Speed limit proponents

[rickstr66]

FYI I just got an email from someone on this board letting me know the speed limit people are at it again. They are trying to push the new bill HB162 through by organizing together. I got an email asking me to join their cause when its clear from my posts on this matter that im against it. Just want to let those who are against it that "they" are up to no good again.

This is the message:

Sir,
There is a group gathering to support HB162 and get a speed limit on
Winni. We were the ones who convinced the RR&D committee to retain it for
further review. We are gaining members and momentum and are very
optimistic about the chance for success, despite what you may be reading on
the forum. Although the opposition is well-funded, we are finding that
we clearly have the numbers on our side. "Regular folk" are tired of
being afraid to use the lake.
It seems that you might be in agreement with us. Please visit
www.winnfabs.com. Hope you are willing to pitch in.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by rickstr66

FYI I just got an email from someone on this board letting me know the speed limit people are at it again. They are trying to push the new bill HB162 through by organizing together. {snip}

1'st thx for the notice rickstr66. I suspected as much when I saw APS's post. Because I think Webmaster Don would rather not have another discussion on the speed limits (SL) I'll refrain from commenting on that matter until I think he thinks it's OK. (reread it 3x, I think that makes sense )

2'nd - I just have to comment on 1 thing the proponents mention that bothers me more than the SL concept itself. To paraphrase one of the points I think is being used to justify passage of the 45/25 SL ... whether or not there's proof that the lake is actually unsafe, even if it's just the perception of a growing danger, their right to use the lake is effectively being taken away because of their fear... Have I understood this correctly ? That even if the fear is unfounded, the fear is enough, in and of itself, to restrict other peoples actions. Shouldn't the facts matter ? Shouldn't perception be based upon the facts ? I really am hoping I'm not reading it the way the author intended it

[codeman671]

Look at the Coast Guard statistics on www.winnfab.com (pages 8-9). According to this "Since 1991, recreational boating fatalities have continued along a downward trend even though the number of registered boats has increased by 15%". Also PWC accidents have had a similar downward trend of incidents since 1996. In NH, accidents are down over 50% since 1999 (page 32). Boats in the 26-40' (the size range where most boats considered "go fast boats" would be) range made up only 10% of accidents, a 1/3 were under 16 feet and over a third were between 16-26 feet. And my final statistic, "Nearly 80% of all reported fatailities occurred on boats where the operator had not received boating safety instruction".

Was this the smartest thing to link to their website proposing a speed limit? I think not. Define excessive speed. Excessive speed could be going too fast in a 16 foot skiff (not coming close to the proposed speed limit but exceeding recommended handling for a boat of its size) with an outboard, or taking a fast turn in a pontoon boat or family cruiser putting its occupants in an unsafe condition.

Education and enforcement of current laws is the key, not a speed limit. I would rather see the MP chasing boating law infractions such as 150' safe passage than sitting in the broads with a radar gun.

[restauranteer]

Not sure how I feel aobut the whole topic, but I did take time to check the website. Curious, but not a single name to be found as to who or what controls this group. Also, if you make a donation, who or where is the money going? I checked the Secretary of State's website and could find no record of this group as either a business or non-profit entity. Has this group filed the appropriate paperwork to receive funds, operate legally as a PAC or non-profit in this State? I would think that with all the ethics scandals going on at the Statehouse that most legislators would steer clear of any group with money that has not followed the appropriate rules. Hopefully this anonymous group has or is filing all the necessary paperwork to accomplish their stated goals. Wouldn't it be ironic if they are breaking the law to create new law?

Just food for thought.....

[PROPELLER]

I viewed the site & restauranteer is correct, I did not see any names either. However, from what richstr66 posted earlier we know Frank M is somehow associated with that group. Frank M is Frank M on this forum ****. He spearheaded the effort to designate Black Cove a NRZ last fall & there is a thread covering that issue.

There is no doubt in my mind that there are several people who use Winni & I believe many may be property owners, who wish to eliminate any activity on the lake they do not like or agree with. There is a certain arrogance among people who support various restrictions on the lake that they know best & how dare any of us who do not agree question them. I have witnessed the arrogance first hand. And they justify their position by saying they are doing it in the name of safety, the environment, the Loons etc. When in fact, I believe(just my opinion)they are doing it just because they do not like it & in their OPINION its not right.

Who are these people to say its not right to raft, to operate a GFB at speeds they deem excessive, to operate a cruiser they deem too big, to set horsepower limits they deem excessive. Rafting, speed limits, horsepower limits etc are all separate threads on this forum but I beleive they all have one thing in common, the individuals who are behind the support of these restrictions. The speed limit & no rafting bills are just the start, next will be horsepower limits & beyond that who knows.

I also agree with the sentiments stated earlier that some users of the lake may have a perception that is not true or unfounded. I use the lake every weekend from ice out to mid October & I do not see many of the things that supporters of these restrictions claim exist. I am sure that most if not all of the complaints have occurred at one time or other but not to the extent & frequency that they claim. Many of the complaints(I believe) are exaggerated.

I have not witnessed rafters littering, playing loud music, blocking passage to ones property, anchoring too close to ones property & partying in general making a nuisance of themselves. I have not witnessed GFB'S going too fast in a certain situation or area, creating an unsafe or dangerous situation for other boaters. I have not witnessed large cruisers creating a dangerous situation for smaller boaters with their wake, creating too big a wake too close to shore so as to perpetuate erosion. One thing I have witnessed with disturbing frequency is violation of the 150' rule & 90% of the time or more it is committed by someone in a small or smaller boat, bowrider, with family on the boat & they will even smile & wave to you as if they have no clue what they are doing & I believe they do not have any clue about boating safety or regulations.

Now I know this was longwinded & maybe I am on a soapbox but I felt it had to be said. Frank M & his organization WinnFABS is correct about one thing, we should all e-mail, write, call etc our legislators, the Governor etc to let them know our position & I and many of my boating friends have been doing that & will continue too as long as there are people who wish to restrict activity on Winni. I think the supporters of these restrictions will be surprised to see that there are just as many if not more Winni users & boaters who are not in support of these restrictions.

[frank m.]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

Frank M is Frank M on this forum. He spearheaded the effort to designate Black Cove a NRZ last fall & there is a thread covering that issue.

I hope nobody is confusing this guy with me. He sounds like a real jerk...using the loons like that and trying to stop everyone from enjoying the lake.
frank m.

[restauranteer]

Geesh Frank, are you confused? Here's your post from 9/27/04 on the subject of Black Cove;

Originally Posted by frank m.

Dear Fellow Forum Members,
If you care about the future of loons on Winnipesaukee, please send an email supporting this petition to the Commissioner of Safety, by way of
safety-hearings@safety.state.nh.us
I would also appreciate it if you could please cc that email to me at
patenter@metrocast.net
Make sure the petition includes your name and address, or it will not be counted. If you have had some link to or history with Black Cove, or to the protection of loons in general, please explain that. If you have witnessed the outrageous activities in Black Cove this summer, please describe those experiences. But try not to be too emotional or wordy.
We in Black Cove and surrounding region support the right of boaters to “raft” and do not aim to take that away. Lake Winnipesaukee is obviously a recreational lake and will always be one. We know that our region’s economy depends on boating. Although we do feel that our rights to use and enjoy the Cove and Lake are being infringed by these rafters, that is our problem to fight and we do not expect outside support over that issue. But the loons need more support than we alone can muster. We will face strong opposition from organized boating associations, most based out of state, and from boating rights activists whose last concern is the threatened common loon. In fact, the lake would be a better place for many of these people if loons were extirpated from the lake altogether. But Winnipesaukee has almost 50,000 acres, with thousands of other quiet coves, hundreds of shallow areas where nobody yet resides, and many popular destinations for partying groups to go. Almost none of those are loon nesting sites, loon brooding sites, or loon sanctuaries, and none are like Black Cove.
Black Cove is less than 7 acres. That’s less than 14 hundred thousandths of the Lake. Yet it is the number one loon producer in the state, by a large margin. It is not only the “rafting” that is threatening these loons, it is also the illegal activities that the rafters bring with them, that are a natural and unavoidable extension of rafting, and that the Marine Patrol has proven unable to stop. They have tried, but the shape and location of the Cove make it nearly impossible to the MP to approach without being seen and to witness the behavior that we see from within the Cove. Behavior that CANNOT continue if the loons are to remain. In fact, it was the Director of the Marine Patrol who suggested that we file this petition, after proving unable to protect the cove through enforcement of existing laws.
Consider that there were only nine successful loon pairs on Winnipesaukee this year, including Black Cove’s. And that the “batting average” of our few territorial pairs is only 0.48 chicks per year over the last decade or so. This means that when two loons have been lucky enough to make it through their first four years and return to mate up on Winni, and are even more lucky enough to secure one of the nineteen possible loon territories on the lake, even then, they still have less than half of a chance to actually lay an egg, hatch it, and raise it to fledge. THE BLACK COVE PAIR PROUCED 18 CHICKS OVER THE LAST DECADE. THAT’S AN ASTOUNDING 1.50 "BATTING AVERAGE" OVER THE SAME PERIOD. This is more than 3 TIMES the average, and is so far above the next that it makes the value of Black Cove to the future of loons on Winnipesaukee just indisputable. Black Cove is far and away the most prolific and most important loon producer and loon sanctuary in the entire state.
And this is typical year after year. While the other territories hope to raise one chick each summer, we get concerned in the years, like 2004, when the Black Cove pair does not raise two. The following link to some data posted by an LPC summer intern
http://www.unity.edu/sarihou/2002/gcolligan/map2.jpg
shows that in 2002, as is usual, there were only 7 successful breedings on Winni. As is also usual, Black Cove produced two chicks again that year. That’s 2 of the Lake's 8 fledglings that year, or ONE QUARTER of Winnipesaukee’s entire loon production!!! Notice that the other six successful nests (yellow dots) exist only in the deepest reaches along the northeastern shore of the Lake. Black Cove is the only successful sanctuary in the entire southeastern ¾ of the Lake. Do you think you should have to go to Lee’s Mill to see a loon chick next year?
The Common Loon is NH’s state bird, yet we typically raise less than ten chicks on the state’s biggest and most suitable lake. This is why it is so solidly planted on the threatened species list. LESS THAN TEN CHICKS ON A 50000 ACRE LAKE! Surely the state can set aside the most productive 7 acres from activities that this bird can simply not tolerate.
We who live in and around Black Cove have grown to limit and time our recreation to avoid adverse impact on these loons. We have sacrificed many of our rights for the benefit and well-being of these loons. We have invested hundreds of hours towards these birds. We claim no special rights over the cove, but just want to see it remain the rare and special place that it has become, to see our investment in these birds protected. We do not want to see all of our hard work and sacrifice wasted so that a few selfish boaters can practice their right to party in a loon sanctuary.
The rafters who have recently begun to frequent Black Cove are going to ruin this cove’s ability to harbor loons in very short order. One more year like this one will surely be the last for loons in Black Cove. The rafters bring with them jet skis and ski boats and water ballons. They bring with them illegal activities that the MP cannot prevent or stop. Litter accidently blows off their boats and sinks to the bottom where the loons feed. They drink and play loud music from early morning until after dark, and surely must be peeing in the tiny shallow cove all day long. If anyone of a truly open mind had witnessed the behavior of this past summer, then they would not have any argument over this petition….even the most staunch supporters of boating rights and rafting.
I think any opposition to this petition that is based on an unwillingness to surrender boating rights even in this tiny loon cove can only serve to show the true and selfish face of those who put their right to party wherever they wish over something so precious as the survival of a loon chick. I rafted for years before we moved to Black Cove. But I would never have even considered rafting in a loon sanctuary, or being so bold as to argue for my right to do so. And in my day, neither would anyone else. Anyone who argues against this petition, and thereby argues in favor of dropping anchor in the middle of a loon sanctuary, the state’s most prolific and important loon sanctuary, should be ashamed.

Please email to the commisioner to support our effort.

Frank Marino.
Black Cove, Meredith

[Ski Man]

Rick,
Thanks for the heads-up. As you should recall, I too was a huge opponent to the speed limit. In fact, I was one of the speakers against the bill at the January hearing. I saw the speed limit as another restriction on personal freedom. But my visit to the link you provided, www.winnfabs.com, really opened my eyes to this issue. I now recognize that my earlier opinion was based on a lot of disinformation being presented as fact by those whose profits would be impacted by this bill, and by my ignorance of the much broader impact that a lack of such a limit has been having on the freedoms of the public at large. I guess the marinas and cigarette boaters had successfully tricked many of us into believing that it was their "right" to buzz around the lake at dangerously fast speeds, and that it was the general public that was being selfish. The lack of "statistics" was used to prove that speed is not dangerous, when in fact, there were no statistics even being recorded about speed, so how could there be any proof. The fallibility of the "statistics" argument became very apparent when I saw that the two boats that flipped over on the lake last summer while speeding very fast and all alone, one going 90MPH in a straight line on the Broads, and another going over 70MPH in Alton, were recorded "statistically" as reckless operation. I also so that Director Barrett had testified that NO speed was too fast for the lake, and had earlier testified that a no-wake zone in Center Harbor would actually create danger (?). In consideration of this, how could I take any of his January testimony seriously? I just felt so foolish after researching this a bit more, and wanted to make sure that others, who were tricked like me, take a more serious look at the facts before taking too firm a stance on the wrong side of this issue.

[restauranteer]

Ski man,

But when a young lady asked in a poll back in October "how could anyone not enjoy boating" you replied with the following:

Originally Posted by Ski Man

Because some of us don't see the need to spend that amount of money and add the noise and pollution that it comes with, when there are plenty of more enjoyable activities on the lake.

10/07/04

Hmmmm, where was your concern for "personal freedoms" then?

I'm just "starvin'" for the answer

[PROPELLER]

I notice in the message to rickstr66 from WinnFABS that "Regular Folk" are tired of being afraid to use the lake. Well, myself and all my boating friends are "Regular Folk" who do not own GFB's or large Carver type cruisers and we are not afraid to use the lake. We do not feel threatened by other users of the lake. We welcome all kinds of boaters and users alike as long as they abide by the laws and use common sense and courtesy. This sounds like the same kind of scare tactic the liberal left media used several times prior to the most recent presidential election to help elect Senator Kerry and discredit President Bush. Of course we all know the outcome, it didn't work.

[frank m.]

Originally Posted by restauranteer

Geesh Frank, are you confused?

I was talking about the deceptive Frank M. that Propellor was talking about, who dishonestly "uses" issues like the loons and the environment for personal reasons. I don't know who that guy is.
It's interesting that the exact same small group who felt then that the most important loon sanctuary in the state should have been left open to unlimited partying seems to band together at every opportunity to oppose even the most reasonable limits on even the most outageous types of behavior. I think that one could start a thread on this forum about drunk driving and this same small group would start yapping about how DWI laws are a restriction on their personal freedoms and just a ploy by the poster to further his own agenda. I can't imagine what it would be like to live in the lawless world that you guys seem to want. Luckily, there are some of us who stand up for ourselves.

[Ski Man]

Restaraunt,

I understand that you take pride in your ability to search through posts, but I don't see how that previous statement conflicts with what I just said.

[frank m.]

restauranter,
Since we are quoting, didn't you just say this morning;

Originally Posted by restauranteer

I'm a newbie here...Looking forward to jawboning... you know how cranky us elders can be!

If you are just looking to argue, why not join the good guys?

[Ski Man]

Propeller,

You may want to adjust your foil hat, you wouldn't want the "liberal media" to find out that you're on to their conspiracies.

[PROPELLER]

Geesh Frank, now you are being downright ridiculous to suggest that anyone on this Forum would condone drunk driving. Again the ridiculous unfounded scare tactic.

Reasonable limits? Again, reasonable by whose definition. You are exhibiting the arrogance I alluded to in my earlier post. How dare anyone question the righteous Frank M who knows better than all of us whats best.

By the way, we who are opposed to the restrictions that have been discussed previously are doing what you suggest. WE ARE STANDING UP FOR OURSELVES.

[restauranteer]

But I really think you and Frank need to go and read your own commnets on boating and Black Cove over the past year. It is not me, or Propellor or anyone else putting words in your mouths, or taking you out of context. Your true thoughts on this matter are published comments of record of this site....it only took but a few minutes of searching to flush that out.

Of course you and Frank are entitled to your opinions on the matter, and your comments and posts are, I am sure, just as welcome as the opposing views.

Just don't cheapen your position by trying to hide from your past posts, that's all!

Bon appetit!

[Ski Man]

Restaraunt,

I didn't attempt to hide from my posts, in fact, quite the opposite, I said that the posts don't contradict anything, and that I have no need to hide from anything. You've failed, once again, to explain to me why I would.

[Ski Man]

"Reasonable limits? Again, reasonable by whose definition. You are exhibiting the arrogance I alluded to in my earlier post. How dare anyone question the righteous Frank M who knows better than all of us whats best."

I don't know where you're getting that. His point still holds. Who defines drunk driving to be past a resonable limit? Obvously, different people will have different tollerances for what they consider destructive behavior, but since when is voicing your opinion arrogant? How is the righteous? We live in a democracy, and as such, everyone should voice their opinions, we shouldn't let the vocal minority lead us.

[frank m.]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

This sounds like the same kind of scare tactic the liberal left media used

Propeller,
Please don't try to make this into a liberal/conservative issue. In fact, up here there is equal support for this bill from both sides, but I see that most of the opponents on this forum are from the more liberal south, as seem to be most of the members of this forum (not that there is anything wrong with that).
Generally, when you look out on the lake and see a typical American family cruising along leisurely in their 21-footer and then see a young well-tanned city-slicker in a 40-foot Baja flying past at full throttle with the stereo blasting, you don't presuppose that, of the two, it was the family guy that voted for Kerry. The recent evolution of Winnipesaukee into a playground for the rich was not perpetrated by the conservatives. The average resident of this region, whether Republican or Democrat, and is being denied full use of this lake by many non-residents from a much more liberal state. So if you are going to make this a liberal/conservative issue, it seems to me that you are twisting the argument in the wrong direction. But as I said, it has nothing to do with the candidate you voted for. Nice try though.

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by Ski Man

We live in a democracy, and as such, everyone should voice their opinions, we shouldn't let the vocal minority lead us.

...but, we don't live in a "democracy", we are a representative republic. And because of our local regulations, state and federal constitutions, the minority can often "lead us"....its the way of life here in the good ol US of A, even if there are way too many people that don't understand the basic tenants of our government.

But anyway, this stuff is way to heady for me. I am heading to 51 Mill Street..to eat, drink & be merry, my true calling!

Look for my review soon....and just to leave you all with a thought, while you battle it out here on your keyboards, I'll be enjoying my favorite cocktail at a nice new restaurant by the beautiful Winni thinking about anything but this debate!

Salute!

[SIKSUKR]

Propeller hits it right on the head.Liberal scare tactics.46 Mph is too fast and unsafe on Winni? Give me a break.The propagander that is on that website is exactly that.They don't feel safe to go out on Winni anymore?I'm on the lake every weekend on a 10 foot PWC,going to all parts of the lake.The only place I'm a little uneasy is coming into the Weirs towards Paugus Bay.Now that's a little hairy granted but it's the volume of traffic in that one area.Put a speed limit there maybe but the whole lake?Come on.Some of the people who support this bill either don't boat at all of probably dont have a boat capable of going 45 mph or dont care to go more than 45 mph.It's "the whats good for me is what is what you should do also"mentality.My little 10 foot pwc goes 60 mph but I hardly think I would be cutting docks in half as one of our more vocal big boat bashers likes to say.Ok,Im off the soapbox.Let me have it. SS

[PROPELLER]

Frank, I am not trying to do anything other than stand up for my opinions as you are. I never stated this was a liberal/conservative issue. You have the wrong impression. I simply used what I believe(in my opinion) were scare tactics by what I believe(in my opinion) is a biased liberal media as a comparison to what I believe(in my opinion) are scare tactics being used by WinnFABS and any other supporters of lake restrictions.

Just to set the record straight, I live up here, am registered to vote up here and spend 99% of my time on Winni in the summer and skiing in the North Conway region in the winter. I am not a liberal southerner and many of my boating friends live and are registered to vote in NH.

Although many who use the lake maybe rich, many of us are ordinary, middle class folk enjoying the lake. Nobody that I am aware of is denying anyone access to the lake. If you can't afford a lakefront property or slip you can still trailer an affordable boat to the many pay and free public launches. When you say denied access, if you are referring to people afraid to use the lake, that is not the same thing. They are not being denied access. Please do not twist being afraid into denied access. How am I or any of my boating friends or anyone else for that matter denying access? Again, another scare tactic that is unfounded.

You are welcome to state your opinion or stand on any issue but please do not twist my opinions as I am entitled to them just as you are.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

"1'st thx for the notice rickstr66. I suspected as much when I saw APS's post."

Ahem!

"APS post" was a quoted letter to the editor -- authored by a NH Representative. http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...2&postcount=48

Shoot the messenger.

Originally Posted by codeman671

"...And my final statistic, "Nearly 80% of all reported fatalities occurred on boats where the operator had not received boating safety instruction". Was this the smartest thing to link to their website proposing a speed limit...?"

It depends on your perspective.

I will not have had boating safety instruction -- and I stand an excellent chance of becoming what the GFBLs call "a speed bump".

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

"Because I think Webmaster Don would rather not have another discussion on the speed limits (SL) I'll refrain from commenting on that matter until I think he thinks it's OK."

The former speed limit discussion devolved into intimidation and veiled threats by members of the GFBL's Marine Mafia. I just checked that source -- we're OK -- for now.

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

"Propeller hits it right on the head. Liberal scare tactics.46 Mph is too fast..."

No-o-o-o-o. 110MPH is too fast.

A 45MPH speed limit will keep away the thrill-seekers banned from the other lakes because they can't risk a ticket against their insurance premiums.

They'll end up in the open salt water for which they were designed, where they can see over their bows, and where they can actually achieve higher speeds due to salt water's density.

__________________________

If you're afraid of the lake -- stay off the dock!

[Cal]

Originally Posted by frank m.

Generally, when you look out on the lake and see a typical American family cruising along leisurely in their 21-footer and then see a young well-tanned city-slicker in a 40-foot Baja flying past at full throttle with the stereo blasting.

Is this what you see or what you "think" you see or what you would like to see???
I have an undersized overpowered Formula and I can't tell you the number of times I've had that typical American family in their 21 footer(rental perhaps)come up from behind , and pass me like we were on a TWO LANE ROAD , just because I was going slow and their 125 hp outboard is going to beat the Formula.
I almost wish you would get your speed limit , just so you could see that speed is not the problem. It's people who are clueless or drive like they have blinders on and they are in their own little world.

[Bear Lover]

Here is an example of a boating activity that is to fast and to dangerous for Lake Winnipesaukee.

[upthesaukee]

I smiled when I saw the reference on the "winnfabs" website about effective enforcement on Lake George & Saratoga Lake in upstate NY. Most of Lake George is very narrow with quite a few islands that channel traffic into a small navigation area, pretty much like Alton Bay from Echo Point to Little Mark (for width---maybe a little wider. Saratoga Lake isn't much bigger than Wolfeboro Bay as seen from shore...haven't been on it.

Enforcement...use relatively inexpensive radar guns (is that website going to fund the cost???? ) or even better is the use of the trained eye of experienced patrol officers in estimating speed (who's funding the use of experienced officers to estimate the speed).

From their own link to a a USCG report on accidents 2003 (pg37 or so I think): they show the causes of accidents:

total accidents operation of vessel 3105
operator inattention 703
careless reckless oper 486
operator inexperience 477
excessive speed 446
no proper lookout 326
alcohol 289
rules of the road infraction 199

these seven causes contribute to 2926 of the accidents. The first 3 plus the last cause totals 1865 accidents or almost 64% of the accidents. speed is 15%.

The speed cause is of concern to me because there is no quantitative data here. Was it 50 MPH, 60, 90, 100+???? or was it 15 MPH while docking at the Alton Docks???

Lake George and Saratoga Lake are not Winnipesaukee. Nor is our Marine Patrol funded for this type of enforcement. We have adequate regulation and simply need enforcement of the existing laws and education education education. Some of that education will come in the form of fines and operating privilege suspension, but let's not over legislate. I am more concerned with the 64% accidents than I am with the speed related, and with the 64% I didn't even include the improper lookout. Speed is not the major factor here.

Hope the bill fails!!!!

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Ahem!

"APS post" was a quoted letter to the editor -- authored by a NH Representative. http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...2&postcount=48 {snip}

Correct !

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Ahem!

"APS post" was a quoted letter to the editor -- authored by a NH Representative. http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...2&postcount=48

Shoot the messenger.

As my good buddy Hernando Rodriguez Christian Guardo de la Hoya would say ... "Que". Let's see ... rickstr66 says the SL people at at it again and I say I suspected as much after reading your post containing GSN letter. Then next somehow I'm "shooting the messenger". Que ? I just don't see how any lead was lobbed, let alone in your direction.

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

The former speed limit discussion devolved into intimidation and veiled threats by members of the GFBL's Marine Mafia. I just checked that source -- we're OK -- for now.

Well I had read the whole thread just after Don had closed it and I've just gone back and re-read it now. Actually except for some name calling it was tamer than some of the stuff above re: the SLs. I don't find any threats, veiled or unveiled, nor any intimidation. I only mention this because you seem to think there's some, I dunno, "slight" (inferred from the ), aimed at you in the above transactions. I don't see this either.

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Ahem!


I will not have had boating safety instruction -- and I stand an excellent chance of becoming what the GFBLs call "a speed bump".



.


__________________________

If you're afraid of the lake -- stay off the dock!

Well, I have family and friends that boat the Winni, with me along on occasions (depends what's in the picnic basket).

And yes, the on the weekends Winni gets quite crowded!

But your quote intrigues me, as does many of your posts. Could you please supply some relevant data on how, in your own words, you could become a speed bump? If you have that information readily available and documentable, I would be surprised as to why you would not be willing to share that immediately with all of us, in the name of safety!

Strong definitive statements deserve strong definitive proof....please enlighten us!

Bon apetit!

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

"I've just gone back and re-read it now...I don't find any threats, veiled or unveiled, nor any intimidation..."

No intimidation? Then there shouldn't be any apologies, right?

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...8&postcount=91

Everybody should be offended at intimidation -- surprised it "wasn't found".

[Seaplane Pilot]

He who views that as intimidation should really get a spine replacement. Gimme a break!

[ApS]

Originally Posted by restauranteer

"...Could you please supply some relevant data on how, in your own words, you could become a speed bump?

It's a little unclear what is being asked here. How about these definitions?

"GFBL" stands for Go Fast Be Loud ('Tip-o-the-hat to BoaterEd)
"Speed Bump" is what the oversized GFBL boaters call any smaller boat.
"Lake Lice" -- is what the oversized GFBL boaters call...well, you'll just have to guess.
"Blow Boat" -- or Snail Boat -- a sail-powered vessel.
"Poker Run" is a loosely organized race of scores of GFBLs, generating large numbers of complaints from "Speed Bumps" and a token contribution to a needy local governmental agency.

All of my boats (Winnipesaukee-traditional: sail/paddle/power) are smaller than the GFBLs.

Moreover, none have more than 25HP, and are NH exam-exempt.

Originally Posted by restauranteer

And yes, the on the weekends Winni gets quite crowded!

A mid-day "sail" usually keeps me on The Broads for 5 to 6 hours on a sunny day.

All the time, moving...listening...observing ...moving...looking...watching. You see a lot of mischievous, reckless, negligent, drunken -- and sometimes lewd -- boating activities in six hours of active boating in a day.

Originally Posted by restauranteer

Well, I have family and friends that boat the Winni, with me along on occasions (depends what's in the picnic basket).

I carry just an apple. (Can't have distractions while sailboating).

Originally Posted by restauranteer

If you have that information readily available and documentable, I would be surprised as to why you would not be willing to share that immediately with all of us, in the name of safety!..."

1) This state is woefully inept in promulgating documents regarding boating incidents.

Illinois and Missouri are excellent. Florida, with ten-times the number of registered boats as New Hampshire, is just "fair".
http://www.mswp.state.mo.us/news/NRD...ct=2&ID=040114 http://dnr.state.il.us/law3/report/04/June04.htm http://www.floridaconservation.org/l...ts/summary.htm

There are many jurisdictions reporting in these states (municipal, wildlife, sheriff, state, conservation, water patrol), but all have decent reports available on-line.

Ever try to find a New Hampshire boating accident report?

All you'll find is "Boating Accident Attorneys". http://www.attorneylawyernetwork.com...hire/state.htm

2) In a state without a boating speed limit, a police report can't show "EXCESS SPEED" as a causative action. (Preferring "reckless operation" instead).

In the last official NH site I could find to visit -- possibly hosting the data you request, the MPs stated that

"One source has estimated New Hampshire leads the nation
in accidents per acre of water per 1,000 boats registered."

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/lba/...ine_1997p.html

(I'd gather the remaining dearth of data is due to NH insisting on tourist-friendly information at its official websites).

3) At this forum, there are the occasional requests for information about "a boat accident". Those end up becoming "orphan" threads. There's just no information available -- and probably won't ever be until the MPs get a decent police-report website put up. (And probably not then).

4) Had our lake's most famous GFBL boater not run from the scene, the "incident" would have been "below the fold" in the newspapers.

Regarding such hit&runs, I've archived four such GFBL fatal incidents.

Running from the scene has to do with insurance premiums, as most of those boats are listed as "RESTRICTED" or "CAUTION" in American Modern Insurance data: http://www.sullivan-sullivan.com/pdf...T_LIST2004.pdf

So!...the short answer is, there's no way "...to share that immediately with all of us, in the name of safety!..." New Hampshire has left us with heuristics.

You want stats? Go to the "Official Winnipesaukee Lake Depth Gauge" website.

Or look at where the water's height is on your dock.

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

.

A 45MPH speed limit will keep away the thrill-seekers banned from the other lakes because they can't risk a ticket against their insurance premiums.

They'll end up in the open salt water for which they were designed, where they can see over their bows, and where they can actually achieve higher speeds due to salt water's density.

__________________________

If you're afraid of the lake -- stay off the dock!

The speed limit will not keep away the "thrill - seekers. They will still come. I know of no "thril - seekers" that have been banned from other lakes excpept if they do not pass noise restrictions.

This "see over their bow's" comment interests me. Why is it that you think that we have a hard time seeing over our bows? I never have a hard time seeing over my bow from a slow speed to wide open. Some boats, not only speed boats, have a blocked view while they plane off however once on plane they are fine. I would suggest that most "go fasts" actually have better view then the majority of boats out there. Have you ever driven one? If not then please do not comment on it.

As for salt water being faster.... Well since salt water in denser there is more drag so most boats do not see a increase in speed. Some claim 2 mph at most.....

The statistics just are not there to show that this will have any effect on the lake as far as safty. All my close calls on the lake have been at slow speeds with other boaters not paying attention.

Jon
AKA CITY SLICKER FROM MA

[ITD]

I would like to see statistics because I've seen tidbits of information out there, guess I might have to look myself. I did find this, flies in the face of what the proponents of a speed limit say, from an insurance company also. Other people have posted in insurance info. so it MUST be true.....

Congestion levels: Are the waters quiet (like Lake Winnipesaukee) or are they crowded with traffic (like Long Island Sound)?

Guess it depends on your frame of reference......

(Quotation taken from http://www.premierins.com/premierIns...ceBoatCost.asp)

[Unleashed]

I do not apologize for the amount of space in this letter I intend to devote to telling you about Speed Limits. What follows is a call to action for those of us who care -- a large enough number to perform noble deeds. You are, I'm sure, well aware that Speed Limits's canards are attributable to an ignorance born of fear. But did you know that if we submit to Speed Limits's definition of "magnetohydrodynamics" and become sinister, we have lost the war for self-preservation? Speed Limits is locked into its present course of destruction. It does not have the interest or the will to change its fundamentally lackluster orations. And there you have it. Speed Limits expresses a disgusting nostalgia for a uniform, unchallenging, homogeneous society that never really existed.

And thats all I have to say about that!

[Wizard of Oz]

Speed limits on the water are for tree hugging conservatives (these people usually own sail boats, right Acres Per Second??). I was considering a vacation to Lake Winnie this year... I have now changed my mind and will be going to Lake Champlain or Lake George instead. I would have brought a family of 4 (two growing and very hungry kids), one 24' GFBL that gets one mile to the gallon at 70 mph, one gas hog V-8 truck (how much gas do you think I might have bought at a local station?), and an appetite for all things touristy. But it seems that me and my family would not be welcome on Winnie due to the seemingly overstressed and underinformed general public (A.P.S. again??) I will not bring my hundreds, perhaps $1000's of tourist dollars to your area knowing that I am not welcome.

Oh, and Acres Per Second, if Betty Cook knew someone like you was using her race boat as an avatar, I'm sure she'd be dissapointed. You should be ashamed of yourself... hippocrite. I've been boating for 35 years, both sail and power. I choose to own a powerboat simply because it's more fun for me and my family. I am Coast Gaurd Certified in safety and navigation. I know the "rules of the road" for recreational and commercial boating. I'll bet most boaters on your lake don't. Yet you single out the boater with the fast, loud boat as the offenders in every case. I have to call BS on that. I know PLENTY of sailboaters like yourself who don't have the first clue about navigation. My 14 year old is probably a better boater than most simply because I've taught him to be. Also, you seem to be very good at pulling skewed statistics from the internet... congratulations!! You are the type of boater that gives the rest of us a bad reputation. Single minded. Closed minded. As one of my fast boating friends put it, a woosie.

I came to this site looking for information on Lake Winnipesaukee, where to stay, where to eat, where to have some fun. But all I find is threads like this one and another on banning rafting? Come on, get a life people!! Share the lake, contrary to what seems to be popular belief in your community, you do NOT own the lake and a public access is just that, public. If I want to put my fast, loud boat in Winnie, I can. But, I won't.

If you want to look me up, come to Lake Champlain in June.... that's where I'll be buying my gas, food, and hotel accomodations. Maybe the occasional stuffed animal moose for the kids too.... afterall, aren't our kids what it's all about???

Wizard of Oz

[Evenstar]

I'm just wondering why Lake Winnipesaukee is being singled out for a bill to impose a limit on speed. Why not a state speed limit for all lakes? After all, aren't high speeds likely to be even more dangerous on smaller lakes?

I haven't kayaked on Winni yet, but I have been on other NH lakes enough to comment on high speeds. Yes, I have felt very unsafe at times, wondering if that speeding boat even sees me. In a sit in kayak, you actually sit below the water line and your top speed is maybe 5 MPH.

While kayaking on Squam last summer, my friend and I were both swamped by a speeding boat that passed within 40 feet of us and never even slowed down. So enforcement of current boating regulations seems to be the bigger issue here.

[PROPELLER]

If you didn't already know, Squam already has a speed limit. I think its 40mph. That speeding boat you mentioned may not have exceeded that limit as I am sure a boat going 35 mph may seem fast to someone sitting in a kayak.

Its become an issue on Winni because the proponents & supporters of the speed limit say that the high performance boats are taking over the lake, scare people & are too fast for the lake. These high performance boats probably do not use the other lakes like they do Winni so that could be why Winni is singled out.

As a powerboater I agree that kayaks are difficult to see sometimes, especially when there is a good size chop & some are blue & blend in with the color of the water. It would be very helpful if kayaks had a flag like kids bikes started using a few years back.

[FormulaOutlaw]

[QUOTE=Acres per Second]It's a little unclear what is being asked here. How about these definitions?

"GFBL" stands for Go Fast Be Loud ('Tip-o-the-hat to BoaterEd)
"Speed Bump" is what the oversized GFBL boaters call any smaller boat.
"Lake Lice" -- is what the oversized GFBL boaters call...well, you'll just have to guess.
"Poker Run" is a loosely organized race of scores of GFBLs, generating large numbers of complaints from "Speed Bumps" and a token contribution to a needy local governmental agency.

All of my boats (Winnipesaukee-traditional: sail/paddle/power) are smaller than the GFBLs.

Moreover, none have more than 25HP, and are NH exam-exempt.



Thank you for defining those terms for me. As a member of "the other site", with over 5,000 posts, I had never heard of the first three terms you refer to.

As someone who has organized five Poker Runs, and participated in many many more, I can assure you your definition of Poker Run is out the window. Are there fast boats involved? Sure. There are also slow boats involved. There are cabin cruisers involved. The ones I've personally produced had different categories for different styles of boats, thus making it attractive to all types of boaters.

As far as the purpose of a Poker Run: First, it's about boaters having fun. Then there is the boost to the local economy. And most important, the vast majority of them benefit charities. There is the "SCOPE" Poker Run in southern California that generates up to half a million dollars for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, in one run.

No matter how hard you try to "paint" us GFLB owners as evil, we simply do too much "good" for you to ever paint over.

If your boat only has 25 horsepower, good for you. It doesn't concern me what you own, how fast you go, or what you do AS LONG as you do it responsibly. And thusly, a responsible GFBL boat owner (which the VAST VAST majority are) should be no concern of yours.

It has been nine years since I last boated on "the Lake". So I may be out of touch with the conditions up there now. I can tell you this, down here that has so many more boats than your area has, the "Offshore Crowd" is without question the most courteous group on the water, bar none.

Want to take a guess who the most discourteous group is????? Without a doubt, the sailboat crowd. Now there are exceptions to every rule. I even get the occasional wave (I always wave first) from a sailboat, but more often than that I get "flipped off". I just laugh at them, blow them a kiss, and I'm on my way.

One thing you also might want to consider. There is a lot of money in the GFLB groups. And that group is very passionate about their interest. And what you and your kind are doing is so simple to understand, a tree stump can see it. You want to get the GFBL's off of "your" lake. Well here's a reality check. It's not your lake. It's everyone's lake. And the lake is certainly big enough to accomodate everyone. If you put one tenth of your energy and focus into boater education, rather than trying to rid the lake of us evildooers, you might actually accomplish something positive.

Oh, one more thing. I apologized to Bear Lover for what was considered a bad joke, which by the way was not posted by me in THIS forum. Nothing more. I have never posted a single statement that by any definition could ever be considered as intimidating or threatening. It's just that you feel threatened when someone calls it straight. That's your problem, not mine.

[Wizard of Oz]

People with dark (water) colored kayaks wearing dark (water) colored clothing are just asking for trouble. Would you go biking in the dark wearing all black or dark blue? Not me. Seems to me that kayakers (I like kayaking... though I prefer rivers) should take some self-preservation responsibility and use a bright colored flag, patch, shirt, etc... to help ANY boater (even those people with a 25 mph Boston Whaler 13' skiff or 12 mph Hobie Cat) see them better. Seems like common sense.

Wow, I think I just hit the nail on the head. Common Sense. Everyone has it, but some just can't seem to use it.

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

I'm just wondering why Lake Winnipesaukee is being singled out for a bill to impose a limit on speed. Why not a state speed limit for all lakes? After all, aren't high speeds likely to be even more dangerous on smaller lakes?

I haven't kayaked on Winni yet, but I have been on other NH lakes enough to comment on high speeds. Yes, I have felt very unsafe at times, wondering if that speeding boat even sees me. In a sit in kayak, you actually sit below the water line and your top speed is maybe 5 MPH.

While kayaking on Squam last summer, my friend and I were both swamped by a speeding boat that passed within 40 feet of us and never even slowed down. So enforcement of current boating regulations seems to be the bigger issue here.

A few things from my side of this issue just so that you know what we are thinking. First off it is often very hard to see you guys, I do not care if you are in a bow rider, speed boat, or a sail boat. Often times your hulls and wet suits blend into the surroundings. My father and I both sail and we always laugh when we go to buy our foul weather gear and it is blue and white!!!! How stupid would you have to be to buy blue and white foul weather gear!!!! YOU BLEND IT and your boat will never find you in the dark sea with white caps on top!!!! I have lots of friends that kayak and we have talked about this at great length. They now understand that a lot of times when boats come close to them it is because they are just not visible. They have mentioned to me that they often wear what they wear and so on to make it so that they blend in and can enjoy nature, sneak up on animals and so on. I said great but please understand that what makes you invisible to animals also make you invisible to people as well. They all now use the flags that were recommended above and say that things have been better since. As for being swamped on Squam then I would suggest that boat was probably going much slower then the speed limit. I would suggest that they were probably only going 20mph or os if they were putting of a wake large enough to swamp you. I know that over 30 my boats put out amost no wake at all.

Jon

[winnilaker]

Speed limits will not make the waters safer, Boater Safety/Education makes it safer. The unfortunate accident that happen a while back, happened under the so called proposed speed limit. I would actually give some serious thought to accepting a speed limit IF the result was to make the water safer. But not with these ridiculous reasons of jealously and unproven information.

I went to the hearing and I openly listened to the proponents of the Bill. And I'm sorry, insulting other individuals because for the money they make, shows lack of knowledge and intense jealously.

I don't understand why their energy couldn't be focused on looking at real safety issues and how to fix them. Maybe increase the distance between boats or something, anything is better than "let's all ban together to force the big monster boats and rich people off the lake"

[Boater]

Originally Posted by Wizard of Oz

I was considering a vacation to Lake Winnie this year... I have now changed my mind and will be going to Lake Champlain or Lake George instead.

Um, Wizard. Lake George has a 45 mph speed limit. You must REALLY hate them, all we're doing here on Winni is discussing it.

Originally Posted by Wizard of Oz

I will not bring my hundreds, perhaps $1000's of tourist dollars to your area

No, no, not that! You may not believe it, but the lakes region economy will do just fine without you.

I came to this site looking for information on Lake Winnipesaukee, where to stay, where to eat, where to have some fun. But all I find is threads like this one and another on banning rafting?

I guess you didn't look very hard or you just see what you want to see.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

If you didn't already know, Squam already has a speed limit. I think its 40mph. That speeding boat you mentioned may not have exceeded that limit as I am sure a boat going 35 mph may seem fast to someone sitting in a kayak.

When I wrote "speeding boat", I just meant a boat that was going faster than it should have been at that distance from us. I didn't realize that Squam has a 40mph speed limit, and this particular boat was likely under that limit. My point was "enforcement of current boating regulations seems to be the bigger issue here." That powerboat operator saw us just fine. He passed with 40 feet of us and laughed as his wake swamped us.

The NH law (Boating And Water Safety On New Hampshire Public Waters Section 270-D:2; 270-D:2 General Rules for Vessels Operating on Water) states:
VI. (a) To provide full visibility and control and to prevent their wake from being thrown into or causing excessive rocking to other boats, barges, water skiers, aquaplanes or other boats, rafts or floats, all vessels shall maintain headway speed when within 150 feet from:
(1) Rafts, floats, swimmers.
(2) Permitted swimming areas.
(3) Shore.
(4) Docks.
(5) Mooring fields.
(6) Other vessels.

Besides being too close to us, he was also too close to the shore (an island).

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

Its become an issue on Winni because the proponents & supporters of the speed limit say that the high performance boats are taking over the lake, scare people & are too fast for the lake. These high performance boats probably do not use the other lakes like they do Winni so that could be why Winni is singled out.

Thanks for explaining that to me. I understand it much better now.

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

As a powerboater I agree that kayaks are difficult to see sometimes, especially when there is a good size chop & some are blue & blend in with the color of the water. It would be very helpful if kayaks had a flag like kids bikes started using a few years back.

My current kayak is white and light blue (my next one will be yellow or red if possible), but I wear a bright red PDF. My friend's kayak is red and yellow, and we stay fairly close together. Personally I can spot other kayaks at least a mile away (when visibility is good), no matter what color they are, or how choppy the water is. But I'm at their level and I'm not going fast. To me, speed becomes an issue if you are going too fast to see smaller boats (like kayaks) in time to give them the proper clearance.

[Wizard of Oz]

Originally Posted by Boater

Um, Wizard. Lake George has a 45 mph speed limit. You must REALLY hate them, all we're doing here on Winni is discussing it.

No, no, not that! You may not believe it, but the lakes region economy will do just fine without you.

I guess you didn't look very hard or you just see what you want to see.

Just as I said boater.... you don't want my $$ so I'm not going to spend it there. Self centered aren't we?? And as for Lake George, I will probably end up on Champlain anyway. More to do there as far as I can see (and I've been there before).

But how long do you think your local economy will last without the all mighty Tourist Dollar? Not long I think. Continue to propose/discuss the limitations on Winnie and more people than just myself will NOT be coming there. "Don't go to Winnie, they won't let you go fast (most inboard ski boats will do more than 45 mph, and you don't seem to be singling them out) and they won't let you raft off to make new friends."

Oh, and please don't bother coming to the Great Lakes (my neck of the USA woods). We don't want any of you here mucking up a good thing.

Wizard of Oz

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

When I wrote "speeding boat", I just meant a boat that was going faster than it should have been at that distance from us. I didn't realize that Squam has a 40mph speed limit, and this particular boat was likely under that limit. My point was "enforcement of current boating regulations seems to be the bigger issue here." That powerboat operator saw us just fine. He passed with 40 feet of us and laughed as his wake swamped us.

The NH law (Boating And Water Safety On New Hampshire Public Waters Section 270-D:2; 270-D:2 General Rules for Vessels Operating on Water) states:
VI. (a) To provide full visibility and control and to prevent their wake from being thrown into or causing excessive rocking to other boats, barges, water skiers, aquaplanes or other boats, rafts or floats, all vessels shall maintain headway speed when within 150 feet from:
(1) Rafts, floats, swimmers.
(2) Permitted swimming areas.
(3) Shore.
(4) Docks.
(5) Mooring fields.
(6) Other vessels.

Besides being too close to us, he was also too close to the shore (an island).

Thanks for explaining that to me. I understand it much better now.

My current kayak is white and light blue (my next one will be yellow or red if possible), but I wear a bright red PDF. My friend's kayak is red and yellow, and we stay fairly close together. Personally I can spot other kayaks at least a mile away (when visibility is good), no matter what color they are, or how choppy the water is. But I'm at their level and I'm not going fast. To me, speed becomes an issue if you are going too fast to see smaller boats (like kayaks) in time to give them the proper clearance.

That guy that passed to close deserved a ticket and as you have said therer are already plenty of laws in place to give him one. Again as I see it in this case since you said he was laughing probbly no law was going to help as he was just a jerk and wanted to be a "funny guy".

As for the color, visability and speed issue I agree a operator of a boat HAS to know what is safe for the area that he is in. It is important for the operator to know when they need to slow down. However Often times the proposed speed limit is way to fast for many areas. Like heading out Alton bay on a weekend you often times can barely keep in on plane there can be so much boat traffic. It would be interesting to know if there was in fact a speed limit on the lake would people tend to go the speed limit no matter what the conditions..... Then when they get pulled over say what is the matter I was going slower then the speed limit..... Remember there are tons of recrational boats now that go 50-60mph and they are NOT all speed boats. I would suggest to the people that want this bill that in fact the speed boats are actually designed for the speeds that they run and a open bow run about or open cockpit fishing boat is not.

Jon

[rickstr66]

If the lake is not a proper place for "offshore" or go fast boats, maybe its too large for kayaks , canoes and rowboats???? Just a thought

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

Speed limits will not make the waters safer, Boater Safety/Education makes it safer. The unfortunate accident that happen a while back, happened under the so called proposed speed limit. I would actually give some serious thought to accepting a speed limit IF the result was to make the water safer. But not with these ridiculous reasons of jealously and unproven information.

I went to the hearing and I openly listened to the proponents of the Bill. And I'm sorry, insulting other individuals because for the money they make, shows lack of knowledge and intense jealously.

I don't understand why their energy couldn't be focused on looking at real safety issues and how to fix them. Maybe increase the distance between boats or something, anything is better than "let's all ban together to force the big monster boats and rich people off the lake"

But there is a direct relationship between higher speeds and safety (basic physics). If you don't see a smaller boat, until you are within a hundred feet of it, that can be a real safety issue, when your are going fast.

I really don't see how a 45 MPH spped limit would force anyone off the lake.

My point was just to give some perspective from a kayaker's point of view. And my main point was that "enforcement of current boating regulations seems to be the bigger issue here." The boater who swamped us was much closer than 150 feet, and he was going way faster than headway speed.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Audiofn

"...The speed limit will not keep away the "thrill-seekers". They will still come..."

You are correct; however, the specter of a speeding ticket will discourage many who would view our lake's natural beauty at 70MPH. There are GFBLs who cheerfully will bear those costs on their insurance premiums as "the cost of doing business on Winnipesaukee".

Originally Posted by ITD

Congestion levels: Are the waters quiet (like Lake Winnipesaukee) or are they crowded with traffic (like Long Island Sound)?

I've boated on "The Sound".
The western end (next to NYC) is hopeless.

The rest requires real boating skills (navigation, fog, dodging high-speed ferries). You may see one GFBL a day there -- but it's rare when you see one "offshore".

Winnipesaukee is no longer quiet. (Anyone wondering why?)

Originally Posted by Wizard of Uhs

"...I would have brought a family of 4 (two growing and very hungry kids), one 24' GFBL that gets one mile to the gallon at 70 mph, one gas hog V-8 truck (how much gas do you think I might have bought at a local station?), and an appetite for all things touristy...but I will not bring my hundreds, perhaps $1000's of tourist dollars to your area knowing that I am not welcome...

We had an opportunity to be Bribed? What were we thinking?

Originally Posted by Audiofn

Why is it that you think that we have a hard time seeing over our bows?

There you go again, asking me not to believe "my lying eyes".

This lake's population is growing older -- many take the "easy kayaking" route. When last year I posted an announcement of a new transparent polycarbonate kayak, the post was assailed as "You can't see kayaks, much less transparent ones!"

The breaking news is: there are living human beings in those boats.

(Transparent or not).

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

"...The former speed limit discussion devolved into intimidation and veiled threats by members of the GFBL's Marine Mafia. I just checked that source -- we're OK -- for now..."

WELL, TODAY WE'RE NOT OK. (6:46PM yesterday).

The Marine Mafia is calling for 5000 GFBLs to flood this Winnipesaukee website.

(The Internet equivalent of a book burning).

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

... Marine Mafia is calling for 5000 GFBLs to flood this site. (The Internet equivalent of a book burning).

And why shouldn't they. Even though a new poster here, a search under your present and past monnikers reveals a long and concerted effort to anonymously agigtate this portion of the boating public with your heavily weighed opinion. And yes, you are entitled to your opinion on this manner, an opininon you have shared, it appears, many, many times over. And they are just as entitled to attempt to sway the masses with whatever hyperbole they choose to counter yours.

It does not matter to me either way what happens in reference to this debate. Parties on either side of this emotional issue either can't, won't or don't provide even rudimentary statistical data with which to claim an even perch for their particular position.

Until someone from either side takes the time to do the necessary research, we are stuck with opinion.

And we all know what opinions have in common with,err, ahh - forget it, this is a family site, afterall!

Bon appetit!

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by rickstr66

If the lake is not a proper place for "offshore" or go fast boats, maybe its too large for kayaks , canoes and rowboats???? Just a thought

Hey my current kayak is made for large lakes, and I'm trading that one in this spring for a larger one. So when I kayak on Winni this summer, it with be in a sea kayak ... which is a kayak made for going on the open ocean. Winni is not too large for kayaks. We have as much right to be on this lake as anyone.

[PROPELLER]

Evenstar, I agree with your opinion about enforcement of the boating laws & regulations instead of a speed limit. That has been one of my arguments against the speed limit & if you read a previous post of mine I stated that the most common infraction in my experience is the 150' law. By the way it was not necessary to cite the entire law as I am very familiar with it since I took it upon myself to become familiar with NH boating regulations when I started boating here, I have my boater education certificate & the class covers those regulations extensively & when you register your boat you are required to sign the registration after you read that there is 150' law.

The speed limit if passed will prevent some boaters from using Winni simply because it would be useless for some boaters to only cruise at 45 mph when their boat was designed to cruise faster. That is exactly the intent of the speed limit proponents. 45 mph was chosen because most performance boats cruise faster than that & they knew that. I honestly do not think the speed limit supporters are concerned with boats cruising 46-60 mph which is what many of those boats do, they just don't like them & they are attempting to elminate what they do not like. If there was a family on a bowrider cruising between 46-60 they would not be concerned & there are many boats on the market that are not considered performance boats that are capable of that. In my opinion there are many infractions of the 150' law & that becomes interpreted into they were speeding when in fact they may not have been going any faster than 25-30 mph but it appeared that way because of the close proximity. Fine, enforce the 150' law.

I do not own a high performance boat & typically cruise between 25-30 mph & I have encountered kayaks several times where they were not visible or very difficult too see because there was enough of a chop so that when in the trough of a wave they were not visible or they were wereing clothing that blended with the water or their kayak blended in with the water. The fact that they were not visible had nothing to do with my speed or the style boat I operate or any inattention on my part. I am always scanning the water in front of me. Its just a fact that kayaks are not always visible or are very difficult to see for many reasons, no way around it unless the kayaker takes it upon themselves to be more visible.

[Fat Jack]

I heard that there was a big pro-speedlimit rally on Saturday. Does anyone have any info about how that went?
FJ

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

Hey my current kayak is made for large lakes, and I'm trading that one in this spring for a larger one. So when I kayak on Winni this summer, it with be in a sea kayak ... which is a kayak made for going on the open ocean. Winni is not too large for kayaks. We have as much right to be on this lake as anyone.

YES YOU DO!!! As do I and Jet skiers and everyone else that wants to use the lake. People have said that you need to be more visible and that certainly would help but as my friends why Yack point out we (all the other boaters) have to pay attention to what we are doing. That is the real safty issue. People do not look were they are going. In that case there is no helping them but to take their boat away from them......

[Audiofn]

[QUOTE=Acres per Second]
There you go again, asking me not to believe "my lying eyes".

The Marine Mafia is calling for 5000 GFBLs to flood this Winnipesaukee website.

(The Internet equivalent of a book burning).

[/QUOTE

Yes and there you go again not answering my question..... I have been on MANY speed boats and NONE of them have vision issues while on plane. So I guess they really are "lying eyes"

You are the one that goes to all the other sites to get your info that you post all over. You have pulled posts from that site and posted them hear. You opened up the box and let them all in. Blame yourself.

As has been posted by Formula Outlaw us speed boaters raise a HUGE amount of money for charity. We are not the bad guys that you make us out to be.

I tell ya what we can race your sail boat against me in my sailboat, or better yet you can sail mine and I will sail yours just to keep it interesting. If I win you drop the issue

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

...By the way it was not necessary to cite the entire law as I am very familiar with it ...

I wasn't citing that law just for you, but because it seemed like my point was being missed by a couple of people. And that isn't the entire law.

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

The speed limit if passed will prevent some boaters from using Winni simply because it would be useless for some boaters to only cruise at 45 mph when their boat was designed to cruise faster.

Ok, I have no personal experience with fast boats, so I'm likely a bit clueless here. But I just don't understand how going no faster than 45 mph is useless for them. I mean, 45 mph is fast for being on water. And what about the rights of kayakers? How many kayakers don't paddle on Winni, because of the excessive speed of some of the powerboaters?

And your point about some boats being designed to cruise faster than 45 mph, is like saying that there shouldn't be a highway speed limit, since some cars are designed to cruise faster than 65 mph.

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

I do not own a high performance boat & typically cruise between 25-30 mph & I have encountered kayaks several times where they were not visible or very difficult too see because there was enough of a chop so that when in the trough of a wave they were not visible or they were wereing clothing that blended with the water or their kayak blended in with the water. The fact that they were not visible had nothing to do with my speed or the style boat I operate or any inattention on my part. I am always scanning the water in front of me. Its just a fact that kayaks are not always visible or are very difficult to see for many reasons, no way around it unless the kayaker takes it upon themselves to be more visible.

You just made a really good point for impossing a speed limit. Since there seems to be a visibility issue here in seeing kayakers (for many reasons), wouldn't it perhaps be a good idea to have a speed limit? After all, the faster you're going, the less time you have to avoid a collision with a semi-visible kayaker. Think about it.

[FormulaOutlaw]

One "constant" I have noticed, beginning with the previous thread that was ultimately locked down, is that the "offshore" crowd is all for everyone enjoying the lake, yet it is a few of the "others" that are trying to eliminate the offshore crowd or as APS calls them the GFBL crowd. Why? Simply because they don't like them. I don't particularly care for sailboats, but I will staunchly defend their right to enjoy the lake.

We care about everyone, while some here appear to only care about themselves.

And thank you Don for allowing me to post in your Forum.

FormulaOutlaw

[Wizard of Oz]

Cool, I made the Marine Mafia! Thanks Acres Per Second. Since I'm of Dutch heretige, I guess that makes me the Dutch Mafia. Have cement shoes, will travel (relax, it's a joke, not a threat).... oh, and there is a LONG story behind that statement dating back to the Chicago Mafia... of which my family was an itegral part during the depression and prohibition.

I love it when someone groups ALL people into one category. If you own a fast boat, you must be a moron with bad eye sight, a gold chain wearing jerk, a "damn the environment" idiot, a Marine Mafia member. Does it matter to you that I also have a 14' fishing boat I probably put more hours on than my GFBL boat? Or that I have a Sunfish I enjoy taking out on nice sunny days?? How about the 24' Pontoon boat we use for lake cruising at the cottage??

Oh well, we GFBL owners have plenty of monikers for snailboaters too, but MOST (not some, not a few, but MOST, as in above 75%) of us know how to navigate better than most people, because we take responsibility for our speed, things happen quicker at speed, and we want (not need, want) to be able to do our best to be good boaters. Join the mafia sight and start a thread on how many have taken boaters courses, Coast Gaurd training courses. I'll bet you the numbers will stagger you. Ask how many have had accidents on the water. I'll bet the numbers (or lack there of) will surprise you. I've been a GFBL boater for nearly 15 years and a boater for 35 years. Every one of those years has been incident free, no matter which boat I'm piloting.

Now go back to searching the internet for other peoples words and useless facts. Take responsibility for yourself and quit trying to force your opinions on others.

Now that I think back, most of the, how can I say this without angering every sailboater out there?.... uncooperative?.... bad boaters??.... stupid???.... boaters I've come across over the years are those in snailboats. I always give way to a sailboat under sail, I always use common courtesy to snailboats in tight quarters (even under power, a snailboat is not as manueaverable as my power boat), but since my exhaust exits above the water, I always seem to be in the wrong. Hmmmmm.... maybe it's because I don't look my age.... that must be it, right?

[restauranteer]

Back to the original post and a question I posed somewhat thereafter....

Has anyone ascertained if this Winnfabs site is indeed legit, or could it be an internet scam prowling for pocket change?

Checked again with the Secretary of State's office today, no record of this group as a bonified PAC, private or non-profit entity. Who will be taking this money, how will it be reported, can I claim it as a deduction? I know HALCLYON and Frank M. have been perusing this thread since the questions were posed....c'mon guys, does this bird have stuffin' or not????? Inquiring Chefs need to know!!!!

Bon Apetit!

[PROPELLER]

The reason your point was missed(at least the way I read it) is in your 1st post regarding your being swamped you did not explain that the offending boater saw you & laughed at you(they did it intentionally). It could have been interpreted that they did not see you & it also sounded like they were speeding. No law or speed limit is going to prevent that situation. The only way to deal with that is to be lucky enough that the Marine Patrol was there to cite them or at the very least try to report the incident & get the bow #'s.

As far as not understanding about high performance boats & the point I made about cruising, there is no other way I can explain it other than take a ride on one. Maybe one of the forum posters who owns one could do a better job explaining. I have taken rides in the past on Winni & elsewhere & in my opinion & experience if they are operated with common sense for each specific situation I do not think they are a safety hazard traveling 50, 60, 70 mph. That does not mean they are constantly operating at that speed. If they enter a small bay, one of the harbors or they want to site see then they can go slower obviously. Why do you think they(speed limit proponents) chose 45 mph? In my opinion they purposely chose that speed knowing that the majority of bow riders & small cabin boats max out between 40-45 mph & high performance boats cruise at higher speeds. So that would eliminate most performance boats from coming to Winni & you would be left with bow riders, small cabin boats etc. Each boat performs best at particular cruising speed as far as how it rides on the water, fuel consumption etc. My boat is 25-30 mph. Most performance boats are higher than 45 mph. Although as I said earlier more & more there are other boats that are not performance boats can go faster than 45 mph but their optimum cruising speed probably would still be under 45 mph.

No, I do not think I made a good point for a speed limit. Quite the contrary, my post said that at my typical speed 25-30 mph, kayakers have often not been visible right away or were very difficult to see so the speed limit would be irrelevant. I have never hit one or even come close because I pay attention, the ones that are hard to see I eventually spot them. But many I do see right away because they wear a more visible color or the kayak is a bright color. How would setting a speed limit improve my chances of seeing the kayaker? I am cruising at 25-30 & still had a problem because of the kayak color, the clothing of the kayer or the wave conditions. My speed had nothing to do with the visibility problem. Why not wear more visible clothing or attach a flag as Audiofn suggested some of his friends have done.

[Wizard of Oz]

Propeller brings up some good points. Like I said, self-preservation. Don't want to get run over or swamped? Dress for it.

[FormulaOutlaw]

A question please, I'm curious about something.

On your "average" weekend, what percentage of all the boats on the lake, are the GFBL types?

I would appreciate a straight answer. I would also like multiple responses to this question so I can guage the correct number. Thank you......

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

No intimidation? Then there shouldn't be any apologies, right?

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...8&postcount=91

Everybody should be offended at intimidation -- surprised it "wasn't found".

I would be offended if, by any stretch of the imagination, anything said here, or even over "there", by the poster in question was intimidating. I found plenty of insults, on both sites and from both sides, which I think is stupid enough but still nothing even remotely close to intimidating. The comment pertaining to your link above looked to me to be an insult re: someone's parenting capabilities. I don't know if you're inventing something because you wish it were so, ran off at the mouth (keyboard) w/o thinking, or whether you actually think something threatening was said. The problem I have with such characterizations is that they devalue the meaning of the word threat and/or intimidation to the point where discourse, even if uncivil, gets limited. I believe you are against that.

[PROPELLER]

Thats tough for me to answer. Never thought about it too much. Now I will this summer. For now I will say less than 5%. But to be fair I am out on the water before 11am, sometimes before 10am & during the peak boating hours I may be anchored in a cove or at a town dock & when I do ride during those hours I may be in a less traveled part of the lake. I will return to my slip between 2-4pm.

The other issue that may make it tough to answer is different individuals will interpret the definition of GFBL boats differently. Some manufacturers have boat models that could be borderline. For example in the Formula line the Fast tech in my opinion is definitely what I would consider GFBL or high performance but there are other models Formula sells that are capable of speeds in the 50-65 mph range that I would not call GFBL or high performance. Although I have not seen many on Winni, there is a growing number of center console fishing boats that are capable of 50-60 mph but they typically use outboards, many times twins & they are not loud, I would not call the GFBL or high performance but some may because the speeds they are capable of. Fountain manufactures models in this category as an example.

[FormulaOutlaw]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

Thats tough for me to answer. Never thought about it too much. Now I will this summer. For now I will say less than 5%. But to be fair I am out on the water before 11am, sometimes before 10am & during the peak boating hours I may be anchored in a cove or at a town dock & when I do ride during those hours I may be in a less traveled part of the lake. I will return to my slip between 2-4pm.

The other issue that may make it tough to answer is different individuals will interpret the definition of GFBL boats differently. Some manufacturers have boat models that could be borderline. For example in the Formula line the Fast tech in my opinion is definitely what I would consider GFBL or high performance but there are other models Formula sells that are capable of speeds in the 50-65 mph range that I would not call GFBL or high performance. Although I have not seen many on Winni, there is a growing number of center console fishing boats that are capable of 50-60 mph but they typically use outboards, many times twins & they are not loud, I would not call the GFBL or high performance but some may because the speeds they are capable of. Fountain manufactures models in this category as an example.

Thanks for your input. My original thought that GFBL (or other "high performance" boats) probably make up less than 10% of the overall boating "population" on the Lake. I find it difficult to believe that the other 90%, or higher, boaters are having their time on the water ruined by that small a percentage of a certain type of vessel.

Down here "we" average probably about 5% or even less. Again, thank you. FormulaOutlaw

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by Fat Jack

I heard that there was a big pro-speedlimit rally on Saturday. Does anyone have any info about how that went?
FJ

Rumor is the rally was canceled, supposedly the organizer was arrested enroute to the event for speeding!

(ahhh, a little late April 1st humor)

Salute!

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Mee'n'Mac

"...The comment pertaining to your link above looked to me to be an insult re: someone's parenting capabilities. I don't know if you're inventing something because you wish it were so, ran off at the mouth (keyboard) w/o thinking, or whether you actually think something threatening was said..."

You weren't intimidated.
I wasn't intimidated.
Formula Outlaw apologized...for some reason.
Perhaps the "intimidatee" needs to clarify.
BTW: Do you find the GFBL quote "Too bad he has only two knees" offensive?

Originally Posted by FormulaOutlaw

A question please, I'm curious about something.
On your "average" weekend, what percentage of all the boats on the lake, are the GFBL types?

I would appreciate a straight answer. I would also like multiple responses to this question so I can guage the correct number. Thank you......

You mean:
1) Static?, like "parked" at a dock near a bar? Or...
2) Dynamic? like what percentage of GFBLs take up the most acreage on the lake? -- Per Second?


It's important to know, because the more GFBLs are out tearing up Winnipesaukee speeding, the ratio of GFBLs on the lake increases. (Conversely, the ratio of family-boaters decreases).

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

As far as not understanding about high performance boats & the point I made about cruising, there is no other way I can explain it other than take a ride on one.

Or maybe some powerboaters should try paddling in my kayak, and then they would know how I feel?

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

... No, I do not think I made a good point for a speed limit. Quite the contrary, my post said that at my typical speed 25-30 mph, kayakers have often not been visible right away or were very difficult to see so the speed limit would be irrelevant. I have never hit one or even come close because I pay attention, the ones that are hard to see I eventually spot them. But many I do see right away because they wear a more visible color or the kayak is a bright color. How would setting a speed limit improve my chances of seeing the kayaker? ...

Like I wrote earlier, I do dress for visibility. But I can't control the waves.

Ok, some basic physics: At 75 mph, a boat covers 110 feet in 1 second! At 45 mph that same boat cover 66 feet.

If kayaks can be difficult for powerboaters to see (for various reasons) how close is a 75 mph powerboater when he actually sees a kayak? No matter how fast their reaction speed, they get much closer before they can actually turn. How can it be considered safe for boats to travel at these speeds, on a heavily used lake?

So kayakers have to restrict themselves to just shorelines and small bays, so some powerboats can use the main lake at insane speeds? How fair is that? And I’m not suggesting paddling in the high traffic areas, but what if I just want to cross a section of the main lake?

You know, I wasn't really a big proponent of a speed limit until I got into this discussion. But now I do see the need. It's about safety.

[PROPELLER]

Although I do not own a kayak, I have kayaked a few times & on Ossipee & other lakes on a Saturday which can also be very busy but had no problems. I have canoed since I was a kid with my father. So I do know what its like from that perspective.

Maybe you do dress for visibility & thats great. Many do not. As far as the waves, that is less important than dressing for visibility because it is only a couple seconds that a kayak would be in the trough & then they are on top of the crest of the wave & can be visible.

Heavily used depends on your definition. I am on Winni at the peak of boating season, Saturdays & Sundays in June, July & August (although as my post earlier explained many times I may not be out in the Broads from 11am to 2pm) In my opinion, its not nearly as busy as many would have you believe. I have had rides in boats at speeds of up to 65 mph on Winni & if you are paying attention like anyone in any other boat should be also there is more than enough time to react to a kayak, canoe or any other boat, swimmer etc. I have experienced it. If you want to use the highway comparison as you did in an earlier post, its no different than navigating to another lane to avoid a car or debris or what ever at 65mph(as long as its not something that darts in front of you like a wild animal or someone cutting you off from another lane)

The lake is for everyones use. So how fair is it for you to expect a powerboater to not enjoy the lake in his way? If someone does not feel safe then that is their issue & they should do what they need to do to feel safe but that does not mean that the powerboater is doing anything wrong.

You see the difference between the way I look at it in comparison to speed limit proponents is I think the lake is there for everyones use as long as they operate their vessel with common sense, courtesy & obey the laws. If there was a bill to eliminate kayaks, sailboats or any other vessel I would speak out against that too. Thats the difference, the speed limit proponents want it their way period. They are the same ones who support a no rafting bill also & I believe they would also support a horsepower limit bill as well. They want it to be their own private lake by eliminating what they do not like.

You are correct, it is about safety & everyone is responsible for operating their vessel responsibly & safely & there are plenty of boating laws to making boating safe & those existing are more than enough & should be enforced as you said in an earlier post. I see so many 150' violations every day I boat but there are not enough Marine Patrol to catch them all.

P.S. Are you infering that boaters do not love the water with your quote at the bottom?

[Audiofn]

Evenstar:
It does not matter to me if I am in a Sailboat or power boat. The faster I go the more I concentrate on what I am doing. If I am sailing in my fathers Hinkley then I can put the auto pilot on trim out the sails and enjoy the slow sail and do nothing. If I am in my 470 or International 14 or sailboards, then it takes every bit of my concentration. Same thing with power boats. All the speed boaters that I know when they drive fast we concentrate. You look forward, watch the waves, watch for any boats in the area and throttle. If you do not then things can go wrong fast just as they can in the high performance sail boats.

Acres I also find it interesting that you said in a early post responding to Formula outlaw that you first of all avoided the question at hand and said that we are all "parked" at the bar... You are letting your true colors show. I am willing to bet that more booze is consumed by any other form of boating on that lake then GFBL boats.

Oh Acres speaking of sailboards I guess under th law that you propose I can not use my sailboards on the lake as I have been clocked on them at over 70mph back when I was racing for Bic Sport.......

Formula to answer your question I am willing to bet that the GFBL boats are under 1% of the boats on the lake. Of course that all depends on how you quantify what a GFBL boat is. In this situation we are not only targetting the GFBL boats but also the guys that fish.

Jon

[Audiofn]

Propeller this is a bill about getting the LOUD boats off the lake it has NOTHING to do with safty. If it did then they could put forth evidence to show it was a safty issue. Only problem is that the evidence does not exist because the evidence shows that we are one of the safest groups of boaters out there. Yes there are accidents involving Offshore boats as there are with every type. The Offshores get all the press due to the fact that we have that "image" of the high rollers attached to us. I would propose that if any of these people went out to Lake of the Ozarks and saw what it is like there they would never complain again. I have been there many times and there is a very high percentage of GFBL boats. There is almost never a issue out there unless booze is involved and since you can not regulate stupidity it just does not matter what boat they are in at that point.

Jon

[PROPELLER]

Jon, did you read my post of 2:05pm yesterday? I stated the same thing you are saying. If you have followed my posts on the speed limit & rafting bills you will see that I also believe what you do. Its all about eliminating activities not embraced by the supporters of these bills.

I believe the supporters are using the speed limit to attain their goal through the back door so to speak & that is eliminating high performance boats because either they do not like them or they have the pre-concieved notion that they are inherently unsafe.

When I said its about safety I was not specifically refering to the speed limit bill. I am agreeing with Evenstar that BOATING must be practiced with safety in mind. But I do not believe that is what is behind the speed limit bill.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

You know, I wasn't really a big proponent of a speed limit until I got into this discussion. But now I do see the need. It's about safety.

Interesting point , just like horses and bicycles aren't allowed on major highways and interstates , perhaps small boats should be banned from big lakes and big boats banned from small lakes.
That way Champlain , Winnipesaukee and Sebago can have big fast boats. Heaven knows there litertally thousands of small lakes and ponds all across New England for the under 11 or 12 foot crowd. There you could sail , paddle or just float and enjoy the surroundings in total serenity knowing your safe.
I've paddled kayaks and canoes along with sailing sunfish , sailfish , moths , comets , k-boats , and stars and there are places on Winnipesaukee I wouldn't take them regardless if there were NO other boats around.

[frank m.]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

So kayakers have to restrict themselves to just shorelines and small bays, so some powerboats can use the main lake at insane speeds? How fair is that? And I’m not suggesting paddling in the high traffic areas, but what if I just want to cross a section of the main lake?

Evenstar,
Please stop selfishly trying to deny these guys their right to "share" the lake with you. This is NH, the "live free or die" state. If you were a true Granite Stater, you would either stay near to shore (where kayakers and old people belong) or buy yourself a 40-footer and join them. This is all about "rights" to use the lake. Stop trying to limit theirs just so you can enjoy yours. you are so selfish.

[PROPELLER]

Frank, if you truly were in favor of safety on the lake you would support a bill eliminating most boats & jetskis on the lake wouldn't you? Because 12' jetskis, 18' bowriders, bass boats, cruisers, center console fishing boats(need I go on) are all capable of causing accidents, inflicting serious damage, causing death to boaters, swimmers, kayakers(need I go on).

Oh, let me guess you probably own a boat that would be eliminated in such a bill. Now we wouldn't want to infringe upon your right to use your boat.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

... The lake is for everyones use. So how fair is it for you to expect a powerboater to not enjoy the lake in his way? If someone does not feel safe then that is their issue & they should do what they need to do to feel safe but that does not mean that the powerboater is doing anything wrong. ....

So a powerboater should be able to "enjoy the lake his way", even if it prevents others from enjoying the lake? So what am I supposed to do to feel safe, when some powerboaters are traveling 15 times faster than me? Maybe that's exactly what this law is the result of ... people like me who are just doing "what they need to do to feel safe".

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

... P.S. Are you infering that boaters do not love the water with your quote at the bottom?

That's just a well known kayak quote, that I happen to like. I'm not trying to infer anything by it. All boaters obviously love the water.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Audiofn

Evenstar:
It does not matter to me if I am in a Sailboat or power boat. The faster I go the more I concentrate on what I am doing. If I am sailing in my fathers Hinkley then I can put the auto pilot on trim out the sails and enjoy the slow sail and do nothing. If I am in my 470 or International 14 or sailboards, then it takes every bit of my concentration. Same thing with power boats. All the speed boaters that I know when they drive fast we concentrate. You look forward, watch the waves, watch for any boats in the area and throttle. If you do not then things can go wrong fast just as they can in the high performance sail boats. ...

It's a simple fact that the faster you go, the more distance you cover in the time that it takes you to react. Do you really expect me to believe that reaction times get faster when you go faster?

And we're talking about speed limits here, so a high performance sailboat would also have to respect a lake's speed limit.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Cal

Interesting point , just like horses and bicycles aren't allowed on major highways and interstates , perhaps small boats should be banned from big lakes and big boats banned from small lakes.
That way Champlain , Winnipesaukee and Sebago can have big fast boats. Heaven knows there litertally thousands of small lakes and ponds all across New England for the under 11 or 12 foot crowd. There you could sail , paddle or just float and enjoy the surroundings in total serenity knowing your safe.
I've paddled kayaks and canoes along with sailing sunfish , sailfish , moths , comets , k-boats , and stars and there are places on Winnipesaukee I wouldn't take them regardless if there were NO other boats around.

Perhaps a better way would to be to only allow NH residents to use NH lakes. Now I'm not actually endorsing that, but it makes about as much sense as what you are suggesting.

Apparently you don't know kayaks very well. My avatar image is a 16' sea kayak. That's the type of kayak that I'm planning on taking on Winni. A sea kayak is make for very large bodies of water, not for small lakes and ponds. A sea kayak is not 11 or 12 feet long, but 14 to 22 feet long.

[PROPELLER]

Power boaters are not preventing you from enjoying the lake. You are welcome to use it any time you want. You are not banned from using it. You explained in your 1st post about a power boater that probably was not going any where near the 40 mph speed limit but you did not feel safe. Should we ban all powerboats because YOU do not feel safe? No, the existing laws should be enforced & that operator would have been cited by the Marine Patrol if they were there. There are many kayakers that do & feel perfectly safe.

45 mph is approximately 10 times faster than most kayakers. 45 mph is still alot faster than a kayaker.

If someone does not feel safe because they do not like powerboats around or they do not like boats that to them is too loud (there is a noise ordinance already, and they do test for it) then a lake like Winni is not for you anyway. Or you can chose to use it at a time when its not peak powerboat time.

I do not know any powerboaters who dislike kayaks or feel they should not use the lake. Why shouldn't all users of the lake be tolerant of all other activities as long as its done responsibly & all laws are obeyed. Whats wrong with that?

P.S. Who ever quoted it first must have felt boaters only like boats & not the water. Otherwise why would they say it. Its not very PC, I'm offended as a boater.

[rickstr66]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

Hey my current kayak is made for large lakes, and I'm trading that one in this spring for a larger one. So when I kayak on Winni this summer, it with be in a sea kayak ... which is a kayak made for going on the open ocean. Winni is not too large for kayaks. We have as much right to be on this lake as anyone.

One of the arguments the "anti go fast boat" people make is that those boats are made for the ocean, just like your new Kayak, and that is where those boats belong...... on the ocean. Would you want to be told that since you own sea kayak..... take it out on the sea? See where we are comming from? I would never try and restrict your access or use of ANY body of water. All we are asking is dont restrict ours. BTW I own a bass boat which im sure they consider a go fast boat.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

Power boaters are not preventing you from enjoying the lake. You are welcome to use it any time you want. You are not banned from using it. You explained in your 1st post about a power boater that probably was not going any where near the 40 mph speed limit but you did not feel safe. Should we ban all powerboats because YOU do not feel safe? No, the existing laws should be enforced & that operator would have been cited by the Marine Patrol if they were there. There are many kayakers that do & feel perfectly safe.

45 mph is approximately 10 times faster than most kayakers. 45 mph is still alot faster than a kayaker.

If someone does not feel safe because they do not like powerboats around or they do not like boats that to them is too loud (there is a noise ordinance already, and they do test for it) then a lake like Winni is not for you anyway. Or you can chose to use it at a time when its not peak powerboat time.

I do not know any powerboaters who dislike kayaks or feel they should not use the lake. Why shouldn't all users of the lake be tolerant of all other activities as long as its done responsibly & all laws are obeyed. Whats wrong with that?

P.S. Who ever quoted it first must have felt boaters only like boats & not the water. Otherwise why would they say it. Its not very PC, I'm offended as a boater.

I have nothing against powerboats. I never suggested that we ban powerboats from Winni. And a 45mph speed limit would not ban any powerboatsI have an issue with feeling safe around boats that are traveling at high speeds, and with any boaters who do not obey the laws.

No matter how you try to look at this, the fact is that 45 mph is a safer speed than 75 mph.

I'm sorry if you're offended by my quote. But you're reading into it a lot more than you should be, after all, kayakers are also boaters.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

Power boaters are not preventing you from enjoying the lake. You are welcome to use it any time you want. You are not banned from using it. You explained in your 1st post about a power boater that probably was not going any where near the 40 mph speed limit but you did not feel safe. Should we ban all powerboats because YOU do not feel safe? No, the existing laws should be enforced & that operator would have been cited by the Marine Patrol if they were there. There are many kayakers that do & feel perfectly safe.

45 mph is approximately 10 times faster than most kayakers. 45 mph is still alot faster than a kayaker.

If someone does not feel safe because they do not like powerboats around or they do not like boats that to them is too loud (there is a noise ordinance already, and they do test for it) then a lake like Winni is not for you anyway. Or you can chose to use it at a time when its not peak powerboat time.

I do not know any powerboaters who dislike kayaks or feel they should not use the lake. Why shouldn't all users of the lake be tolerant of all other activities as long as its done responsibly & all laws are obeyed. Whats wrong with that?

P.S. Who ever quoted it first must have felt boaters only like boats & not the water. Otherwise why would they say it. Its not very PC, I'm offended as a boater.

I have nothing against powerboats. I never suggested that we ban powerboats from Winni. And a 45mph speed limit would not ban any powerboats. I just have an issue with feeling safe around boats that are traveling at high speeds, and with any boaters who do not obey the laws.

No matter how you try to look at this, the fact is that 45 mph is a safer speed than 75 mph.

I'm sorry if you're offended by my quote. But you're reading into it a lot more than you should be, after all, kayakers are also boaters.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by rickstr66

One of the arguments the "anti go fast boat" people make is that those boats are made for the ocean, just like your new Kayak, and that is where those boats belong...... on the ocean. Would you want to be told that since you own sea kayak..... take it out on the sea? See where we are comming from? I would never try and restrict your access or use of ANY body of water. All we are asking is dont restrict ours. BTW I own a bass boat which im sure they consider a go fast boat.

Please don't lump me in with other people's views. I never wrote or even suggested that any type of boat should be banned from Winni.

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

So a powerboater should be able to "enjoy the lake his way", even if it prevents others from enjoying the lake? So what am I supposed to do to feel safe, when some powerboaters are traveling 15 times faster than me? Maybe that's exactly what this law is the result of ... people like me who are just doing "what they need to do to feel safe".

That's just a well known kayak quote, that I happen to like. I'm not trying to infer anything by it. All boaters obviously love the water.

Well in fact what I am saying is that for a large part people that drive high performance power boats do have very quick reaction time. You have to to know how to throttle one. People who do not know how to drive one just DO NOT UNDERSTAND what it takes. You do not just jump in the thing and push the throttles forward and sit back. There is a lot that you have to do and it all takes quick reaction times. So in fact I would say that there is a good chance that my reaction times are better then most.

However lets take reaction times out of the picture and say that we all have the same reaction times (there is plenty of proof that this is not true but just for arguments sake). What my point was above is that when you go faster be it in a car, sailboat, power boat what ever, most poeple concentrate quite a bit more on what they are doing. People that drive around in small bow riders from what I have seen are not as well aware of their surroundings as most of us that drive fast and will just turn with out looking, come to close (as happened to you with the jerk in the cruiser), or even take them out in conditions that they just should not be in. I have on more then one occasion seen guys out with bow riders and the waves coming over the bow because they hav 10 people in their 18 foot boat. At any rate ALL of the close calls that I have had on that lake have been while traveling at slow speeds NONE of them while traveling fast. I have no interest in going close to another boat. I have no interest in pissing off some guy in a Kayak and ruining his day. I run my boats in the middle of the bays were it is safe to do so and I think that most of the guys that run speed boats are the same.

Jon

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

I have nothing against powerboats. I never suggested that we ban powerboats from Winni. And a 45mph speed limit would not ban any powerboats. I just have an issue with feeling safe around boats that are traveling at high speeds, and with any boaters who do not obey the laws.

No matter how you try to look at this, the fact is that 45 mph is a safer speed than 75 mph.

I'm sorry if you're offended by my quote. But you're reading into it a lot more than you should be, after all, kayakers are also boaters.

No it does not kick us off the lake however it does keep us from using our boats to their full potential. I mean if you just spent 150-500K on a boat so that you could go 80 or more MPH then I think that you would be upset, no? However lets forget all that as no one has shown a lick of evidence that a speed limit will help. That is because it does not exist. Lake George has one as has been mentioned. Guess what they have found it to be totally impossible to enforce. Unless you are in a bay hauling past boats close no one there will pull you over for speeding. However common sense says that you do not do that so is the limit really required. I am still for more boater knowledge then boater limits.

Jon

[winnilaker]

My grandmother doesn't like to drive on the highways, cause the crazy drivers go really fast. (reality most are doing the speed limit)

So your theory is since you don't feel safe we should change the laws. Maybe we should lower our highway speeds while we're at it, so my grandmother would feel safe. She likes 35 mph, be long a trip to the white mountains doing 35mph on 93.

I know, sacarsm at its best. But laws are design to resolve problems from facts and to accomondate society's growing needs. I bet there was a time when New Hampshire was beautiful when only horse carts traveled the road ways. But we all know, horses can't travel on the highways now.

As my previous post stated, I'm all for a speed limit IF it would make our lake safer. Doing 75 in a boat designed to safely go 75 is just as safe as doing 45 in a boat designed for 45. Did you know there is a law already on the books for reckless boating which has a misdemeaner penalty, any issues brought up in this thread would fall under that law and it carries a higher penalty, the proposed speed limit is only a violation.
Getting hit by a boat doing 35 in a kayak, still gonna hurt when the driver is not obeying the current laws.

[PROPELLER]

Evenstar, as has been said in earlier posts, the speed limit even though it does not ban a specific kind of boat has the same effect. High performance boat engines do not run at their optimum efficiency & the hull is not giving you the optimum ride at a speed of 45 or less. However, it will at 50-60. Thats why many of us against the speed limit think that the supporters are using 45 mph, why not make it 60 or 65 mph? Because they are not so interested in limiting speed as they are trying to eliminate a class of boat they do not like.

The fact that you may not FEEL safe does not translate into you ARE NOT safe. You are just as unsafe or dead at 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45 mph. If a boat keeps the proper distance so as not to create an unsafe condition whats the problem? Like you said in your 1st paragraph, last sentence you have a problem with boaters who do not obey the laws like the one in your first post, that was not a speed issue, it was an unresponsible operator issue. We should all have a problem with boaters who do not obey the laws. I have a problem with any boater who may come too close (under 150') at any speed.

P.S. My comments about the quote were tongue in cheek. If I were that thin skinned I would not be posting on this forum.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

Perhaps a better way would to be to only allow NH residents to use NH lakes. Now I'm not actually endorsing that, but it makes about as much sense as what you are suggesting..

Was that for MY benefit , being an out of stater??


[/QUOTE=Evenstar]Apparently you don't know kayaks very well. My avatar image is a 16' sea kayak. That's the type of kayak that I'm planning on taking on Winni. A sea kayak is make for very large bodies of water, not for small lakes and ponds. A sea kayak is not 11 or 12 feet long, but 14 to 22 feet long.[/QUOTE]


Yes , as a matter of fact a friend has an Ocean kayak. And strangely enough I've never seen one more than maybe 100 yards off the surf. I know I certainly wouldn't want to get caught in the Broads with a fast moving thunderstorm rolling in . Lets face it sea kayak , ocean kayak , canoe , row boat , surf board can go anywhere the skipper wants , but sometimes disgression should over rule your ego .

[gtxrider]

There enough laws on the books they just need to be enforced. But how do you do that? More MP may be the answer but I don't see it happening.

It's not the size of the boat but the boat operator.

[restauranteer]

Well, I gave up.

Couldn't get Frank M. or HALCLYON to fess up whether their Winnfabs group was legit or not. So, with some spare time (and no spatula) on my hands, I decided to give some of my local legislators a ring on this subject.

Boy, is it hard to get a hold of some of these people!

Anyway, here's the skinny from the folks good enough to give me some time today.

The Bill as proposed is dead, will never come out of committee as currently written. No support in the general legislature for it for a number of reasons:

The 45 mph limit proposed is simply an arbitrary number with no statistical or scientific data to back it up.

No support from the State, in particular the MPs. Apparently they are so undermanned and underfinanced now, when they were unable to make a dent in the violations occuring above 45 mph, they'd spend more time fielding complaints than handling them! Until the MPs get more funding and support for current regulations, look for little more in the way from the legislature in "piling it on" to the agency. Contrary to popular belief, fines collected from violations go mainly to the court system, not to the issuing agency (wow, would never know that reading the posts here).

The legislature is overwhelmed with school funding, budget deficits, ethics scandals, etc. Most of the legislatures have no first hand knowledge of the Winni issues, see it as a minor blip not worthy of time/effort. Told that since accidents are so far and few between, when balanced with what goes on around our roadways everyday, most wish everyone would just "grow up" over this issue and quit wasting their time (wow, really sensed some frustration here).

The squeaky wheel has squaked too much, the same hadful of people are supposedly doing the complaining, and quite frankly some are tired of hearing the same old doom & gloom. One legislator jokingly pointed out that after hearing a local marina owner complain about sppeding boats, he took the time to visit that individual's web site. Lo & behold this guy had a number of go fast boats for sale at that same marina! The hypocrisy did not sit very well with this particular legislator.

All said they would entertain a well thought out piece of legislation that had sound data to back it up, if & when it could get the backing of the MPs.

So, the issue does not to completely dead. Somehow, somewhere and sometime there might be statewide legislation governing speeds on lakes & ponds. But it appears a long way down the lake!

Phew, that's it....I did my homework, I'll post no more on this subject....don't want to be accused of overgrilling a dead horse!

Sorry Franky & HALCY, good shot....looks like you need to get your ducks lined up a little better....but there's always next session!

Salute!

[frank m.]

Originally Posted by Cal

perhaps small boats should be banned from big lakes.

Cal,
This is a great idea. You should make this recommendation at next week's committee hearing. Or better yet, see if you can get a bill introduced. If nothing else, I think it would do so much to expose the mentality that we are contending with here.

[Island-Ho]

Audiofn hit the nail on the head. This bill is about LOUD boats that also happen to go fast. I am not in favor of imposing a speed limit on the lake, I don't think that should be necessary. I have no objection to a boat traveling down the middle of the broads at 75 mph, but I don't want to hear it for the entire length of the run. I do object to listening to the relative peace and quiet of the lake disturbed by a GFBL tearing across the broads at 7 am or 9 pm with his thru hull direct pipes resonating off the islands. There is no sound on this lake that carries as much and is quite as disturbing as one of these boats that can be heard for miles and miles. There are plenty of GF boats on the lake that are quiet, and I don't object to them. The issue has been discussed previously, but why not retrofit a decent muffler system on these boats and remove the reason for the objection to them on the lake in the first place. Please don't tell me these pipes are legal: Some probably are and others are probably not. They are objectional to many people. Yes, it might cost a few mph on the top end, and a few dollars out of pocket, but wouldn't it make a significant contribution to solving this entire issue? That said, with the current state of the issue, I would probably support a speed limit on the lake, especially at night, if it would help remove some of these boats from the lake and contribute to a quieter environment for all.

[FormulaOutlaw]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

You weren't intimidated.
I wasn't intimidated.
Formula Outlaw apologized...for some reason.
Perhaps the "intimidatee" needs to clarify.
BTW: Do you find the GFBL quote "Too bad he has only two knees" offensive?



You mean:
1) Static?, like "parked" at a dock near a bar? Or...
2) Dynamic? like what percentage of GFBLs take up the most acreage on the lake? -- Per Second?


It's important to know, because the more GFBLs are out tearing up Winnipesaukee speeding, the ratio of GFBLs on the lake increases. (Conversely, the ratio of family-boaters decreases).

Acres, if you spent any time at all in either of these two threads on speeding, you would know why I apologized. (hint: it was to Bear Lover) I have a suggestion, take ten minutes and you'll know the answer. I'm not stating it again. If you can't spend the time to find out the answer, then it must be not important enough to keep posting about it.

I asked a simple question. Other people have answered that simple question. Then you come back with this complex theory of gobbility goop.

Let me rephrase the question so that maybe you'll understand:

On any given weekend, how many GFBL type boats are enjoying Lake Winnie?


I'll even make this easier for you. I'll make it multiple choice:

A) 1 to 3 %
B) 4 to 5 %
C) 6 to 10 %
D) over 10 %

Thank you......FO

p.s. your theory is all wrong because a single boat only takes up "X" amount of space regardless of how fast or slow it may be moving. As it moves from space "A" to space "B", space "A" is now free of boat, thus that space is now "open".

[Joe Kerr]

Originally Posted by Audiofn

People do not look were they are going. In that case there is no helping them but to take their boat away from them......

You are right. Many boat accidents are due to boaters not seeing what is around them. You would think that good vision would be a prerequisite for a safe boater. It has been mentioned on the forum a few times over the years. We have our vision checked when we get a driver's license but not for a safe boating certificate.

Not only do we want boaters to pay more attention to their surroundings they should have the ability to see their surroundings. You can be legally blind and still receive a boater education safe boating certificate which allows you to legally drive a boat.

What good is knowledge of the 150 foot rule if you can not see things 150 feet away?

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by frank m.

Cal,
This is a great idea. You should make this recommendation at next week's committee hearing. Or better yet, see if you can get a bill introduced. If nothing else, I think it would do so much to expose the mentality that we are contending with here.

Well thank you for showing your mentality on the subject.

I would find it hard to believe that was anything other then a joke

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Island-Ho

Audiofn hit the nail on the head. This bill is about LOUD boats that also happen to go fast. I am not in favor of imposing a speed limit on the lake, I don't think that should be necessary. I have no objection to a boat traveling down the middle of the broads at 75 mph, but I don't want to hear it for the entire length of the run. I do object to listening to the relative peace and quiet of the lake disturbed by a GFBL tearing across the broads at 7 am or 9 pm with his thru hull direct pipes resonating off the islands. There is no sound on this lake that carries as much and is quite as disturbing as one of these boats that can be heard for miles and miles. There are plenty of GF boats on the lake that are quiet, and I don't object to them. The issue has been discussed previously, but why not retrofit a decent muffler system on these boats and remove the reason for the objection to them on the lake in the first place. Please don't tell me these pipes are legal: Some probably are and others are probably not. They are objectional to many people. Yes, it might cost a few mph on the top end, and a few dollars out of pocket, but wouldn't it make a significant contribution to solving this entire issue? That said, with the current state of the issue, I would probably support a speed limit on the lake, especially at night, if it would help remove some of these boats from the lake and contribute to a quieter environment for all.

I can understand your objection to the noise of the boats. However, I must say that myself and a lot of my friends have gone through some HUGE expenses over the last few years to make sure that our boats comply with the law. I know of a few people that have special inserts to put into their exhaust so that when they are on Lake Winni they are legal and are willing to do so happily and yes they do loose a few MPH. At any point THERE IS ALREADY A NOISE LAW ON THE BOOKS and it IS enforced. I know because a few years back I was asked to leave, fixed the issue and have not had a problem there since. FYI it cost me almost 5,000 bucks to quite my boat, and others I know have spent similiar money if not more, so it is not a cheap thing but if that is what it takes to comply with the law then I am fine with it.

Jon

[Audiofn]

Hey APS:
I have a question for you. You in one of your posts said that at slow speeds we can not see over our bows. So why do you want us to go slow? Wouldn't that according to your logic make us more dangerous?

[Bear Lover]

Originally Posted by Audiofn

Hey APS:
I have a question for you. You in one of your posts said that at slow speeds we can not see over our bows. So why do you want us to go slow? Wouldn't that according to your logic make us more dangerous?

The "real truth" is that we don't want you to slow down. We want you to take your boats to a body of water that is appropriate for them.

Be honest, when this speed limit passes that is exactly what you will be doing, right!

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Bear Lover

The "real truth" is that we don't want you to slow down. We want you to take your boats to a body of water that is appropriate for them.

Be honest, when this speed limit passes that is exactly what you will be doing, right!

No contrary to your beliefe my boat even though my boat is capable of speeds much faster then the proposed speed limits due to conjestion in most area's I rarely get to go faster then say 40. So I will still be coming just as often as I do now and so will every one else. So your ploy to get us big bad bullies off your lake may need a new direction. You will just have to listen to our motors for that much longer as it will take that much longer for us to get from point A-B.....

Again Bear do you have one LICK of evidence that shows that we are a danger to anyone more so then any other boat on the lake? I am still waiting for any evidence that you have other then your insistance that we just do not belong on the lake. See this really bothers me as I have every right to be on the lake as you do.

[Belmont Resident]

You guys need to pull your head out of wherever it is your keeping it.
I think you’ll find there are many of us out there who are able to drive safely even at what you consider unreasonable speeds. As has been stated before the MP who are also against a speed limit have the ability to stop people whenever they deem it is in the best interest of safety.
Hopefully it will be taken into consideration where the people pushing this bill reside from. If they are from out of state then their opinion shouldn’t matter anyway because they are not residents, weekend warriors do not count even if they own million dollar homes. But we appreciate their generous tax dollars providing good schools for NH kids.
Either way I think you will find the opposition to any speed limit to be far too great to overcome.
Besides who’s going to enforce it the MP? The same people who spoke against it? Makes me wonder just how much effort will be placed on enforcement.

[Bear Lover]

Originally Posted by Audiofn

So I will still be coming just as often as I do now and so will every one else.

That's not what has happened on other lakes, is it? When the bill passes there will be lots of long slips available on Winni.

I don't need to prove speed is dangerous. And why I want you off the lake doesn't matter.

I don't know if a speed limit will pass this year. It may be next year or five years from now, but it will pass. And in your heart, I think you it. That is the way things are going these days. You may slow down the process but you will not stop it.

Before long the only place you will be able to go fast is "Offshore".