Proposed Law

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Cal

If the study is accurate, and no boats are speeding, then enforcement will not be a problem.

Perhaps you should explain that to Woodsy in the other thread. He thinks enforcement will be a huge problem, and cost lots of money.

The opposition can't have it both ways. Is there a speeding problem on Winni or not?

If there is no speeding problem now, if almost nobody is going over 45, then a speed limit will not inconvenience anyone. If there is a speeding problem now, then I submit we need a speed limit.

Anyway the real question about the study is its accuracy. Not who it favors. I think most people on both sides realize the way the data was collected was idiotic. Clearly Woodsy believes enforcement will be extremely difficult, expensive and disruptive to the power boating community. If the study were accurate, how could that be so?

Why do you call it a speeding problem? What incidents/accidents have been the result of speeding on the lake? How many have there been in the last 5 years?

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by chipj29

Why do you call it a speeding problem? What incidents/accidents have been the result of speeding on the lake? How many have there been in the last 5 years?

Since you asked for it, here's my definition of a speeding problem:

1.) Boats that are traveling at over 15 times as fast as the maximum speed of other boats.

2.) Personally having powerboats come well within my 150 foot zone, because they don't see me in time and are traveling too fast to stay further away.

3.) Knowing that I have less than one second to live, unless a speeding boat is able to avoid hitting me in that last second.

4.) Having friends who won't paddle with me on Winni, because "powerboats goes so fast there."

5.) The fact that Winni isn't even listed in kayak and canoe guidebooks as a lake to paddle on.

When people like me have posted of the problems that we have personally experienced on the lake - which are a direct result of high speeds, we are made fun of, called liars, told that we are exagerating, and told that we have unreasonable fears.

Apparently you'll only consider speed to be a problem when someone like me is killed by a speeding boat. The problem exists, and everyone knows it. Some people are just too selfish to admit it.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

4.) Having friends who won't paddle with me on Winni, because "powerboats goes so fast there."

5.) The fact that Winni isn't even listed in kayak and canoe guidebooks as a lake to paddle on.

Some people are just too selfish to admit it.

Sounds like a two year old in a power-play with Mom or Dad...

and, yes, some people are just to selfish to admit that a speed limit is not necessary.

Why?

Because the 150' rule and making yourself visible to others while paddling will cure the [strike]reasons[/strike] excuses for your fears.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by GWC...

Sounds like a two year old in a power-play with Mom or Dad... and, yes, some people are just to selfish to admit that a speed limit is not necessary. Why? Because the 150' rule and making yourself visible to others while paddling will cure the [strike]reasons[/strike] excuses for your fears.

So your mature response is to make fun of me (again).

Let's see, the pro-speedlimit group argues that a speedlimit will make the lake safer for everyone. And the anti-speedlimit group argues that they have a right to go really fast - even when their actions have a negative impact on many other boaters. Which group is more like a spoiled 2-year-old?

There is nothing funny about NH residents feeling that their largest lake has become too dangerous to use - because of the high speeds of some powerboats. My kayaking friends are not timid people. If the lake is so safe, why isn't it listed in a single paddling guide? Squam is listed - and so isn't lake Champlain (which is considerably larger than Winni).

I have posted (many times) that one of the main reasons that we need a speed limit is that, when they are traveling at high speeds, some operators apparently don’t see smaller boats until they are closer than 150 feet. It is also true that the faster a boat is traveling, the less time the operator has to avoid an object in its path, or to stay outside of the 150 foot limit. For these reasons, I feel that a speed limit will result in a reduction in the number of 150 foot violations, which will make the lake safer for everyone.

As far as making myself more visible: My 16 foot sea kayak has a bright red upper hull, a white lower hull, my paddle blades are bright orange, my PFD is red, and my dry top is bright orange. My best friend's kayak is just like mine, only it's upper hull is bright yellow. Yet some high-speed boat operators still break the 150 foot rule before they notice us in time.

Speed is the issue here. In good weather, I can usually spot other kayaks when they are a mile away. It's amazing how much more you can see (or notice) when you just slow down.

High-speed boaters have even hit islands on Winni - I guess we need to make islands more visible as well.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

And the anti-speedlimit group argues that they have a right to go really fast - even when their actions have a negative impact on many other boaters.

Will you please just try to be even a little right when you write. The "anti-speed limit" crowd has pointed out that the speed limit crowd cannot support their erroneous, scare tactic, trumped up, proven untrue assertions. This is an effort to eliminate a class of boats off the lake. While being trumpeted as a safety issue, data, tests and common sense have shown that a speed limit will not help safety. In fact common sense dictates that a speed limit will divert limited resources away from programs that truly do enhance safety rendering the lake LESS SAFE.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by GWC...

Sounds like a two year old in a power-play with Mom or Dad... and, yes, some people are just to selfish to admit that a speed limit is not necessary. Why? Because the 150' rule and making yourself visible to others while paddling will cure the [strike]reasons[/strike] excuses for your fears.

You really don’t have any right here to make fun of my posts, just because you don’t agree with me.
There’s nothing funny about NH residents feeling that their largest lake has become too dangerous to boat on.
How is supporting a lake speed limit bill being selfish? This bill only requires the fastest boats to slow down to what I and many others consider to be a reasonable speed. It doesn’t ban any type of boat from any part of the lake.
Making the lake(s) safer is the reason that most NH residents are in favor of the lake speed limit bill. The “right” to go faster than 45 mph is the main reason against it. I testified at last year’s transportation committee hearing and heard all the testimonies. It was obvious that most those in opposition felt that their “right” to go fast was more important than the safety concerns of others – because it is “fun to go fast”. So which side is acting more like a spoiled two-year-old?

My 16-foot sea kayak’s upper hull is bright red, it’s lower hull is white, the blades of my paddle are bright orange, my drytop is bright orange, and my PFD is red. My friend’s kayak has a bright yellow upper hull. I really don’t know how anyone can not see us! Yet some high-speed boaters have not noticed us in time to stay out of our 150 foot zone.

The 150 foot rule isn’t protecting us if others are traveling so fast that they don’t notice us in time. Speed is the problem here, not visibility. I don’t have trouble seeing other kayaks – but I’m traveling around 5 mph, not at 60 or 70mph.

Here's a video of what 70MPH looks like: http://www.nwfdailynews.com/article/8695 Would this guy be able to see a kayak in time? It is extremely dangerous to continue to allow speeds of 70mph (and faster) on lakes that are used by much smaller, and much slower boats.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

Here's a video of what 70MPH looks like: http://www.nwfdailynews.com/article/8695 Would this guy be able to see a kayak in time? It is extremely dangerous to continue to allow speeds of 70mph (and faster) on lakes that are used by much smaller, and much slower boats.

70 MPH was obviously too fast for the conditions. Those conditions would probably be unsafe for my boat at 40 MPH. Not sure what a speed limit has to do with that video though, that was just someone being a jackass and beating the snot out of a nice boat. The operator was even cited for his recklessness, even though there's no speed limit where the video was shot. NH Marine Patrol could do the same today, regardless of the outcome of the bill.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Dave R

. . .Not sure what a speed limit has to do with that video though, that was just someone being a jackass and beating the snot out of a nice boat. The operator was even cited for his recklessness, even though there's no speed limit where the video was shot. NH Marine Patrol could do the same today, regardless of the outcome of the bill.

What a high speed boat looks like on the water has everything to do with the speed limit bill. That was the best video that I could find of a boat traveling at 70mph - if you know of a better on, please post it.

Visibility has never been much of a problem for me with slower boats, but it has been a major factor as boats travel at higher speeds. This is because high speed boats are closing the distance between other boats on the lake in less time - and it takes a faster boat longer to stop or the avoid another boat. Those are all facts, and are not hype or exaggeration. Boats have violated my 150 foot zone because they were traveling too fast and didn't see me in time. That's a real issue and one that I feel a speed limit will improve.

Originally Posted by ITD

Will you please just try to be even a little right when you write. The "anti-speed limit" crowd has pointed out that the speed limit crowd cannot support their erroneous, scare tactic, trumped up, proven untrue assertions. This is an effort to eliminate a class of boats off the lake. While being trumpeted as a safety issue, data, tests and common sense have shown that a speed limit will not help safety. In fact common sense dictates that a speed limit will divert limited resources away from programs that truly do enhance safety rendering the lake LESS SAFE.

My statement that the anti-speedlimit group argues that they have a right to go really fast - even when their actions have a negative impact on many other boaters is totally accurate. I was at last year's hearing and their "right to go fast" was their main argument. They also repeated refused to believe that the safey concerns voiced by other boaters were legitimate.

Anyone with any common sense knows that it becomes more dangerous as speeds increase. You now have some boats that are traveling at speeds that are 15 times (or more) faster than other boats on the lake - I (and many others) see this as being very dangerous. You don't.

As I've stated many times, I just want boats to slow down - I'm not part of a conspiracy to ban any type of boat from any part of the lake.

[bilproject]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

What a high speed boat looks like on the water has everything to do with the speed limit bill. That was the best video that I could find of a boat traveling at 70mph - if you know of a better on, please post it.

Visibility has never been much of a problem for me with slower boats, but it has been a major factor as boats travel at higher speeds. This is because high speed boats are closing the distance between other boats on the lake in less time - and it takes a faster boat longer to stop or the avoid another boat. Those are all facts, and are not hype or exaggeration. Boats have violated my 150 foot zone because they were traveling too fast and didn't see me in time. That's a real issue and one that I feel a speed limit will improve.



My statement that the anti-speedlimit group argues that they have a right to go really fast - even when their actions have a negative impact on many other boaters is totally accurate. I was at last year's hearing and their "right to go fast" was their main argument. They also repeated refused to believe that the safey concerns voiced by other boaters were legitimate.

Anyone with any common sense knows that it becomes more dangerous as speeds increase. You now have some boats that are traveling at speeds that are 15 times (or more) faster than other boats on the lake - I (and many others) see this as being very dangerous. You don't.

As I've stated many times, I just want boats to slow down - I'm not part of a conspiracy to ban any type of boat from any part of the lake.

You are correct when you say I am lumping all kayaks together when they are out in open water. I do not know your equipment or ability but i do know that you are very hard to see in the open water even if my boat is going 25. I am concerned for you and other paddlers putting yourself in a bad situation with or without a speed limit. With the number of kayaks now on the lake, many being piloted by children, I believe some restrictions are necessary. A speed limit will not make you safe. It will make me in my power boat safer as overtaking speeds of visible boats will be reduced. The reduction in speed ratio between a power boat going 65 or 45 and a kayak going 4mph will have little or no impact as you are to small on open water to see from any great distance. Remember that when you post a speed limit, you are lumping all boaters together with Capt. Bonehead.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by bilproject

You are correct when you say I am lumping all kayaks together when they are out in open water. I do not know your equipment or ability but i do know that you are very hard to see in the open water even if my boat is going 25.

Here’s what I posted just yesterday:

Originally Posted by Evenstar

My 16-foot sea kayak’s upper hull is bright red, it’s lower hull is white, the blades of my paddle are bright orange, my drytop is bright orange, and my PFD is red. My friend’s kayak has a bright yellow upper hull. I really don’t know how anyone can not see us! Yet some high-speed boaters have not noticed us in time to stay out of our 150 foot zone.

In good weather conditions I can spot most other kayaks as far as a mile away. The most visible part of a kayak are the blades of the paddles – because they are moving up and down. The blades of my paddle are bright orange. Since my friend has a dark paddle, she has attached white reflective tape to hers, which makes them very visible. It has been my experience that anyone who is paying attention and is traveling at a reasonable speed seems to be able to spot us pretty easily and does not seem to have any trouble keeping out of our 150 foot zone. Unless your eyesight is really poor, you would not have any trouble spotting us at 25mph. (When visibility is low, due to the weather, we try to stay near the shore.)

A speed limit will not make you safe. It will make me in my power boat safer as overtaking speeds of visible boats will be reduced. The reduction in speed ratio between a power boat going 65 or 45 and a kayak going 4mph will have little or no impact as you are to small on open water to see from any great distance.

Speed has a major impact – here’s why: A boat going 45mph covers 66 feet every second. At 70mph it covers 102.7 feet per second. If a boat is 300 feet away from me and heading directly at me, it takes the 45mph boat 4.6 seconds to reach me. At 70 mph, the boat will reach me in just 2.8 seconds. At a speed of 45 mph, the operator will have nearly twice the amount of time to see and avoid me - and I have nearly twice as much time to try to paddle out of the way.

Remember that when you post a speed limit, you are lumping all boaters together with Capt. Bonehead.

We need a speed limit for several reasons. Boats on the lake have been steadily increasing is size and speed - and even PWC are getting faster every year. In my opinion, a 45/25 speed limit is too fast – I would rather see a 40/15 limit, but 45/25 will be safer than what we have now, and seems like a fair compromise.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

Speed has a major impact – here’s why: A boat going 45mph covers 66 feet every second. At 70mph it covers 102.7 feet per second. If a boat is 300 feet away from me and heading directly at me, it takes the 45mph boat 4.6 seconds to reach me. At 70 mph, the boat will reach me in just 2.8 seconds. At a speed of 45 mph, the operator will have nearly twice the amount of time to see and avoid me - and I have nearly twice as much time to try to paddle out of the way.

4.6 - 2.8 = 1.8 seconds, as in one Mississippi, two Mississippi, splat!!!

So, besides soil yourself, what exactly do you plan to do in 1.8 seconds to save your life, that is?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

"...It has been my experience that anyone who is paying attention and is traveling at a reasonable speed seems to be able to spot us pretty easily..."

Sometimes, "pretty easily" isn't attention-enough:

Originally Posted by ITD

"...I spend most of the summer on the lake and only occasionally see a boat going over 45 mph..."

Hey...something I can agree with!

However, one violator that I reported to the MPs was going somewhere between double and triple that number. The [strike] captain [/strike] driver turned out to be a VERY wealthy Tuftonboro neighbor.

Another [strike] captain[/strike] driver makes gas trips two/three times a day and goes past me at about 60-MPH.

He's really easy to spot because he always trails his stern docking line—and leaves his boarding ladder down!

Originally Posted by bilproject

"...analogy on the interstate..."

...is irrelevent: everybody on Interstates is going in the same direction.

Originally Posted by bilproject

"...Someone will want to see how fast they can go down the broads..."

With the ocean only an hour away?

Originally Posted by GWC...

"...After all, this is a family oriented Forum..."

You're not being treated "like family"?

Originally Posted by GWC...

"...So, besides soil yourself, what exactly do you plan to do in 1.8 seconds to save your life, that is...?"

As one who has had to paddle from a speedboat myself, that seems like enough time to leave about half a kayak behind, say, in Moultonboro's moonlit waters.

Originally Posted by GWC...

2 miles x 1 mile = 2 sq miles
(2 miles + 1 + 1) x (1 mile + 1 + 1) = 12 sq miles
What happened to the other 60 sq miles of the Lake?
Not good enough for you? Great! Then there is no need for a speed limit on the 60 sq miles of the Lake that you prefer not to use.

Here's a look at your kayaking area (2 miles x 1 mile = 2 sq miles)...

First, consider the Lake's static and dynamic environment:

Static:
Red-pencil the Graveyard, the Witches, Middle Ground Shoals, all other shoal waters: add No-Wake-Zones, a 150' border around all mainland shorelines, a 150' border around all 253 islands, and the lake shrinks—a lot.

Dynamic:
Subtract each speeder's Acres/Second coefficient and "Safe Passage" margins, and there's not much left of the lake to enable reckless speeds.

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

"...Yeah... I hate speed...!"

Include me: my avocation for 24 years is in-car racecar driving instructor.

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

"...Having seen plenty of overweight "go-fast, bolster boys" climb out of their well-padded and very expensive go-fasts...it's obvious that lots of you guys could benefit from the physical exercise of paddling a kayak. Maybe you want to give a kayak a try..."

"Bolster Boys"? Sounds better than "Cowboys".

For real physical exercise, try breaking the night speed limit with one of these:

Originally Posted by Evenstar

"...Sea kayaks are designed for large bodies of water, and most sea kayakers have no trouble handling fairly large waves...my sea kayak can handle conditions that would be too rough for many small powerboats..."

Even recreational kayaks can handle conditions too rough for speedboats:

[bilproject]

Originally Posted by GWC...

4.6 - 2.8 = 1.8 seconds, as in one Mississippi, two Mississippi, splat!!!

So, besides soil yourself, what exactly do you plan to do in 1.8 seconds to save your life, that is?

GWC making fun of this is not helping reach a solution. You would actually have the whole 4.6 seconds to respond. The point is though that the boater does not see the kayaker. Since neither have esp any correction the Kayaker makes may be matched by the boater or the boater may stay on course and a near miss takes place. Accidents are almost a comic (if they don't result in trajedy) collection of events that occur. This is true of car accidents, boats or industrial accidents. I spent 18 years in a corporate safety department and believe me in most accident investigations you would say that those involved were the most unluckey people. However, as in this case of small vessel vs large vessel, slow speed vs. high speed, certain things are in place to make the accident likely to happen once all the other bad karma comes together. Reducing speed does help reduce the likelyhood of an accident but does not prevent it. Reducing speed will now give the kayaker in this example 2.6 seconds to dip their paddle in the water. The other 2 seconds will go to their brain processing the situation and reacting. The idea of restricting small boats along with a speed limit is getting some traction with lawmakers. At least I have only received positive responses to the email I sent to them all. My hope is to see an amendment or more study into the total problem so all are satisfied and safe.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by bilproject

GWC making fun of this is not helping reach a solution. You would actually have the whole 4.6 seconds to respond. The point is though that the boater does not see the kayaker. Since neither have esp any correction the Kayaker makes may be matched by the boater or the boater may stay on course and a near miss takes place. Accidents are almost a comic (if they don't result in trajedy) collection of events that occur. This is true of car accidents, boats or industrial accidents. I spent 18 years in a corporate safety department and believe me in most accident investigations you would say that those involved were the most unluckey people. However, as in this case of small vessel vs large vessel, slow speed vs. high speed, certain things are in place to make the accident likely to happen once all the other bad karma comes together. Reducing speed does help reduce the likelyhood of an accident but does not prevent it. Reducing speed will now give the kayaker in this example 2.6 seconds to dip their paddle in the water. The other 2 seconds will go to their brain processing the situation and reacting. The idea of restricting small boats along with a speed limit is getting some traction with lawmakers. At least I have only received positive responses to the email I sent to them all. My hope is to see an amendment or more study into the total problem so all are satisfied and safe.

Originally Posted by Evenstar

Speed has a major impact – here’s why: A boat going 45mph covers 66 feet every second. At 70mph it covers 102.7 feet per second. If a boat is 300 feet away from me and heading directly at me, it takes the 45mph boat 4.6 seconds to reach me. At 70 mph, the boat will reach me in just 2.8 seconds. At a speed of 45 mph, the operator will have nearly twice the amount of time to see and avoid me - and I have nearly twice as much time to try to paddle out of the way.

Time for some real figures:

The rule is called the 150’ rule!

70 mph = (70 x 5280’) = 369600’ in 1 hour = 102.67’ per second

45 mph = (45 x 5280’) = 237600’ in 1 hour = 66’ per second

150’ / 102.67’ per second = 1.46 seconds (70 mph)

150’ / 66’ per second = 2.27 seconds (45 mph)

2.27 – 1.46 = .81 seconds (safety factor difference between 70 mph and 45 mph vessel at 150’)

If 2 seconds are necessary mental time for avoidance decision, kayaker has .27 of a second (2.27 - 2) to paddle if approaching vessel is traveling at 45 mph.

This is the safety factor provided by the proposed speed limit.

Originally Posted by Evenstar

I can paddle 1 mile in 10 to 12 minutes.

5280’ (1 mile) in 10 to 12 minutes = 528’ in 60 seconds (1 minute) = 8.8’ per second

8.8’ x .27 seconds = 2.38’ (represents distance in straight line from time mind determines it is necessary for evasive action on current heading and does not allow any time to change course)

[Dave R]

I am still trying to figure out why people think kayaks are difficult to see in daylight. I think they are incredibly easy to spot. If one can spot spars (a necessary skill on this lake), a kayak is a piece of cake to spot. Maybe that's why NONE have ever been hit in daylight in NH. If one kayaker can spot another a mile away from that low on the water, imagine how easy it is for someone in a boat with at least 4 times the freeboard.

[Bear Islander]

I still can't figure out why kayaks should be outlawed because they might get run over by boats.

If you can't see a kayak in the daytime, don't take the helm.

If you can't spot a kayak, how can you spot a swimmer? Or is swimming in the lake to be outlawed now.

[SIKSUKR]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

If you can't spot a kayak, how can you spot a swimmer? Or is swimming in the lake to be outlawed now.

Of course not.But the point is,do you think it's a good idea for someone to be swimming in the middle of the lake with no boats next to him?I grew up on a very small lake in southern NH (Baboosic) and would not think to be out there alone.I would not go in the middle in a little rowboat and that's on a lake where no boat went more than 50 mph.I did not expect larger faster boats to see every small subject in the lake.We always stayed near shore when in small self-propelled craft.It's just comman sense and it was drilled into my head by my father.One of the first things I was taught when I learned to waterski was that if I fell and driver did not immediately turn back to protect where the fallen skier was,take off my ski and wave out of the water so other craft could see you.It's comman sense and being in small craft or swimming in a large lake should take place close to shore.My boat is only 11 ft long so I know about being the little guy out there.I spend a minimum 0f 25 days on Winni in the summer and almost all on weekends so I know about the worst conditions.The bigger boats that go 70 mph are almost never a problem.It's the Capt Boneheads in their 17 ft bowrider that is on a daytrip.Those are the ones I've had the problems with and I'm not alone.Their boats don't even go 45 mph.Speed is not the problem.Perception and scare tactics are now the problem.

[Bear Islander]

There are many things that are a bad idea, but not illegal.

There are many reasons why a swimmer can be in the water far from shore. They may have fallen of the Mount Washington, or other boat. They may have had their boat sink from under them. It could be a SCUBA diver on the surface. It could even be an irresponsible idiot availing himself of his legal right to swim across Winni un-escorted.

And if you run over any of them you better call an attorney real quick.

[SIKSUKR]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

There are many things that are a bad idea, but not illegal.
And if you run over any of them you better call an attorney real quick.

I suppose those poor people that ran over the aunt and the two children in Mass should have seen them in the speed limited highway and should now call their attorney?Unfortuanately all tragedies in life cannot be avoided and legislated for the sake of one incident.Let me give you an example that might hit home for you BI.You like risking your life going to extreme climates and I think that's awsome.If you died or someone died trying to save you from your "adventure" should we have laws that outlaw your kind of behavior?Of course not.If there were numerous occurances of these incidents then it might have some merit.We must always weigh overreacting to such things.I think over reacting is exactly whats going on with a speed limit.

[Bear Islander]

Pedestrians are not allowed on highways. And double murder with suicide is against the law everywhere. Swimming across the lake is legal.

Common sense and good judgment argue against swimming far from shore. The LAW requires the boater to keep a proper lookout.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

. . . If there were numerous occurances of these incidents then it might have some merit. We must always weigh overreacting to such things. I think over reacting is exactly whats going on with a speed limit.

But there are numerous occurances - even if many here are not willing to admit it. Collisions might be rare, but close calls seem to happen quite a bit on Winni. No agency keeps track of close calls, so there’s no real data on this. I’ve had close calls with high speed boats on NH lakes (including Winni), so I know for a fact that they do happen. And many other boaters had stated that they have had close calls. But whenever we point this out, we are told that we are exagerating (or are accused of lying).

Others feel like we are putting ourselves at risk if we venture more than 150 feet from shore. They believe that kayaks have no business going out on the main lake. For instance:

Originally Posted by Hottrucks

Why do kayaks need or want to be out beyond the 150 feet we are talking about...I don't kayak but when I think about it I think about going up small rivers and into back coves where there are less people and quiet... or hanging close to shore . . .

Why does any boat NEED to be out beyond 150 feet? The obvious answer is because we enjoy being out on the main lake as much as any other boater. I own a boat that I can carry by myself, will float in a 6 inches of water, and is designed for large waves. I'm very experience and physically in shape, and have the proper equipment . . . so why would I want to limit my paddling to just the first 150 feet of a lake?

You may view a lake speed limit law as the result of over reacting - I view it as self-preservation.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by Dave R

I am still trying to figure out why people think kayaks are difficult to see in daylight. I think they are incredibly easy to spot. If one can spot spars (a necessary skill on this lake), a kayak is a piece of cake to spot. Maybe that's why NONE have ever been hit in daylight in NH. If one kayaker can spot another a mile away from that low on the water, imagine how easy it is for someone in a boat with at least 4 times the freeboard.

Dave, it's COMMON SENSE like that that blows the SL proponents arguments right out of the water, not to mention the actual statistics that exist proving that there is not a problem.

Unfortunately COMMON SENSE is in short supply, thanks for sharing some with us.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

"...I was at last year's hearing and their "right to go fast" was their main argument. They also repeated refused to believe that the safety concerns voiced by other boaters were legitimate..."

I got the same sense with the following Quality-of-Life issues when these were before the Legislature recently:
1) The right to smoke cigars in restaurants
2) The right to skim a snowmobile
3) The right to refuse seat belts
4) The right to refuse PFDs for their children

Originally Posted by Dave R

"...Maybe that's why NONE have ever been hit in daylight in NH..."

Not killed, but a male kayaker was run over, suffered "broken bones" and was evacuated by air via DART4 to Dartmouth-Mary Hitchcock Hospital from Lake Winnipesaukee. I posted it at the old forum.

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

"...is it your contention that experience here in NH doesn't inform us enough about what happens in NH to allow a reasonable decision...?"

Then why is New Jersey experience going unchallenged in this thread?

To whit:

1) "...Down here the coast guard or marine police catch you in a channel or boatway in a kayak you get a ticket for unsafe operation of a vessel..."

2) "...Kayaker"s are often in places that they should not be. We see it all the time on Barnegat bay here in New Jersey..."

3) I've seen the inlet deal you mentioned also. Kinda like riding a bike on an interstate..."

Smith Mountain Lake was a double for Lake Winnipesaukee for a movie—yet their double-fatality is challenged as "not on Winnipesaukee".

(Yet Maine's Long Lake double-fatality was, what, forty miles away?)

Originally Posted by Dave R

"...If one can spot spars (a necessary skill on this lake), a kayak is a piece of cake to spot..."

You'd think...

Originally Posted by jeffk

"...Further, I would guess most power boaters, seeing a collection of sailboats would give them a very wide berth..."

You'd think...



(Had Evenstar been in the photo, she'd have been in that lone sailboat—center foreground).

[jrc]

Originally Posted by Dave R

I am still trying to figure out why people think kayaks are difficult to see in daylight. I think they are incredibly easy to spot. If one can spot spars (a necessary skill on this lake), a kayak is a piece of cake to spot. Maybe that's why NONE have ever been hit in daylight in NH. If one kayaker can spot another a mile away from that low on the water, imagine how easy it is for someone in a boat with at least 4 times the freeboard.

I agree 100%. The visibilty of kayaks is a red herring. If you can't see a kayak in open water and in daylight, you shouldn't be operating a boat. Now at dusk or in narrow areas, I can see being startled by an unexpected paddler.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Dave R

I am still trying to figure out why people think kayaks are difficult to see in daylight. I think they are incredibly easy to spot.

They are easy to spot, but it depends on your speed.

The human female retina is amply and evenly filled for color detection. Women have the ability to detect colors better. This is likely an evolutionary adaptation from earliest human's seeking berries and other food gathering needs.

Men have fewer of those color-detecting "cones" in their vision and those are all located in the center of their retinas.

Overall, the male retina is biased towards black-and-white detectors—called "rods"—which are particularly dense in mens' vision outside of center. "Rods" are smaller, and can be packed more tightly and in larger numbers onto the retina.

This is of special impact to those who crave extreme speeds for the following reasons:

1) Peripheral vision is enhanced for movement with only black-and-white vision. (An evolutionary benefit for the stalking hunter-male).
2) Once a kayak gets out of dead-center of the male's vision at high speed, it doesn't matter what color the kayak is.
3) At high speeds, peripheral vision becomes blurry or, at advanced high speeds, lost altogether. The retina-center that detects color becomes much smaller for the operator. The effect is called tunnel-vision, or funnel-vision. The effect is like peering through a long pipe with a very shiny interior. At very high illegal speeds on the highway, a driver will overlook the patrolman sitting in the median!

In the extreme, such as the centrifuge mentioned previously, one's vision can go black even while the participant is fully conscious. Perhaps Bear Islander has been made aware of this.

Women would see kayaks best; unfortunately, most boaters with the excessive speed imbalance are compensating men.

Originally Posted by ITD

"...Dave, it's COMMON SENSE...

Kayaks can disappear with excessive speed: it's science, not common sense.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

If you rely on your blades for us to see you please be sure to go in circles so we can see you from every direction. Also, please never stop paddling as we won't see your blades at rest on the water surface.

Bright paddles do make you more visible but probably should be only part of your visibility strategy. We want to see you. It makes our experience much more enjoyable and safe as well.