Cabin Cruiser Operators - "WAKE UP!...no, WAKE DOWN"!

[Paugus Bay Resident]

The bottom line as I see it is that you CHOOSE to live on an island, you don't have too, you could live on the mainland. People who have cruisers choose to have them, they could have rowboats. What makes your choice higher in "priority" than there's?

[Islander]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

The bottom line as I see it is that you choose to live on an island, you don't have too, you could live on the mainland. People who have cruisers choose to have them, they could have rowboats. What makes your choice higher in "priority" than there's?

Bringing food to your home has priority over taking a joy ride.

So does taking a sick child to the doctors or rushing a family member to the emergency room.

This is just common sence and obvious. If you can't see the difference then you need to think about it some more.

[Outlaw]

The implication that island people have more rights is ludicrous, it's no more than a lashing out, and could even be construed as prejudice. Why would a person on an island deserve to have a fuel powered boat? Row or paddle you way to shore, it gets the job done. Is it realistic in the 21st century, probably not, but stating that a select few have greater rights than the masses, would this not be considered.........?

Why couldn't we impose a restriction on the size and type of boat island dwellers can have - an inflatable meets the basic requirements. Don't agree - than why should the same imposition be made on everyone else?

Freedom of choice is what we all have. I think if I were ever to maroon myself and become an island dweller, my mode of transportation would be helicopter, so I wouldn't need a boat.

[ITD]

Who cares? Islanders need boats, so what? Does this mean that people on islands should be the only ones allowed to have boats? I think not. Does this mean that people on islands should be allowed to dictate who gets a boat? Nope. Should islanders be allowed to dictate speeds? No they shouldn't. Is the true reason for most proponents of the speed limit showing? Why yes it is, they are unhappy with the number and size of boats and feel a speed limit will reduce both.

I bought a place on Winnipesaukee knowing full well that on weekends and holidays in the summer it is a busy place. Had I wanted quieter with less boats and a speed limit I would have bought "On Golden Pond" (Squam). If you want less boats and a speed limit I suggest you buy on Squam and stop trying to turn Winni into Squam.

[Paugus Bay Resident]

Bringing food to your home has priority over taking a joy ride.
So does taking a sick child to the doctors or rushing a family member to the emergency room.
This is just common sence and obvious. If you can't see the difference then you need to think about it some more.

You're either missing my point or choosing to ignore it. You CHOOSE to live on an island, you CHOOSE to have children, etc. Thankfully, you have the right to be able to make those choices and I have defended that right. I have the right to have an 80 foot boat on this lake. What about the people that would rather have a weekend cruiser to spend weekends (weeks) with their children than buy island property?


What makes your right to choose any higher in the grand scheme of things than mine? You seem to imply (sorry if I'm misinterpreting) that you have some inalienable right to live on an island and go back and forth at the expense of me having whatever kind of boat I'd like. Accept equality of choice (and freedom) and enjoy life (isn't that why you're on an island?).

My point, for my final time, is that its all about choice; your's is backed by the same higher moral authority than mine. We only make different choices (for different reasons).

[Silver Duck]

Island Lover (or, others with an answer)

I'd be quite curious to see the specific RSA(s) which grant special rights to island residents. Could one of you point me in the right direction?

So far as I've always been taught, operating a motorized vehicle upon a public way (including operating a motor boat on public waters) is a priviledge, rather than a "right", and I'd be astounded to see an actual RSA stating differently.

While a boat is admittedly a necessity for accessing island property, the island resident doesn't necessarily have to own it or be allowed to operate it. I, for one, can think of any number of instances where living on an island probably shouldn't "cut any ice", whatever, with respect to being allowed to operate a motor boat.

For instance, would you actually argue that a cronic BUI offender should continue to be allowed to operate a motor boat just because being forbidden to do so would make accessing their island home inconvenient? IMHO, this should be a case of "Tough luck; swim, paddle, or hitch a ride".

How about a scofflaw who refuses to get their safe boating certificate? Do you think that they should be allowed to operate a motor boat anyway, just because they live on an island?

Or (tragically because no wrongdoing is involved) someone that's losing their eyesight or succumbing to Alzheimers or has just plain gotten too old to be able to operate a motor boat safely? Does living on an island make it safe to continue to operate a motor boat? (Remember, WinnFabs pushed safety as a reason to promote a speed limit!)

Now, as to your crowing about the speed limit, let me remind you that it hasn't passed. What's gone into effect is a temporary experiment in two very limited areas of the lake, while the MP evaluates whether it makes any sense. Somehow, I doubt that will suffice to drive GFBLs off the lake.

What I do strongly suspect you've accomplished is to gift a bunch of island residents with speeding tickets when they take off out of the Lovejoy Sands public docks after sunset (sometimes in pouring rain or fog) like the proverbial bats out of **** and encounter an MP boat waiting, without the blue light going, out there in the darkness.

Do you think they'll be happy with WinnFabs? Do you think they'll continue to support the speed limit after getting nailed for what they've been allowed to do for years?

I don't.

Silver Duck

[Outlaw]

Three cheers for Silver Duck, excellent job.

Quack, Quack, Quack (those are the 3 duck cheers)

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

...Island Lover (or, others with an answer)

I'd be quite curious to see the specific RSA(s) which grant special rights to island residents. Could one of you point me in the right direction? ...

Good question....and I think we've been down this path with some of these same individuals before.

Simply stated, the State by RSA specifically states that "...no corporation or individual shall have or exercise in any such body of water any rights or privileges not common to all citizens of this state...".

I have attached the entire RSA below and highlighted the specific answer to your question in red.

Hope this helps.....


TITLE XXII
NAVIGATION; HARBORS; COAST SURVEY
CHAPTER 271
PILOTS, HARBOR MASTERS, AND PUBLIC WATERS
Defining Certain Public Waters
Section 271:20
271:20 State Water Jurisdiction; Published List of Public Waters; Rulemaking. –
I. All natural bodies of fresh water situated entirely in the state having an area of 10 acres or more are state-owned public waters, and are held in trust by the state for public use; and no corporation or individual shall have or exercise in any such body of water any rights or privileges not common to all citizens of this state; provided, however, the state retains its existing jurisdiction over those bodies of water located on the borders of the state over which it has exercised such jurisdiction.
II. The department of environmental services shall prepare, maintain, and publish an official list of all public waters in the state. The commissioner of the department of environmental services shall adopt rules, pursuant to RSA 541-A, relative to this publication.
Source. 1901, 9:2. PL 152:16. RL 182:17. RSA 271:20. 1977, 24:2. 1990, 177:2, eff. June 26, 1990.

[Islander]

You see what people do when they lose an argument, they pretend it was really about something else!

Who said there were any laws giving more rights to islanders.... nobody!

Who said islanders had more rights than anybody else..... nobody!

Go back and read. The question was if islanders NEED boats. The obvious answer is - yes they do. But instead of admitting they were wrong, some people want to pretend it was about islanders having more rights than others.

We don't have more right to a boat than anybody else. We do have more NEED of a boat than anybody else.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Islander

Who said islanders had more rights than anybody else..... nobody!

Maybe you should be the one that re-reads the posts...

Originally Posted by Island Lover

If I have given the impression that islanders have more rights than others to boat on Winnipesaukee, then I have done my job well. We Do!

As a fellow islander I find this line of thinking ludicrous and arrogant. We choose to have island properties (definitely not a necessity) and have the same rights as people who do not. Period. We are not special. Maybe certain people (especially on parts of Bear) seem to think that they are more so than others, but here is a little tip. You are not!

By the way...

Originally Posted by Islander

We do have more NEED of a boat than anybody else.

We NEED our boats because of our CHOICE to live on an island. If people choose to live out here year round it is their CHOICE. I am sure you can buy a nice house or condo for what your island property is worth. How's that for an option?

[Islander]

I read that and took it as a joke. But she may mean that people have more right to get to their home than others have to take a joy ride.

However there are at least 4 islanders posting in this thread, who says they are all from Bear.

Lets not start attacking people because of the island you THINK they live on.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Islander

However there are at least 4 islanders posting in this thread, who says they are all from Bear.

Lets not start attacking people because of the island you THINK they live on.

Shall I say it again? Re-read.

Does my post state "only people on Bear"? Or pertain only to this thread? Historically speaking a certain group of islanders seem to be the ones spearheading many of the complaints and crusades to change the lake and the laws pertaining to it. Guess what? Many are from Bear. It's gotta be in the water...

[Bear Islander]

I am from Bear

Do islanders have more rights to a boat than anybody else? Interesting question. We do have more need, and I think that should mean more accommodation. But nobody has a right to a boat or a right to operate one.

Not everybody on an island chose to live there.

The reason why Bear islanders are leading the push for speed limits is not the water.

[Outlaw]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Not everybody on an island chose to live there.

This is America, land of the free and the brave. Everything you do is a choice. Unless the island you live on is Alcatraz, my guess is you are there by choice. Even under house arrest you can be relocated off the island. I give the benefit of doubt though, because there are times when people loose control over circumstances and the result is they are forced to do things they may not ordinarily do.

All everyone is trying to communicate is we all make choices everyday, and whether you choose to live on an island, on mainland, in a tree, or forced to live on the streets, no one of these people, because of where they live, is entitled to more or less than the other.

No one needs a boat, no one needs a car, it's a choice we make because we want to have one based on our individual reasons.

What about the folks and 'their children' who do not have any property in the Lakes Region, but spend their vacations and weekends aboard their cabin cruiser (whatever the size) so they and their children can enjoy life and create wonderful childhood memories. This is their second home, this is what they chose to purchase. Are they now not entitled to have a boat on the lake because A) it's a cabin cruiser and/or B) they do not own island property?

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I am from Bear

Not everybody on an island chose to live there.

I seriously doubt someone held a gun to your head

[Island Lover]

Originally Posted by Cal

I seriously doubt someone held a gun to your head

Most people are on Bear because their parents, grandparents or great grandparents chose to live there. When an ancestor buys island property in 1895 and each generation grows up on the island, did the current residents choose to live on an island? Not really.

Accommodation is the right word. The higher need requires more accommodation.

[ossipeeboater]

Originally Posted by Island Lover

Most people are on Bear because their parents, grandparents or great grandparents chose to live there. When an ancestor buys island property in 1895 and each generation grows up on the island, did the current residents choose to live on an island? Not really.

Accommodation is the right word. The higher need requires more accommodation.

wow I hope not all the island owners are as arrogant as you, islander and bear islander seem to be. Just because you own on an island does not give you any more right to the lake than anyone else as established by the state law that Skip so nicely posted.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by ossipeeboater

wow I hope not all the island owners are as arrogant as you, islander and bear islander seem to be. Just because you own on an island does not give you any more right to the lake than anyone else as established by the state law that Skip so nicely posted.

Your using a very wide brush there. What statement of mine do you take offense to?

I posted "nobody has a right to a boat or a right to operate one."

I do believe that our situation requires special consideration at times. Thankfully the Marine Patrol understands the situation and towns have been very helpful by providing police boats, fire boats, public docks, mainland parking etc. Some towns even have islander only docks and parking lots.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Your using a very wide brush there. What statement of mine do you take offense to?

I posted "nobody has a right to a boat or a right to operate one."

I do believe that our situation requires special consideration at times. Thankfully the Marine Patrol understands the situation and towns have been very helpful by providing police boats, fire boats, public docks, mainland parking etc. Some towns even have islander only docks and parking lots.

Watch Out!

Some of these guys will have Skip contact the towns and tell them the law does not allow islander only parking or docks!

And the police boat gives rides to the islands for town employees like the health officer and building inspectors, that will have to stop! The police don't give them rides to mainland property so they can't be allowed to give special consideration to island property.

That is all we are asking for here, a little consideration for an unusual situation. State and local officials get that, unfortunately it is beyond the understanding of some on this forum.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Islander

Watch Out!

Some of these guys will have Skip contact the towns and tell them the law does not allow islander only parking or docks!

And the police boat gives rides to the islands for town employees like the health officer and building inspectors, that will have to stop! The police don't give them rides to mainland property so they can't be allowed to give special consideration to island property.

That is all we are asking for here, a little consideration for an unusual situation. State and local officials get that, unfortunately it is beyond the understanding of some on this forum.

Crusading to have certain types of boats from the lake to meet their own personal agendas has nothing to do with consideration. As an islander we are entitled to certain town services to be provided such as docking for islanders as we pay our own fair share of taxes (and then some), the same as someone on the mainland is entitled to receive different services such as plowing of roads, curbside waste pickup, etc.. In Gilford, we receive islander only docks and dumpsters at the dock. There is a fire boat and the town does send inspectors out to do what is needed, although the town also receives money back from us in payment for this (taxes, building permit fees, etc). This is our "consideration".

What other consideration do you expect? It's our choice to live where we do.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Crusading to have certain types of boats from the lake to meet their own personal agendas has nothing to do with consideration. As an islander we are entitled to certain town services to be provided such as docking for islanders as we pay our own fair share of taxes (and then some), the same as someone on the mainland is entitled to receive different services such as plowing of roads, curbside waste pickup, etc.. In Gilford, we receive islander only docks and dumpsters at the dock. There is a fire boat and the town does send inspectors out to do what is needed, although the town also receives money back from us in payment for this (taxes, building permit fees, etc). This is our "consideration".

What other consideration do you expect? It's our choice to live where we do.

I think I see what codeman's problem is. It's not about being islanders. He agrees with us about the need for special consideration. It's the fact that we support speed limits that he is angry about.

Islanders DO have a RIGHT to back any legislation they choose. Speed limits and horsepower limits are coming. And I will continue to crusade about them with or without your approval.

Skip - Not sure what your point is. For a long time this thread has been about if island residents require special consideration or not.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Islander

I think I see what codeman's problem is. It's not about being islanders. He agrees with us about the need for special consideration. It's the fact that we support speed limits that he is angry about.

Islanders DO have a RIGHT to back any legislation they choose. Speed limits and horsepower limits are coming. And I will continue to crusade about them with or without your approval.

Skip - Not sure what your point is. For a long time this thread has been about if island residents require special consideration or not.

Yes and no.

I do see the need for the town to provide certain accomodations (they'd better do something for what we pay in). Does this however give us more right to the lake than others? Nope. Not at all.

You are welcome to vote on whatever you choose, just because my views on speed limits and hp limitations are not the same as yours I do not fault you on it. I do have a problem with some of the tactics that have been used to crusade for this and the underlying motives that drive this. This is another topic (one that has been covered before) for another thread...

What lit me up was the comments about having more rights to the lake than others, followed by comments of how island life was basically forced on them. People make choices and there is certain necessities in life, island living is not one of them. I am sure many people would love such a thing to be forced on them...

[Islander]

codeman

I think the word "rights" was only used once and has been withdrawn.

I think the comments about choosing to live on an island were misunderstood on both sides. One side was talking about island life being voluntary while the other was talking about how they came to be islanders. Most islanders did not "choose" island life, but love it and will not leave it.

It's kind of like religion, most people didn't choose their religion, but they stay voluntarily.

[Seaplane Pilot]

This thread was started to discuss the problems with large waves, not as a boxing ring between islanders and non-islanders. Now - back to the problems with large waves.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Islander

...Watch Out!

Some of these guys will have Skip contact the towns and tell them the law does not allow islander only parking or docks!. ...

Originally Posted by Islander

...You see what people do when they lose an argument, they pretend it was really about something else!...

Thank you Islander, I couldn't have said it better myself, and you did it all within the same thread!

[jeffk]

Any local government has the responsibility to accept the reality of the conditions that exist in the locale that services must be provided for. For example, in a city with multistory buildings it would be negligent for the fire department not to have extensible ladder trucks. Fire services are provided to all residents. The tall buildings must be "accommodated".

However, where is the line drawn? If children live on an island must a town provide "school bus boats" or should it be the responsibility of the parents to bring the child to a shore location where the bus could pick them up?

Everyone has a some choice of where they live. Property is easily transferred. You make a choice every day to either live where you are now or move. Just because you don't want to move doesn't mean you can't. An ancestor may have made the original choice but you own it now. You also have the responsibility to deal with the consequences of your choice.

If I decide to live a remote rural area and the nearest grocery store is 20 miles away and the nearest doctor is 100 miles away am I entitled to to free transportation or a subsidized car? If I can't manage the transportation to needed facilities maybe I need to move closer to them or within an area that at least has public transportation. I probably don't want to move but I might have to.

I, for example, don't look at towns providing reserved dock space for island residents as an "accommodation" but instead as a unique perk. This is not a service provided to any other resident. If a shore resident of the same community threw his boat in the water for the day, could he use "island docking" for a while if he needed to run to the store for more soda? The town doesn't even provide me with garbage pickup. Why should they be "accommodating " anyone with free reserved docking? Why can't the island residents band together and buy a docking area for their use?

The statement " a higher need requires higher accommodation" is illuminating. My answer is, "No, it doesn't". It may require more work by the person with the needs to get what they need. They might even have to make some trade offs. If you have a serious medical condition, you might have a very high need for prompt medical service. However, by placing yourself on an island you create a barrier to that need. Is it up to the town or anyone else to meet the unique need you have created or is it up to you to move to a more accessible, although less desirable, place?

Finally, in a silly attempt to remain true to the original topic of this thread, large displacement boats can be a hazard not only to the shoreline but to other boats as well. Perhaps there should be some training and usage guidelines for these boats but I could say the same for many types of boats. I think it is unfortunate that some people can't seem to accept the responsibility for the reasonable use of the vehicles they own but we have plenty of "boneheads" out there. I just don't think it's right to punish the majority of responsible boaters for the stupidity of the few.

[Island Lover]

Originally Posted by ossipeeboater

wow I hope not all the island owners are as arrogant as you, islander and bear islander seem to be. Just because you own on an island does not give you any more right to the lake than anyone else as established by the state law that Skip so nicely posted.

If the shoe fits.....

You are very arrogant in your complaint about our arrogance.

I don't think my post that you quoted was arrogant at all. Sometimes the way a post is read is not the way it was intended. Your preconceived notions can insert a flavor the author did not include.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Island Lover

Most people are on Bear because their parents, grandparents or great grandparents chose to live there. When an ancestor buys island property in 1895 and each generation grows up on the island, did the current residents choose to live on an island? Not really.

Accommodation is the right word. The higher need requires more accommodation.

Again, you chose to be there. So it was in your family, if it was passed down to you and you didn't want to be there you could sell it and profit handsomely. It is your choice to be there! You do not have to be a current resident. You don't have to be a resident at all.

Higher need? Come on...It is a priviledge to be on an island as far as I am concerned. One that many can't afford with todays property values.

You make it sound so tough to have something passed down to you. I feel bad for you.

[Island Lover]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Again, you chose to be there. So it was in your family, if it was passed down to you and you didn't want to be there you could sell it and profit handsomely. It is your choice to be there! You do not have to be a current resident. You don't have to be a resident at all.

Higher need? Come on...It is a priviledge to be on an island as far as I am concerned. One that many can't afford with todays property values.

You make it sound so tough to have something passed down to you. I feel bad for you.

I not sure what your problem is with island residents. Who said living on an island was tough? It's great!

What difference does it make if we chose to live here or inherited? None! I was just answering the question as to how some people got here.

As has been pointed out living on an island requires accommodations not required to mainland dwellers. And for the most part we get them. We don't get many of the town services, like schools, for our tax dollars. So it is only fair that we receive accommodations in the form of some docks, parking and a fire boat. If you think this is so unfair take it up with the towns.

The Meredith selectmen have been very good to the islands over the years. Why don't you contact them and tell them how unfair that is to other boaters.

[ITD]

I wonder if some of these entitlement comments made it to the Meredith newspapers if the Meredith voters would be so eager to help out island residents, probably not.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Island Lover

I not sure what your problem is with island residents. Who said living on an island was tough? It's great!

What difference does it make if we chose to live here or inherited? None! I was just answering the question as to how some people got here.

As has been pointed out living on an island requires accommodations not required to mainland dwellers. And for the most part we get them. We don't get many of the town services, like schools, for our tax dollars. So it is only fair that we receive accommodations in the form of some docks, parking and a fire boat. If you think this is so unfair take it up with the towns.

The Meredith selectmen have been very good to the islands over the years. Why don't you contact them and tell them how unfair that is to other boaters.

Try reading my last post to Islander before writing such a ridiculous response... I am an islander! I am clear on what is requires and am fine with what the town provides. My problem is with people (in this case certain islanders) that make it sound like they were forced into this and expect the rest of the lake to bow to their every need. I will say it once again, being on an island is a priviledge (I think that makes 3 times)... The level of entitlement that certain people seem to expect is a bit over the top.