Results!!!!! No Wake

[Island-Ho]

What a cop out by the powers that be. 600 feet is no better than the normal 150 feet as far as wake effect on docks and shorelines. I plan to be at the lake, and will certainly comply with the 600 foot rule and more. I need my boat to get to my island property, but once there I will enjoy the lake from non-motorized vessels. I had no problem keeping to headway speed last time this was imposed, even for my 2 mile ride. Just think, you can even talk to your passengers without shouting. I can't believe people are actually changing their plans because they have to slow down within 600 feet of shore instead of 150 feet, but thank you anyway. The lake should be a little less hectic than normal this weekend.

[gtxrider]

From what I am reading the lake is not closed there are speed restrictions. Go out and enjoy a nice leisurely cruise see the sites. Some of us don't have the chance this weekend to be at the lake.

How about some cheese with the whine?

[Lake Lady 6]

The NWZ rule is in effect officially 600 feet from shore. Unfortunately it is difficult for most people to visualize the distance from shore and most do not care.
I have been working outside all day and have observed about 2 out of 10 boats observing the NWZ. The boats that have been coming from the West Alton Marina area and heading to the west side of Rattlesnake have been among the worst offenders. Only one boat was going at headway speed. Have the marinas posted the official notice??
Perhaps the boaters are aware of the NWZ rule and choose to ignore it - they should stand on shore and see the effect as the wave increases as it rolls in.
You can't legislate common sense, courtesy or concern for others - there will always be a Capt. Bonehead on the water.

[John A. Birdsall]

I will also not be putting my boat in this weekend, but that has not changed my plans I leave for the State in one hour. I think that a speed limit has been placed on the lake. Never mind 25 or 45, It seems odd that this happens but it is something we all can live with, it won't be long. I think people will find it difficult to judge the 600' rule, and then also perhaps have to apply the 150' rule. Needless to say I hope that this Memorial Day will not cause anyone to have additional memorials to do, So Drive safe, drive responsibly either on land or on water. God Bless America!

[Aquadeziac]

Lets see what happens Tuesday. Everyone will be home again, and then they can make the NWZ lake-wide. The merchants will have full pockets. There will be that much more unnecessary property damage done. But the all-mighty dollar will still rule. Seems to me that if these people have to lay out more and more money for property damage that could have been avoided, thats that much less revenue for the crying shopkeepers to rake in over a longer amount of time than just a three day weekend. Disposable income now becomes necessary income. Real tunnel vision, wouldn't you say? I don't recall this much whining in 1998 when the lakewide NWZ was in effect over the Fourth of July holiday.

[Belmont Resident]

Since many are so concerned why not take a proactive approach?
Call the marinas and ask if they have signs posted letting boaters know about the rule.
Or better yet print some out and post them yourself, I'll bet the marinas will not mind.
I found out only by mistake and I live here.

[Grant]

Well, you can mandate "now wake," but that doesn't mean people will comply. And the 600 feet does nothing. A big "belongs-in-the-ocean" boat came blowing by our place last evening, probably going 40-50 MPH, and a good 500-800 feet out. The resulting wake was a good as if he'd been 200 feet off shore.

[SAMIAM]

Aquadesiac...that was a pretty rude and thoughtless remark..."crying shopkeepers" indeed.In case you haven't noticed,there is very little industry in the lakes region.Tourism is the very engine that drives the economy.
Those of us in business got rained out two weeks in a row.We badly need a successfull holiday weekend,especially after a winter with no snow.
I don't think anyone is totally happy with the 600' rule,but it shows a little compromise on both sides.
The "almighty" dollar,as you call it,is what paves the roads,keeps schools open,provides fire and police service.Look at the bright side....at least you won't have to rake your beach.

[NFFL]

Very well said MJP!

[Lakegeezer]

The rule is sort of working up north of Moultonboro bay. I'm in an area where safe passage is less than 600', so everyone passing by should be leaving no wake. Lots of big boats out, and all but a few are going slow until they hit the big part of the bay. The bass boats and the midsize cruisers (23'-28') are the worst scofflaws today. Many bass boats are going by slow, but at maximum wake speed. Don't they get it? The midsize boats are the ones that don't seem to care at all, and just fly by with the family on board. When blasted with an airhorn, they just wave. I'd guess 80% compliance overall. The shoreline is taking a beating when the captain boneheads go by, but its not continuous. Better than last weekend, and much better it would be with no rule at all. No power boating for me today. I'm going out shopping, to show the local businesses that no-wake doesn't mean no money.

[DRH]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

I'd guess 80% compliance overall. The shoreline is taking a beating when the captain boneheads go by, but its not continuous. Better than last weekend, and much better it would be with no rule at all.

I'd say it's about the same over our way today in West Alton ... probably 80% compliance. The other 20% either don't know or don't care about the 600' restriction.

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

The midsize boats are the ones that don't seem to care at all, and just fly by with the family on board.

Again, it's much the same here. Most of the performance boats we've seen today seem to be complying.

Considering that it's Memorial Day weekend, boat traffic seems to be relatively light overall.

[GusMan]

jkjoshuatree,

Yes, my note was in reference to your claim that anyone who altered their vacation plans due to the nowake restriction on winnie was "foolish".

That is an arrogant statement whether you meant it or not. To decide that you know what's best for *anyone* other than yourself is just plain silly. Furthermore, you imply that changing ones plans is a case of "whining" about the no wake zone.... not necessarily. I'm fairly confident that most of the people who heard about the nowake zone and chose to go elsewhere know that the lake has much to offer.

I'm not looking for an argument.....

I never whined, nor commented about the no wake zone... I simply turned left onto route 104 West (instead of East) and travelled over to Newfound and had a glorious day cruising (or bombing) around on an almost deserted lake and managed to land a few nice smallies to boot. For *MY* purposes... it was a much better option than my original plan of heading to winnie for the day.

Pretty simple, huh??

I truly hope *all* property owners survive these conditions with minimal damage...

Gusman

[ApS]

Boats here were so "all over the map" with respect to distance to shore, there was no point in determining a percentage of No-Wake compliance. Since most of my day was doing carpentry on the dock, a perpetrator-based rating system was in order—"A" being the best on the lake:

1) Outboards (All, irrespective of speed) should rate a B+ in dock-rocking.
2) Pontoon boats rate an "A"
3) Jet-Skis aren't in the running—Okay, an "A"
4) Ski-boats and wake-boats get a "D"
5) Remaining inboards: "D-"

An airhorn was used twice pre-emptively on two light cruisers, with 50% effectiveness. (One slowed to headway—one "didn't hear".)

A NW wind piped up at about 3:20PM: That wind, combining now with the boat wakes, repeatedly crashed the dock and pegged the dock-rocker meter. (The surface of a large water-filled garbage can). Some very large wakes appeared "out of nowhere".

One funny encounter earlier this morning was two inboards heading towards one another at ¾-throttle -- about 200' offshore. When they came within 600' of one another, they slowed to "headway speed". When clear, they took off again.

Talk about "Not Clear on the Concept"!

All in all? Not too bad—with two more days to go.

[Winni]

Originally Posted by GusMan

jkjoshuatree,

I'm not looking for an argument.....

... I simply turned left onto route 104 West (instead of East) and travelled over to Newfound and had a glorious day cruising (or bombing) around on an almost deserted lake
Gusman

First of all, this is not the kind of forum where people use that kind of language. I am surprised the web master even allowed your post!

Second, the people here are not trying to tell others how to behave. They are worried and concerned about the loon nests, the otter nests (which we have on our neighboring land) and other wildlife that live at the edge of lakes...something you apparently care little about. They are worried about the safety of the general public who might be hurt by the debris in the water. And, they are worried about the land, docks, boats, etc. many, not just they themselves, have poured their hearts and souls into, in most cases, to maintain.

So, that was really nice of you to go mess up the shores of Newfound instead of Winnipesaukee. I'm sure the otters, loons, and people whose docks are underwater on Newfound are appreciative of your generosity.

If you are this disrespectful in your writing, I'm not surprised you don't recognize arrogance when you see it in the mirror.

[VarneyPoint]

Originally Posted by MJP

So, that was really nice of you to go mess up the shores of Newfound instead of Winnipesaukee. I'm sure the otters, loons, and people whose docks are underwater on Newfound are appreciative of your generosity.

MJP,
Before you go accusing GusMan of doing something utterly destructive to Newfound Lake, maybe you should do some research. According to the DES Dam Bureau website, the height of Newfound Lake is right where it is supposed to be and is not at all flooded. He didn't do anything wrong. In fact, bravo to him for thinking outside the box.

http://www.des.state.nh.us/RTi_Home/...found+Lake+Dam

[Winni]

Originally Posted by VarneyPoint

MJP,
Before you go accusing GusMan of doing something utterly destructive to Newfound Lake, maybe you should do some research. According to the DES Dam Bureau website, the height of Newfound Lake is right where it is supposed to be and is not at all flooded. He didn't do anything wrong. In fact, bravo to him for thinking outside the box.

First of all, I don't think I accused him of "something utterly destructive", but more like being inconsiderate and thoughtless. Newfound's levels are one thing, but I know that lake well and it is certainly not the size or character of lake anyone should be "bombing" around on at any time. Also, the tone and words used in his post were not, I believe, appropriate for this forum. I'm sorry you didn't like my comment, but I think his was just grossly inappropriate.

Now, if he had said respectfully something like, "I looked up Newfound's levels (and, are you even sure he knew that before he went there?) and finding them to be at normal levels, spent a nice day fishing there instead," then I wouldn't have had a problem. But, that's not what was said or how it was said.

As for Newfound, did you happen to notice in those charts how rapid the draw down was from the dam? Don't you wonder how the people below that dam feel about that? Imagine if that were done at Winnipesaukee? Good grief! I imagine there is someplace I can go look up if that rapid draw down did do damage, but frankly I'm getting off this computer today and going out to enjoy our beautiful weather for a change.

Anyway, none of this diminishes the fact that the NWZ on Winni. should have been lake-wide, not just for 600ft., and it was just a wrong decision by the governor. Many of you are saying you see 80% compliance, but it only takes one big jolt of waves from one boat to do damage. 20% is still 20% too many. I've had enough of this, though. I hope you all have a nice weekend. Get outside and enjoy it!

(p.s. In another thread, Bizer says Newfound had been 28" above level on 5/15! Ya' think they might have been a little nervous there about boats out on their lake this weekend regardless of what the charts show? Also, Right On!, JK; we are all in this together!)

[Coolbreeze]

WOW! It is amazing how fast the topic of not enough water in the lake can go polar opposite...too much water. YIKES!!

[Winni]

Just in for lunch and wanted to report what I'm observing as boaters zip around Little Mark Island...full speed ahead! No 20% observance here! They're barely even observing the 150 ft. rule! As I said right along...the MPs should have had a boat stationed in each of the large bays. This whole thing has become nothing but a joke. It may just take a little longer for the waves to hit shore. I could practically build a whole new dock with the stuff washing up on our shore! Groan....

And...uh, mcdude...I wouldn't be out there in my kayak today if my life depended on it; 'cause it would. What a mess!

[jkjoshuatree]

Originally Posted by GusMan

jkjoshuatree,

Yes, my note was in reference to your claim that anyone who altered their vacation plans due to the nowake restriction on winnie was "foolish".

That is an arrogant statement whether you meant it or not. To decide that you know what's best for *anyone* other than yourself is just plain silly. Furthermore, you imply that changing ones plans is a case of "whining" about the no wake zone.... not necessarily. I'm fairly confident that most of the people who heard about the nowake zone and chose to go elsewhere know that the lake has much to offer.

I'm not looking for an argument.....

I never whined, nor commented about the no wake zone... I simply turned left onto route 104 West (instead of East) and travelled over to Newfound and had a glorious day cruising (or bombing) around on an almost deserted lake and managed to land a few nice smallies to boot. For *MY* purposes... it was a much better option than my original plan of heading to winnie for the day.

Pretty simple, huh??

I truly hope *all* property owners survive these conditions with minimal damage...

Gusman

First of all Gusman,


Nice language. You're a class act.

Second of all, you should read my post(s) again. I never called anyone foolish. There was a quote from another forum member that I used.

You're missing the point completely.

I'm just letting people know that Winni has a lot to offer in all of its surrounding towns and areas and it'd be good if we could take care of the environment, businesses, and property of lakeside owners all at once.

After all, we're all in this together.


Jk

[Winni]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

Since many are so concerned why not take a proactive approach?

Well, I tried the proactive approach, but that doesn't work either. I've been watching these monster boats, who claim they make no wake on plane (right....), zipping by my place since Thursday, and it's now Saturday morning. I tried calling the governor's office. I tried calling the Marine Patrol multiple times. Last night I even brought them a nice big hunk of someones dock with a lot of nice long nails sticking out of it that washed up onto our boat ramp as an example of the deathly salad of trash floating out in the middle of our bay.

I got lambasted for all this effort. All I'm trying to do is get the Marine Patrol to understand that "dispatching" is not the answer. It doesn't work with the 150 ft. rule and it's not going to work with a 600 ft. rule. By the time these selfish people go blasting by, they are long gone before a Patrol boat can be "dispatched"! Who, by the way, is going to say they were 601 ft. away or 599? How can you ever read their numbers or identify them as anything but a "red boat"? (Sound familiar? It's just like the 150 rule. We've been through all this with the same arguments about the 45/25 limit and look where it got us.)

My suggestion to the Marine Patrol was to post patrol boats in each of the large bays around the largest lakes as deterrents. (Yes, I know they need to answer emergencies first.)

Perhaps by doing this, just as you naturally slow down when you see a policeman on the side of the road with his lights flashing (admit it; we all do it), it would at least slow down some of these people somewhat. But, instead of my suggestion being "heard", as usual, all I seemed to get were the excuses. This is no different than saying the 150 ft. rule will take care of everything; it doesn't work. This rule won't help either. Those who care will comply. Those who don't won't.

As for posting hand written, non-official signs at marinas, are you kidding? The people blasting their monster boats around this weekend are so arrogant they aren't going to care what's posted there! They don't under normal circumstances care about others and they won't now. Their only interest is in their own misguided adrenaline rush as they screw it to the rest of us.

Sorry, I don't want to be mean, but this IS the reality (see my tag) and yes, the proper word to use is "arrogant"!