something" and just say "I'm outa here!" (sic)? Sounds very fishy to me. If I didn't see how truthful a person you claim to be, I'd have to suspect you have been making all this stuff up to scare and slander. Is SBONH-NHRBA putting you up to this?

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, " martini " in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"


In light of the alcohol tainted reputation of your movement, isn't it time for a new signature?

As I've said before: How many times a day do you people polish your halos?

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

As I've said before: How many times a day do you people polish your halos?

Are you defending BWI? If one of "us people" had a signature like that, you would not be the first to chastise it? Come on.
That signature is the perfect summary the SOBNH philosophy. I'm surprised you all don't use it.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

Are you defending BWI? If one of "us people" had a signature like that, you would not be the first to chastise it? Come on.
That signature is the perfect summary the SOBNH philosophy. I'm surprised you all don't use it.

I know, right? I mean his signature is an obvious implication that he is a regular offender of BWI laws. And of course, that also implies that all SBONH members are regular offenders of BWI laws.

Who wouldn't come to that conclusion?

Hey BIM, you have never seen that quote, or a similar one 1,000 times before in other places?

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by chipj29

Hey BIM, you have never seen that quote, or a similar one 1,000 times before in other places?

Yes ...on the SOBNH and OSO forums...where it belongs. But BH is the only one who claims to be drinking martini's while piloting his boat. The others seem to prefer beer, maybe because it doesn't spill as easily as they "skid in to the dock sideways", screaming "WOO HOO what a ride! Was that a kayak I ran over out there?".
Thank God for the SL.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

Yes ...on the SOBNH and OSO forums...where it belongs. But BH is the only one who claims to be drinking martini's while piloting his boat. The others seem to prefer beer, maybe because it doesn't spill as easily as they "skid in to the dock sideways", screaming "WOO HOO what a ride! Was that a kayak I ran over out there?".
Thank God for the SL.

I could use a martini right now after reading this diatribe.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by gtagrip

I could use a martini right now after reading this diatribe.

I'm sure you could. But mixing cocktails so early in the day is probably a bad idea.

[NoBozo]

It takes a VERY Steady hand to balance a "Proper" Martini glass ..without spilling it......never mind on a boat. So anyone who can do it on a boat must also have a steady hand on the helm....otherwise the drink is spilled, and wasted.

Like me Mum used to say: "Waste Not, Want Not". Nb

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

Yes ...on the SOBNH and OSO forums...where it belongs. But BH is the only one who claims to be drinking martini's while piloting his boat. The others seem to prefer beer, maybe because it doesn't spill as easily as they "skid in to the dock sideways", screaming "WOO HOO what a ride! Was that a kayak I ran over out there?".
Thank God for the SL.

Please provide exact quotes from BH where he claims to be drinking martinis while piloting his boat.

Please provide exact quotes where anyone claims to "skid in to the dock sideways".

Nevermind, don't bother. You won't find it, because the quotes don't exist. You are making stuff up, as usual.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by chipj29

Please provide exact quotes from BH where he claims to be drinking martinis while piloting his boat.

Please provide exact quotes where anyone claims to "skid in to the dock sideways".

Nevermind, don't bother. You won't find it, because the quotes don't exist. You are making stuff up, as usual.

Chip,
Under Scott Verdonck's draconian rules, we are not allowed to quote the SOBNH forum outside the SOBNH forum. "What happens at SOBNH stays at SOBNH...or expect a letter from our lawyer". I suppose Scott thinks this will keep their law-breaking activities secret...but it wont. You'd be amazed at how many of them admit to breaking our laws. And these are Stephen's pals? Anyway, you will need to view those discussions for yourself, if you qualify for membership...How fast can you drink a liter of tequila?

As to this forum, you have surely read BH's signature yourself, so why play this game? Are your really going to pretend you don't understand it? Come on. He might not specifically say that the vehicle he is driving while drinking martinis is a boat, but keep in mind that this is a boating forum, and BH has many times scolded others for violating forum rules when they post non-boating issues. And if it is a car that he is driving while drinking his martinis and skidding sideways, that is just as bad...and illegal.
I'm not saying that it is illegal to be drinking while driving a boat in NH, if not yet drunk, so he might not actually be breaking the law, but based on all the over-drinking that your group brags about, its doubtful that any of you know how to keep it to one martini when you are boating. But I guess people who cannot grasp why huge boats thundering around at 90MPH on a crowded lake is not safe are never going to understand the logic in laws against BWI either. This is why you need a new Governor like Stephen. Maybe he will repeal our BWI laws for you too.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

Chip,
Under Scott Verdonck's draconian rules, we are not allowed to quote the SOBNH forum outside the SOBNH forum. "What happens at SOBNH stays at SOBNH...or expect a letter from our lawyer". I suppose Scott thinks this will keep their law-breaking activities secret...but it wont. You'd be amazed at how many of them admit to breaking our laws. And these are Stephen's pals? Anyway, you will need to view those discussions for yourself, if you qualify for membership...How fast can you drink a liter of tequila?

As to this forum, you have surely read BH's signature yourself, so why play this game? Are your really going to pretend you don't understand it? Come on. He might not specifically say that the vehicle he is driving while drinking martinis is a boat, but keep in mind that this is a boating forum, and BH has many times scolded others for violating forum rules when they post non-boating issues. And if it is a car that he is driving while drinking his martinis and skidding sideways, that is just as bad...and illegal.
I'm not saying that it is illegal to be drinking while driving a boat in NH, if not yet drunk, so he might not actually be breaking the law, but based on all the over-drinking that your group brags about, its doubtful that any of you know how to keep it to one martini when you are boating. But I guess people who cannot grasp why huge boats thundering around at 90MPH on a crowded lake is not safe are never going to understand the logic in laws against BWI either. This is why you need a new Governor like Stephen. Maybe he will repeal our BWI laws for you too.

Now I need 2 martini's. Oh look, it's noon time, I think a 3 martini lunch is in order.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

Chip,
Under Scott Verdonck's draconian rules, we are not allowed to quote the SOBNH forum outside the SOBNH forum. "What happens at SOBNH stays at SOBNH...or expect a letter from our lawyer". I suppose Scott thinks this will keep their law-breaking activities secret...but it wont. You'd be amazed at how many of them admit to breaking our laws. And these are Stephen's pals? Anyway, you will need to view those discussions for yourself, if you qualify for membership...How fast can you drink a liter of tequila?

As to this forum, you have surely read BH's signature yourself, so why play this game? Are your really going to pretend you don't understand it? Come on. He might not specifically say that the vehicle he is driving while drinking martinis is a boat, but keep in mind that this is a boating forum, and BH has many times scolded others for violating forum rules when they post non-boating issues. And if it is a car that he is driving while drinking his martinis and skidding sideways, that is just as bad...and illegal.
I'm not saying that it is illegal to be drinking while driving a boat in NH, if not yet drunk, so he might not actually be breaking the law, but based on all the over-drinking that your group brags about, its doubtful that any of you know how to keep it to one martini when you are boating. But I guess people who cannot grasp why huge boats thundering around at 90MPH on a crowded lake is not safe are never going to understand the logic in laws against BWI either. This is why you need a new Governor like Stephen. Maybe he will repeal our BWI laws for you too.

Seriously? You are taking this a bit too far.
You have posted ridiculous stuff in the past, but you have clearly jumped the shark here.

[tc_mike]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

As to this forum, you have surely read BH's signature yourself, so why play this game? Are your really going to pretend you don't understand it? Come on. He might not specifically say that the vehicle he is driving while drinking martinis is a boat, but keep in mind that this is a boating forum, and BH has many times scolded others for violating forum rules when they post non-boating issues. And if it is a car that he is driving while drinking his martinis and skidding sideways, that is just as bad...and illegal.

Wow, that's an interesting interpretation. I've seen derivatives of this saying in a number of other forums and such - I always assumed it was a humorous way of saying something along the lines of "life should be enjoyed"... or "be sure to have fun". It never occurred to me to interpret this saying in way that includes any sort of motor vehicles.

[Bearislandmoose]

Originally Posted by tc_mike

It never occurred to me to interpret this saying in way that includes any sort of motor vehicles.

No surprises there...have another drink. And when I say "drink" I of course mean "potato chip".

[Pineedles]

OCD's first post on this thread, reposted as a reminder of what civility is.

How has the lake changed????

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well we are into another year of the speed limit. Much different then last. Beautiful Hot and Sunny Weather. No one can argue that the weather has been a deterent. The economy has not rebounded as much as hoped but I think we have turned a corner and are hopefully on the way to full recovery slowly but surely......

However with Labor Day approaching I can honestly say the lake has not become any safer. The accident rate is up, the registration rate is level (that of the early 90's) but yet we have a SL that was supposed to change all of that.

Now I don't want to see a debate get unfriendly but we have all been on the lake for many many hours and I really want to hear specifics as to if you have seen a difference.

Personally I still see the same crazy captains that either have no education or are purposely thumbing their noses at the 150 ft law, NWZ's and yes I have seen plenty of boats / PWC's exceeding the 45 mph law.

However I can say that in all instances where the SL was broken (again my personal observations) there was not a safety issue involved. However the multiple times I have been cut off by unaware captains and those going WAY too close to me caused me great concern.

So in the spirit of our webmasters request, please lets keep the conversation civil. I am sure we are able to do this, that is until the normal grenade throwers show up but lets see what rational information can be obtained before that.

Thanks

PS: I am only limited to 5 posts per day so I apologize if I don't answer your comments or questions regarding this post. However, now that we have 2 years behind us, this is the conversation that should have been taking place before the legislature jumped the gun. We now have seen 2 years of having the SL's in force. Of course we will be getting peoples beliefs at first but the facts and data from the MP are to follow soon. In the mean time all we have is personal observations AND we all know of the multiple accidents that have occured these past two years. What I am driving at is with the information that we now have from a compartive stand point have you seen a difference? Of course you will have the hardliners that say everything is perfect, but if that were the case why are many now trying to futher restrict us with more NWZ's, stricter noise restrictions, and may I dare say size / HP? I thought SL were supposed to make everything better????

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by Bearislandmoose

Chip,
Under Scott Verdonck's draconian rules, we are not allowed to quote the SOBNH forum outside the SOBNH forum.

Sooo, basically making things up then. I believe Chip requested specific quotes. I'm sure you can find those specific quotes in this forum.

BIM, you are letting me down. Do your homework, I'm sure you can pull something out of your.............