![]() |
![]() |
|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Calendar | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 340
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
I will apologize in advance for the length of this post. However, I think it is important to understand why the speed limit supporters feel it is necessary.
First, I would like to know if there are any statistics that are specific to Winnipesaukee detailing the number of accidents involving more than 1 boat in the last 1, 2, 5, 10 years etc and if there are how many involved serious injury, property damage or both & how serious the injuries or damage was. If these are available is there any information explaining how fast the boats were traveling at impact etc. I am asking about this because to me this is what should be used to support or not support a speed limit. I am also asking because in my observations while on the lake and in following the news I am only familiar with 1 tragic accident on a summer evening in Meredith that falls into this category & by all accounts the offending boat did not appear to be exceeding any of the proposed speed limits. Other than this 1 accident the only other incidents I hear about with any frequency at all are ones like a canoe capsized or I recall a couple summers ago that some one fell off a pontoon boat in the evening of off Diamond Island. If these kind of statistics can not be produced then the speed limit supporters are in favor of HB162 for some other reason or reasons. At this point, I can only speculate. Lets take a stab at it. They do not feel safe when out on the lake because they perceive that too many boats are going well in excess of 45 mph. First, what some one thinks a boats speed is & what it really is could be 2 different speeds. Secondly, because the vast majority of boats on Winni are not capable of exceeding 50 mph, many are not capable of exceeding 40-45 mph how could it be true that too many boats are traveling well in excess of 45 mph? Lastly, even with some boats exceeding this proposed 45 mph limit, what evidence is there that this is not safe? I'm not hearing about collisions at high speeds & if they were happening believe me you would hear about it. It would be big news just like the tragedy in Meredith. I'm not hearing about collisions at low speeds either. Next possible reason, too many boats? although I do not believe Winni is too crowded yet, in my opinion. This is a moot point since being too crowded has nothing to do with speed. There is another reason. The speed limit supporters have alluded to the fact that high performance boats make too much noise. There is a noise ordinance or illegal db level but apparently they are not happy with this ordinance. I will speculate on this, because they are not happy with the noise ordinance they think that if they can pass a speed limit that will make high performance boat owners so unhappy that they will not frequent Winni, this will solve their noise problem. Again, this is a moot point since this is not speed related because even at 45 mph the noise is more than the speed limit supporters can bear & apparently they are not interested in supporting a different noise law that may solve this problem. There is one other possible reason that I have stated in previous posts. Some, not all, just don't like high performance boats for no specific reason, just don't like them & would rather see them go somewhere else. Again this is not related to speed but a speed limit appears to be the only way to possibly rid the lake of these kinds of boats. So where does this leave us? Unless there are the statistics that I referenced earlier in the post, we are left people that support a speed limit because they perceive that they are not safe(without statistics to support them), too many boats, which is not a speed related issue & is a perception or opinion not a proven fact, too much noise which is already regulated but not to their satisfaction & also not related to speed, don't like high performance boats, again not related to speed but maybe the only way to get rid of these boats. This post is not meant to chastise speed limit supporters. I am just trying to understand where they are coming from. If these reasons I have discussed here are why they are in support of HB162, I understand them but I do not agree that they should be used by legislators as a basis for passing HB162. Statistics showing that speed in excess of 45 mph is causing too many collisions with property damage & injuries is what the legislators should be demanding before they consider passing HB162. |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,966
Thanks: 80
Thanked 980 Times in 440 Posts
|
![]()
Frank,
Quote:
What do you mean problems the road cops had years ago? The speed laws already had plenty of teeth, the radar just enabled them to do thier job easier. Then of course the insurance guys got involved. Radar is great in straight line application, such as highways and roads. The diagram Radar #1 shows how & why it works so well in that application, its really a simple geometry problem. Radar has enabled alot less arguing in court over speed citations. The State Police ask for more manpower and better equipment every year. They do a great job with what they are given to work with. However, the Legislature has asked the State Police to provide a "Demonstrable Need" in order to receive any increase in funding. Why, because NOBODY wants to pay for it! There is a cost associated with a speed limit law, the cost of expensive naval search & tracking radar equipment, the cost of maintaining the equipment, the cost of specialized officer training, the cost of hiring additional officers, the cost and burden to the legal system for appeals, etc. etc. How do you propose to pay for all of this? Maybe enact some sort of fee for using Lake Winnipesaukee? They have one at Lake George! I already expect or Marine Patrol to enforce our existing rules and regulations and to cite flagrant violators of ANY rule! There is already a reckless operation law on the books as well as an operator negligence law. Both of these laws are arrestable offenses and carry far heavier penalties that a speed limit citation. Just look at the trial last year, and speed was not a factor. As for speed limit violation statistics, I would like to see a breakdown of speeding citations issued for excessive speed in a no wake zone vs citations issued for speeding out in open water. I'll bet the majority of citations issued for speeding are in no wake zones! If anyone has those statistics, please post them! (and from what lake) here is the link to the Lake George State Park Fee Structure: http://www.lgpc.state.ny.us/boat_reg.htm Yes, the whole Lake is a State Park! Your average boater (24' boat, not an overnighter) would have to pay an additional $37.50 for an annual registration just to use his/her boat on lake Winnipesaukee. The day trippers would have to pay $7.50 a day! I am sure that would go over big with everyone! Bear Islander.... Call Kustom Signals and ask them.... specifically if the handheld radar you mentioned can determine the target vessels bearing and speed relative to the operating officer? I did! It can't! If it cannot do that then it cannot give an accurate reading of the target vessels speed. It is simple geometry! The Falcon Marine Radar is essentially a hand held radar that has been marinized, and by marinized I mean it gives speed readout in knots as well as mph and has been made water resistant. It does not and cannot give the target vessels bearing (course) relative to the officer. It will give you a range, however, that is measured in a straight line from the officer. See my diagram Radar #2. It seems mostly for use in enforcement of no wake zones hence the 1/10th MPH adjustment, where boats are forced to travel slower and within a marked lane of travel. See the similarity to highway use yet? Laser Radar suffers from the same issues as electron based radar, in that in only works in a straight line, and cannot give the target vessels bearing relative to the MP officer. Laser also suffers a drawback when used against boats in that most boat surfaces are curved plastic, so the light does not reflect back properly. There are probably less than 10 boats on Winni capable of exceeding 90mph. That doesn't mean that these boats are operated at 90mph all the time. Why should they have to find a new place to recreate just because you don't like them? If people have a hard time judging 150', its a pretty sure bet they are just as bad at judging the speed of another boat relative to their own! Again I challenge ANYONE to post some empirical data from Lake Winnipesaukee that shows speed was a major contributing factor in an accident! There is absolutely NO DEMONSTRABLE NEED for a speed limit. Absolutely no justification exists for the costs and burdens that a speed limit impose on the tax payers, to the MP and the legal system! Better enforcement of existing rules & regulations is the answer. How to get better enforcement? Better full time MP staffing. Not more expensive unenforceble rules! Woodsy Last edited by Woodsy; 04-26-2005 at 02:15 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]()
It is easy to see by the length of the posts which side of this argument is losing momentum.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 295
Thanks: 74
Thanked 52 Times in 25 Posts
|
![]()
I have read all of the long winded posts on the speed limit and just like some of you that cannot understand the desire for a limit I cannot understand the opposition to it.
If the speed limit was 45 MPH I assume MP would give some leeway of 10 or 15 MPH. That means no stops until 60 MPH or so. How many boats out there ca go faster than that? I suspect 30% or so................judging by what I see at the docks. Of the 30% or of those folks how many are going 60 MPH? Slower is safer and there is not an argument in this world that can alter that fact.............although I am sure several of you will try. Please just use a little common sense here. As far as enforcement hasn’t anyone been stopped by MP for going to fast in a no-wake zone? Let MP worry about enforcement. I am sure they will do just fine. I do not know if the speed limit will pass BUT I do know that this is start of the process and if it is voted down this bill will keep coming up until it is passed. Makes the lake (common sense) safer for boaters, fisherman, kayakers etc. Why oppose it? ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 2,928
Thanks: 476
Thanked 691 Times in 387 Posts
|
![]()
Woodsy,
You're wasting your time asking for data, I've asked many times and get no response or a picture of a wrecked boat. I don't think there is any data or if there is, it shows there is not a problem. The 45 mph number is one pretty much pulled out of the air. What bothers me most is that the problems listed by the proponents of speed limits are not caused by excessive speed. Large wakes, noise, dangerous behavior won't be solved by a speed limit, anyone who thinks it will be is a dreamer. The other thing that bothers me are the claims that "speed estimation" is allowed as evidence in court. Humans are not equipped to estimate speed without measuring instruments (stop watch, measured distances, laser, radar). Estimating speed of one boat on the lake by eye with any reasonable accuracy is impossible. |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#6 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
That's been my exact point, but the people who want to travel at 75mph and faster keep insisting that speed has nothing to do with safety. The truth is that the faster you are going, the more distance you cover. If you don't see a small boat (like a kayak) until you are close to it, you'll be all that much closer in the time that it takes you to avoid hitting it (or not). How is that not directly related to high speeds?
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Pitman , NJ
Posts: 627
Thanks: 40
Thanked 21 Times in 12 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
Paddle faster , I think I here banjos |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gilford
Posts: 57
Thanks: 3
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
![]() Quote:
People like me who have boated in NH for 49 years that worked very hard to be able to afford a considerable investment on the ability to go over 100mph. I do it safely, at the proper time and I do not over controle the boat. Most of the time I cruise at 50 to 70 depending on the weather, thats where I get my best mpg.To force somone like me to boat some where else is not living free. PS: I have gone over 130mph and nobody noticed. I plan on buying a boat that goes over 145mph. I call it my endorphins. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
And if my 13' alumacraft gets in your path when you are going 145 mph I will not be living free either. It is incredible how the GFBL crowd just refuses to see our concerns. How many more need to die? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
It is incredible how the GFBL crowd just refuses to see our concerns. How many more need to die?[/QUOTE]
WHO HAS DIED IN AN ACCIDENT WHERE SPEED WAS THE REASON?????????????? I WOULD LIKE SOME FACTS! Last edited by jarhead; 04-27-2005 at 05:59 AM. Reason: wrong choice of words |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]()
Jarhead
How can anybody be sighted for speed when there is no speed limit? And the accident we all know about involved a speed greater than the proposed speed limit. More importantly the accident involved a boat that should not be on Winnipesaukee in the first place. |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,495
Thanks: 221
Thanked 812 Times in 488 Posts
|
![]()
Where are all the statistics on accidents reported on the lake? I would love to see one of the people pushing for a speed limit and posting here that all GFBL's are evil to get some real facts for everyone to see regarding the number of accidents in the last 5 years with their cause. How many people have died or how many accidents on the lake could be related to speed? How many to alcohol? How many to plain stupidity? I think that the results would be overwhelmingly towards alcohol or stupidity, not speed. If someone is screaming into Weirs on a congested weekend and acting reckless I can certainly see a need to rule for excessive speed but feel that this would be better handled as a reckless operation citation, not speeding. It has a much stiffer penalty and would call for witnesses instead of an opinion of a seasonal MP officer to make the sole call which could easily be refuted.
How may people are going to take speeding tickets to court? Probaby most. And to be enforced in court the officer needs to be present, this would take the patrolling officers off the lake frequently, rake up huge expenses and fill the local courts with a lot of minor infractions. "How many more need to die"? Gimme a break. How many have died? Far less than people are claiming or eluding to. I certainly do not discount the value of life but that is a bit dramatic... |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]()
These long winded posts on how radar doesn't work are like those people that argue you don't need to pay taxes to the IRS because money isn't really money or something. I don't understand either argument but I know I DO need to pay the IRS.
And I also know that even if I win in court I have already lost by having to go there. It's usually easier and cheaper to pay the fine. But even if you are right, and radar will not work on Winni, what difference does that make? NONE! Very few speeding tickets will be written because the really fast boats will all be on the Atlantic, where they should be. Go to Lake George and count the GFBL boats you find there. |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Center Harbor
Posts: 1,172
Thanks: 205
Thanked 437 Times in 253 Posts
|
![]()
Thanks Skip,
Between Woodsy's initial discussion and your expertise it seems clear to me that the speed enforcement technology is not very accurate on water. The supporters of the speed limit say that the fast boats prevent their enjoyable use of the lake with smaller and slower boats. I recognize that taking a smaller boat into the broads on a busy weekend would entail a possible increase in risk. However, wherever there is a significant mismatch in the size and power of vehicles it is not a good idea to mix them too closely. This is why we have bicycle lanes and sidewalks and why most slower means of transportation are prohibited on high speed roads. Why is it demanded that every sq. foot of Winni must be allocated and protected for smaller boats? There are many areas that are not practical for larger and faster boats that can be used comfortably and exclusively by smaller craft. The 150' rule creates a buffer zone around every piece of land that is available for slower speed craft. There are also many other lakes, some of which completely prohibit power boats. I don’t want this to be misstated to say that I think smaller boats should be restricted. The choice to travel wherever they wish is theirs and they should be given every respect and legal protection (such as yielding to them) however I think that putting restrictions on other’s use of the lake so that the smaller, slower crowd can feel comfortable is going too far. I also find it interesting that it seems to be the opinion of the speed limit supporters that if an accident happens at a fast speed then speed must be the cause of the accident. If a boat rams into a dock at 10 MPH or at 70 MPH the cause of the accident is not speed, it is operator error and illegal operation under many laws already in existence. You might even say the speed was excessive for the situation (even at 10 MPH). The purpose of a speed limit is to recognize that the conditions of operation are such that a limited speed is required. This is usually indicated by rising accident counts or excessive congestion. This may be true in some parts of Winnipesaukee where there is high traffic or limited maneuverability, especially on summer weekends. However, the statistics seem to indicate the vast majority of problems are reckless operation, drunk boating, and violation of the 150' rule. I wonder if there is an accident and the MP feels the speed was excessive if it is indicated on the accident report? You don't need a speed limit to make this observation. This would be a reasonable thing to track but until I see statistics that support excessive speed being a significant primary contributor to accidents I don't support a general speed limit on the lake. |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
Sorry Islander should have used better word than cited , how about reason ? My bad i will edit.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 340
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
J Deere says he has read all the posts, so he should know why the SL is being opposed if he read them all, so what do you not understand J Deere?
J Deere also said that there will probably be 10-15 mph leeway & that maybe true. So why isn't the proposed SL 60 mph? I'll tell you why, the supporters pushing the hardest want high performance boats off the lake period. They don't like them. 60 mph would not keep high performance boats from coming to Winni & they would still have to deal with what they think is unacceptable noise. So why not lobby to lower the db level? If the speed limit supporters & WinnFABS were truly interested in making Winni a safer lake, long before now WinnFABS would have been in existence(instead of after a speed limit was proposed)& would have been lobbying & supporting better education, strengthening the certification program, demanding more & better trained marine patrol officers, demanding increased enforcement of existing laws etc. Where were these SL proponents before HB 162? Last edited by PROPELLER; 04-27-2005 at 09:58 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 340
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
I disagree, because I believe the vast majority of high performance boats that use the lake are traveling between 50-60 mph. Lets hear from high performance operators that monitor this forum.
If your out there, is it fair to say that the majority of high performance boats are cruising in the 50-60 mph range? As far as speed crazy, I don't believe you are going to see any difference because I think this type of operator rarely comes to Winni. As I have said in previous posts, I spend considerable time on the lake & I have never observed a high performance boat endanger another boat or person because of unreasonable speed or negligent operation. Does not mean its never happened but if it was happening with any frequency at all I am sure I would have seen at least 1 incident if not a handful, I have not. |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Center Harbor
Posts: 1,172
Thanks: 205
Thanked 437 Times in 253 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Further, I would expect the MP to focus their enforcement on the worst problems. If I was an officer and saw one boat crusing the broads faster than a speed limit and at the same time saw a boat cut within 25 ft of another boat at 20 MPH I would go after the slower boat causing the more urgent danger. Yes, some speeding tickets would be written, fines would be paid, and people would generally continue to boat as they choose. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Pitman , NJ
Posts: 627
Thanks: 40
Thanked 21 Times in 12 Posts
|
![]()
Here you are Propeller. This slightly above my normal cruise of 3000 rpm which nets me 50 mph. That is where I get the optimal mileage. Above or below that the mileage drops. Above that , you must keep in mind replacement parts are expensive and I know my pockets aren't bottomless
![]() I do believe the issue is more of getting rid of a certain type of boat , namely the go fasts. Next it will be the cruisers because of their wakes , then the jetskis(at least the 2cycle ones). Next it could be you , so be careful what you wish for...you might just get it ![]() As far as me not coming to Winni...not till they ban powerboats. But then again I'm also an accomplished sailor (but don't let that be known on the "Marine Mafia" site).
__________________
Paddle faster , I think I here banjos |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 40
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
i love going up to the lake and sitting on the boat letting the waves slap against the hull. But i also love sitting down on the boat as i watch the boats fly by. a speed limit on a lake this size is just stupid. People that own lanch ramps think of how much money they would lose over the summer. nobody would come up to a lake of this great size to drive around at 45mph. Putting a speed limit on this lake would make so many people not want to come up to this wonderful place. The boats are loud, sure they are a little loud but you can't hear them inside your house. when you are sitting on your boat don't you look up when you hear the exciting noice. vvvrrrrm.. i don't know what i would ever do if they put a speed limit on this lake!!!!
![]()
__________________
live today like you wont live tomorrow Last edited by HotDog; 04-27-2005 at 07:09 PM. Reason: spelling |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
This summer take a look around, watch the dangerous activity. You'll see for every boat exceeding 45 MPH, you will see 100 boats breaking the 150' rule, and 50 boats operating otherwise unsafely. Just for background, I live in NH but not at the lake. The only motorboat I've ever owned, is a bowrider and will barely do 40 MPH. I've been on the lake with my family for 18 years and I've even kayaked on the lake. I'm not saying that people shouldn't argue for certain laws, maybe banning certain boats is a good idea. Maybe lowering the noise limits is a good idea. But there should be truth in what the reason behind a law is. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | ||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 183
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Of course there are no statistics. There were no statistics kept for many years to correlate tobacco smoking to cancer either. It was not until a means to prove the correlation was adopted that the statistics could be compiled and the correlation could be proven. Does this mean that tobacco did not cause cancer before statistics were compiled? Can we please stop having to answer the "no statistics" argument now? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|