A Challenge for a Solution to Lake Speeds

[Bear Islander]

OK, Just so we all understand.

For data to be considered the accident must take place in NH, on Winnipesaukee, during daytime, involve fatalities, must be boat-to-boat, involve speeds more than 3 mph over 45 mph, have taken place in the last 5 years, and most importantly there must be no alcohol whatsoever involved.

Anything else?

Didn't you forget "must not involve an underage operator". Otherwise you might need to include last summers fatal accident on Winni.



If you can't stand the heat...... Stop cooking the data!

[Airwaves]

Bear Island wrote in part:

Didn't you forget "must not involve an underage operator". Otherwise you might need to include last summers fatal accident on Winni.

I never did hear the outcome of that PWC fatal. IIRC a 15? year old boy was found alone and dead on his PWC but I never heard the circumstances that caused the death, has anyone else?

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

OK, Just so we all understand.

For data to be considered the accident must take place in NH, on Winnipesaukee, during daytime, involve fatalities, must be boat-to-boat, involve speeds more than 3 mph over 45 mph, have taken place in the last 5 years, and most importantly there must be no alcohol whatsoever involved.

Anything else?

Didn't you forget "must not involve an underage operator". Otherwise you might need to include last summers fatal accident on Winni.

I am glad we agree on something!

The underage accident on Winnipesaukee does not count in defense of the need for a speed limit in my opinion. Yes, it was an unfortunate incident, but the facts remain that the driver was underage and probably did not have the training or experience to be out there. The parents are at fault for allowing usage of the machine and failed to keep their child safe. Isn't that what parenting is about? Protecting our children. Also, I do not recall any reports that speed was a factor.

I do agree that an accident on Long Lake is close enough to take into account, however the key factor was alcohol. The driver was drinking and most likely showing off to a younger passenger. The guy was a moron and two people died. I have not heard of anyone really fighting a night time limit. At 60mph at night clearly the boat was traveling faster than it should given the conditions.

Taken the above into account, compare it to the Meredith accident and you come up with two common denominators: alcohol and night time. A speed limit will not stop drinking, nothing will. If people want to get smashed and drive they will do it regardless. I think that similar outcomes would be found if the perps were driving other types of boats. Nobody needs to be traveling 60mph at night as in the Maine accident. Speed was not the issue in the NH case.

Being that the data shows a night time only issue, make it a night time speed limit and step up patrols in the vicinity of public docks to prevent people leaving bars drunk from driving away in their boat. This could be aided by the local PD's and is not only the job of MP to enforce.

You still can't fix stupid, but this is a better choice than a full-blown limit.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by codeman671

I do agree that an accident on Long Lake is close enough to take into account, however the key factor was alcohol. The driver was drinking and most likely showing off to a younger passenger.

The owner of that boat is from Massachusetts. But he had to take his boat out of state because Massachusetts has a state wide speed limit.

If Long Lake had a speed limit this guy might still have been drinking and showing off. BUT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN DOING IT ON ANOTHER LAKE! And two people would still be alive.

As the years pass, more and more lakes will enact speed limits. Thus more and more idiots like him will be headed for the few remaining unrestricted lakes. The only thing that will stop him and others from ending up on Winnipesaukee is a speed limit.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

As the years pass, more and more lakes will enact speed limits. Thus more and more idiots like him will be headed for the few remaining unrestricted lakes. The only thing that will stop him and others from ending up on Winnipesaukee is a speed limit.

So you admit that your wish for a speed limit is solely to keep a certain type of boat off of Lake Winni, right?

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

The owner of that boat is from Massachusetts. But he had to take his boat out of state because Massachusetts has a state wide speed limit.

If Long Lake had a speed limit this guy might still have been drinking and showing off. BUT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN DOING IT ON ANOTHER LAKE! And two people would still be alive.

As the years pass, more and more lakes will enact speed limits. Thus more and more idiots like him will be headed for the few remaining unrestricted lakes. The only thing that will stop him and others from ending up on Winnipesaukee is a speed limit.

Is the fact that the boat owner was boating in Maine instead of Mass truly because of a speed limit in Mass? I doubt it, that is your opinion. Many out of staters have places in NH or Mass, including yourself. This does not mean he doesn't boat in Mass, or was forced to boat in Maine due to a lack of speed limits there.

What makes you think the speed limit would have kept him off the lake altogether? That is absurd. I have 2 boats that go over 45mph, that does not mean I will take them elsewhere because of a speed limit. Unless you got your HP limit there is still nothing to prevent him from boating legally in his Dominator on Long Lake, or Winnipesaukee for that matter. You might as well push for prohibition to be brought back as well, it is the only shot you have at slowing or preventing the drunks. Alcohol and stupidity is to blame, not the type of boat in both cases.

Being that at the time of the incident Shep Brown's was the local Sunsation dealer I am surprised that you have not blamed the Littlefield's for this one too...

[fatlazyless]

Today could be an interesting day at the NH Statehouse if the HB 847 proposal gets to the floor of the House. Today is a rainy, dreary and warm 40ish day, here in New Hampshire. The House of Representatives has floorseats for the 400 state reps, and the balcony has seats for 200 spectators.

Most likely, the combined anti-HB847 forces of Rupublican minority leader Rep Mike Whalley (R) Alton, the NH Marine Trades Assoc lobby group, and their partners in the local and national high performance, boat business will do their best to slow down HB 847, so they can go fast.

Perhaps a compelling and articulate motivational speaker telling the 400 volunteer state reps how and why Lake Winnipesaukee needs to have 'a need for speed.' ...good luck to the go fast-be loud crowd....methinks it will be a tough sell....

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Is the fact that the boat owner was boating in Maine instead of Mass truly because of a speed limit in Mass? I doubt it, that is your opinion. Many out of staters have places in NH or Mass, including yourself. This does not mean he doesn't boat in Mass, or was forced to boat in Maine due to a lack of speed limits there.

What makes you think the speed limit would have kept him off the lake altogether? That is absurd. I have 2 boats that go over 45mph, that does not mean I will take them elsewhere because of a speed limit. Unless you got your HP limit there is still nothing to prevent him from boating legally in his Dominator on Long Lake, or Winnipesaukee for that matter. You might as well push for prohibition to be brought back as well, it is the only shot you have at slowing or preventing the drunks. Alcohol and stupidity is to blame, not the type of boat in both cases.

Being that at the time of the incident Shep Brown's was the local Sunsation dealer I am surprised that you have not blamed the Littlefield's for this one too...

This is not about Marinas or a type of boat. It is about the direction the lake is going in. I'm sure that there are some people that can operate high performance boats safely, even on Winnipesaukee. It's a shame that this legislation, if passed, will inconvenience some responsible members of the lake community.

But if other lakes, like Lake George or Long Lake have speed limits and we do not, then this lake will be the destination for high performance boating. There are people boating here now that were on Lake George years ago.

Some performance boaters are experienced and responsible. Some have large wallets and small.... brains. That is a bad combination for an already crowded lake. Long Lake learned that lesson last summer. I am supporting legislation I believe may prevent similar lessons on Winni.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Some performance boaters are experienced and responsible. Some have large wallets and small.... brains.

And let us not forget the people who have large wallets and narrow minds

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

This is not about Marinas or a type of boat. It is about the direction the lake is going in. I'm sure that there are some people that can operate high performance boats safely, even on Winnipesaukee. It's a shame that this legislation, if passed, will inconvenience some responsible members of the lake community.

But if other lakes, like Lake George or Long Lake have speed limits and we do not, then this lake will be the destination for high performance boating. There are people boating here now that were on Lake George years ago.

Some performance boaters are experienced and responsible. Some have large wallets and small.... brains. That is a bad combination for an already crowded lake. Long Lake learned that lesson last summer. I am supporting legislation I believe may prevent similar lessons on Winni.

You do realize that you are totally contradicting yourself, right?

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by chipj29

You do realize that you are totally contradicting yourself, right?

There is no contradiction.

The problem is not the type of boat. The problem is increasing numbers of that type of boat on an already overcrowded lake. The problem is that as other large lakes enact speed limits, Winni becomes the place to go if you want speed.

I love speed. But speed is not appropriate when it interferes with the rights of others to enjoy this beautiful lake. Such interference is real and growing.

Many years ago I directed a children's camp in NH. I can't imagine the anxiety camp directors on Winni must have sending their children out on this lake. I know some camps now keep their children on shore on weekends. When I weigh that against the "right" of the few to go fast, the answer is simple. Speed limits!

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

There is no contradiction.

The problem is not the type of boat. The problem is increasing numbers of that type of boat on an already overcrowded lake. The problem is that as other large lakes enact speed limits, Winni becomes the place to go if you want speed.

I love speed. But speed is not appropriate when it interferes with the rights of others to enjoy this beautiful lake. Such interference is real and growing.

Many years ago I directed a children's camp in NH. I can't imagine the anxiety camp directors on Winni must have sending their children out on this lake. I know some camps now keep their children on shore on weekends. When I weigh that against the "right" of the few to go fast, the answer is simple. Speed limits!

So it IS about a type of boat...

[Bear Islander]

No, it's not.

But why is that distinction so important? The lake needs speed limits if I like performance boats, and the lake needs speed limits if I don't like performance boats.

How do my person predilections change the situation?

[BroadHopper]

way off from the original intent. Let's close this thread.

[fatlazyless]

I've been to Lake Winnepocket in Webster visiting, and saw a 19' bass boat with a 150hp Yamaha. The people I'm visiting remarked....that boat is way too big for this little lake...it's not right...a boat like that belongs on Lake Winnipesaukee. So, probably it's true, people with the big powerfull boats want the big water where they have always been welcome, and there's lots of other fast boats.

That makes sense even to me. Some one area of the lake should become the designated 'go-fast zone.'

Considering that State Reps Janet Allen, Laurie Boyce, Charles Clark, John Thomas, and Mike Whalley, all Republicans, all voted NO to HB847, and all are from Alton or very close to Alton, maybe one of them could sponsor a post HB847 bill that creates an Alton Bay go-fast zone.

Looking all around the lake, that five state representative concentration of HB847 nay-voters is definately unique and sticks out like a red plague. so's probably them and their local supporters could support the concentration of go-fasts and it could become a venue with good business & spectators on Alton Bay. Alton Bay has always been a speedy type of a place, imho. It offers the only spot on the lake where the water is easily seen from the roads on both sides. There's a number of marinas and food-service businesses that could benefit. People could go there by boat or by car to watch the go-fasts.

I could bring my new-old $250 kayak and paddle up & down the shallows fishn' for sunfish while watch'n the big, bad, go-fasts charge up & down the Bay on a hot & humid, August Sunday morning!

Sounds pretty danged good, don't it!

Let's go to Alton Bay, watch the go-fasts, play some minature golf, and snack on some granola................Alton Bay!

[JayDV]

Has the presidential hopeful made his opinion known about speeds on his summer retreat place? Would be a shame if his party allies voted against him.

Maybe the Secret Service would not be happy if everyone was crawling past the estate at 25 mph if he gets elected. Actually, the whole Winni estate security would probably be a nightmare.

[ITD]

Maybe that's the solution, designate Lake Winnipesaukee the go fast lake and ban the granola munching, kayak paddling blue plague to Lake Winnepocket. Set a minimum HP limit for Lake Winnipesaukee, say 300 hp or you can't play. Same exclusionary practice, just a different target. What's good for goose, should be good for the gander.

This would solve the proponents alleged "safety issues", would really reduce the "wake problem" as fast boats produce small wakes. It would also get rid of the "crowding problem" as most boats are less than 300 hp. It's the perfect logical solution to the SL proponents issues.

[Dick]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

I've been to Lake Winnepocket in Webster visiting, and saw a 19' bass boat with a 150hp Yamaha. The people I'm visiting remarked....that boat is way too big for this little lake...it's not right...a boat like that belongs on Lake Winnipesaukee. So, probably it's true, people with the big powerfull boats want the big water where they have always been welcome, and there's lots of other fast boats.

Bass boat anglers want to go where the bass fishing is good -- not necessarily where they can go fast (and that depends on your definition of what "fast" is). On smaller bodies of water a bass boat often only uses the electric motor on the bow and may never fire up the outboard. It is not unusual for a bass boat to travel over 50 miles on an 8 hour Winnipesaukee bass club tounament. The reason these boats are designed to quickly and safety travel great distances is to minimize the amount of time spent traveling and maximize the amount of time spent fishing.

Most bass club tournaments start at 7:00 AM when there is little or no other boat traffic. If water conditions are good, 45 mph is an unreasonable restriction. When these boats come back to the launch site at 2:30 PM there is usually no way to come back across The Broads WOT because of all the cross wake/wave speed bumps.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

The owner of that boat is from Massachusetts. But he had to take his boat out of state because Massachusetts has a state wide speed limit. If Long Lake had a speed limit this guy might still have been drinking and showing off. BUT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN DOING IT ON ANOTHER LAKE! And two people would still be alive. As the years pass, more and more lakes will enact speed limits. Thus more and more idiots like him will be headed for the few remaining unrestricted lakes. The only thing that will stop him and others from ending up on Winnipesaukee is a speed limit.

"Others" need to include the latest WaveRunner Cruiser Jet-Ski. It weighs a lighter 840 pounds now (down 25%), and has a supercharged engine.

I tried to find out the top speed of this craft that goes 0-30-MPH in under two seconds, but nobody's sayin'.

This quote did appear, however:

"I like the WaveRunner Cruiser. Questions have been asked if it is capable of 75 mph. I was told at the dealership it was capable of doing 85 mph...by my speedometer, I went 76 mph at that point I backed off. I was being raised out of the seat. Too fast for me. I probably won't do that again."

http://www.powersportsnetwork.com/en...21658&veh=8676



Surely, it can be made to go faster, right?

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

The owner of that boat is from Massachusetts. But he had to take his boat out of state because Massachusetts has a state wide speed limit.

If Long Lake had a speed limit this guy might still have been drinking and showing off. BUT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN DOING IT ON ANOTHER LAKE! And two people would still be alive.

As the years pass, more and more lakes will enact speed limits. Thus more and more idiots like him will be headed for the few remaining unrestricted lakes. The only thing that will stop him and others from ending up on Winnipesaukee is a speed limit.

Take your boat down to the CT. River just north of Springfield MA for a day sometime. You'll get to experience boating with a 45 MPH speed limit. Like Lake George, it's loaded with GFBL boats going well over 45 MPH. Be careful what you wish for...

[Bear Islander]

When boats on Lake George are going "well over" the limit, are they going in the 45 to 60 range? If they are, then I don't see the problem. If they are going 90 mph then Lake George has an enforcement problem they need to address.

Route 93 has a 65 mph limit. Yet 70, 75 and even 80 are the norm in the left lane. That is called human nature. The same will be true on Winni, just as it is on George.

However people that go double the limit will end up standing in front of a judge. This will be true on Route 93, Lake George and Winnipesaukee.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

When boats on Lake George are going "well over" the limit, are they going in the 45 to 60 range?

Beats me. My point was that you may think MA and NY have a great thing going with thier speed limits, but if you actually try boating there, you'll find that it's far less pleasant than Winnipesaukee. We have a great thing going on this lake, not sure why you'd want to change it, especially to make it more like MA and NY lakes.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by Dave R

especially to make it more like MA and NY lakes.

Because that's what NH is beginning to become, little Massachusetts. I come to NH to get away from Massachusetts. Others come to NH to turn it into Massachusetts. So much for Live Free or Die............

[SIKSUKR]

Originally Posted by ITD

Because that's what NH is beginning to become, little Massachusetts. I come to NH to get away from Massachusetts. Others come to NH to turn it into Massachusetts. So much for Live Free or Die............

You've hit the peverbial nail right on the head.

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by Dave R

Beats me. My point was that you may think MA and NY have a great thing going with thier speed limits, but if you actually try boating there, you'll find that it's far less pleasant than Winnipesaukee. We have a great thing going on this lake, not sure why you'd want to change it, especially to make it more like MA and NY lakes.

It only makes sense that this is what the goal is, most of the license plates at the long term parking slips at Shep's are MA or NY.

[Bear Islander]

And CT

,

[fpartri497]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

It only makes sense that this is what the goal is, most of the license plates at the long term parking slips at Shep's are MA or NY.

And that Is true of most marinas around Winni. Most of the liscence plates are Mass, Ct, And NY. Over the last thirty years or so NH has become the playground of Mass. residents Ever wonder why every Friday night they are all In there cars driving up here to paradise?

( Ok now watch the bashers come out of the woodwork )

[Bear Islander]

Thankfully the states in question are all part of the United States of America. We are free to move and visit from state to state as we choose. Residents of Massachusetts require no permission to move to, or vacation in, New Hampshire. Each citizen has equal say regardless of length of residency.

Let's go to some of the world class hospitals in the Boston area and look for the license plates of people coming down from New Hampshire for life saving medical treatments. On second thought, let's not do that, because they have every right to be here.

[chipj29]

As much as I hate driving up I-93 on Friday afternoons, it is a fact of life that people from Mass vacation in NH. And we need their $$. Mass residents have been coming to NH to vacation for 100 years, and it is not about to stop now, speed limit or not.

[fpartri497]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Thankfully the states in question are all part of the United States of America. We are free to move and visit from state to state as we choose. Residents of Massachusetts require no permission to move to, or vacation in, New Hampshire. Each citizen has equal say regardless of length of residency.

Let's go to some of the world class hospitals in the Boston area and look for the license plates of people coming down from New Hampshire for life saving medical treatments. On second thought, let's not do that, because they have every right to be here.

We In NH are also fortunate to world class hospitals. I can attest to that. january 21st. 2007 The fine Crew at concord hospital Saved my life with an operation that I was not supposed to survive.

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Thankfully the states in question are all part of the United States of America. We are free to move and visit from state to state as we choose. Residents of Massachusetts require no permission to move to, or vacation in, New Hampshire. Each citizen has equal say regardless of length of residency.

Let's go to some of the world class hospitals in the Boston area and look for the license plates of people coming down from New Hampshire for life saving medical treatments. On second thought, let's not do that, because they have every right to be here.

Each resident doesn't have equal say, only permanent residents. Bit of a stretch there comparing speed limits on the lake to hospitals in Boston that offer life saving medical treatments, but then again this whole issue is about stretching things (the truth) isn't it.

[Bear Islander]

I was stretching the point, not the truth.

You want to make the distinction between residents and permanent residence. There is no length of residency requirement in order to vote where you live. And no limit on how often or repeatedly you can move your primary residence. In practice it's to much trouble to keep getting a new drivers license every few months.

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I was stretching the point, not the truth.

You want to make the distinction between residents and permanent residence. There is no length of residency requirement in order to vote where you live. And no limit on how often or repeatedly you can move your primary residence. In practice it's to much trouble to keep getting a new drivers license every few months.

The issue isn't residency. Here's my gripe. If this law passes and the digital odometer on my boat says I'm going 45 I may or may not get clocked going exactly 45 by MP radar. I could possible get clocked going 46 and that according to the law is reason enough to give me a ticket. OK so I get a ticket and if that's not bad enough it also goes on my NH driving record. ARE YOU SERIOUS!?!?!? and yes I'm yelling about this!! I can't believe that NH is also going to punish me by points on my drivers license for an infraction on my boat. Is that even legal? You do NOT I repeat DO NOT even need a valid drivers license to operate a boat on NH waters, just a valid Safe Boating Certificate (and I won't even get into the confusion on that). Talk about gov't getting involved where they don't need to be!! This is Mass gov't at it's finest and it's right here at work in good ol' New Hampshire. We should ALL be outraged by this bill and the fact that it goes way beyond just your rights as a boater. If this passes you have to ask yourself what's next.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

...Here's my gripe. If this law passes and the digital odometer on my boat says I'm going 45 I may or may not get clocked going exactly 45 by MP radar. I could possible get clocked going 46 and that according to the law is reason enough to give me a ticket...

The proposed law this year is in the same format as previous proposals, the speed limit will be a "prima facie" limit based on the unreasonable speed concept and not an "absolute" limit, as found in nearby Maine.

The difference? Significant to law enforcement personnel.

In Maine and other States that have "absolute" speed limits, it is an accepted concept that regardless of conditions any speed over the posted limit is proof of guilt.

In New Hampshire the proposed boating speed limits will be based on the same principles as our terrestial limits, the "prima facie" and "unreasonable speed" concept.

Simply stated, while any spped over the posted limit is "prima facie" evidence that an offense has occured, the operator can use an affirmative defense that given the time, place and conditions the speed at the time was not "unreasonable".

Let's say that it is 5:00 PM on a Wednesday afternoon in the middle of the Broads. Its a bright and clear day with unlimited visibility. Its only you and the MP radar boat. You will not receive a ticket for 46 in a 45 unless that poor MP officer never wants to face the wrath of that particular court again.

It is a pretty poorly kept secret that in New Hampshire, depending on the Department, the leeway under normal conditions to succesfully get a conviction before a Municipal Court judge is anywhere from 10 to 15 MPH over the posted limit.

How would I know? Been there, done that on the prosecution side many, many times...and as some of you already suspected I am a certified radar operator in the State with a number of years experience.

Be forewarned however that you can be successfully prosecuted for unreasonable speed if you are at or below the posted limit if conditions warrant. Case in point, you are in that same area in a dense fog or rain (you will have to pass awfully close to the MP boat for a reading, radar doesn't like those conditions) and extremely limited visibility, and you are doing 45 in a 45. This isn't an issue on a roadway as in most cases you will pass within feet of the radar unit. Do the same on the Lake and you will be facing different or additional charges!

Still not going to take a side in this debate, but I have been greatly disturbed by the misinformation and hyperbole expressed on both sides of the issue in reference to the technical and legal aspects of the proposed legislation.

As always, please feel free to PM me anytime if you have specific legal or technical questions...if I can't get you a direct and correct answer I'll point you in the direction of someone that can!

Debate away.....

Skip

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by Skip

The proposed law this year is in the same format as previous proposals, the speed limit will be a "prima facie" limit based on the unreasonable speed concept and not an "absolute" limit, as found in nearby Maine.

The difference? Significant to law enforcement personnel.

In Maine and other States that have "absolute" speed limits, it is an accepted concept that regardless of conditions any speed over the posted limit is proof of guilt.

In New Hampshire the proposed boating speed limits will be based on the same principles as our terrestial limits, the "prima facie" and "unreasonable speed" concept.

Simply stated, while any spped over the posted limit is "prima facie" evidence that an offense has occured, the operator can use an affirmative defense that given the time, place and conditions the speed at the time was not "unreasonable".

Let's say that it is 5:00 PM on a Wednesday afternoon in the middle of the Broads. Its a bright and clear day with unlimited visibility. Its only you and the MP radar boat. You will not receive a ticket for 46 in a 45 unless that poor MP officer never wants to face the wrath of that particular court again.

It is a pretty poorly kept secret that in New Hampshire, depending on the Department, the leeway under normal conditions to succesfully get a conviction before a Municipal Court judge is anywhere from 10 to 15 MPH over the posted limit.

How would I know? Been there, done that on the prosecution side many, many times...and as some of you already suspected I am a certified radar operator in the State with a number of years experience.

Be forewarned however that you can be successfully prosecuted for unreasonable speed if you are at or below the posted limit if conditions warrant. Case in point, you are in that same area in a dense fog or rain (you will have to pass awfully close to the MP boat for a reading, radar doesn't like those conditions) and extremely limited visibility, and you are doing 45 in a 45. This isn't an issue on a roadway as in most cases you will pass within feet of the radar unit. Do the same on the Lake and you will be facing different or additional charges!

Still not going to take a side in this debate, but I have been greatly disturbed by the misinformation and hyperbole expressed on both sides of the issue in reference to the technical and legal aspects of the proposed legislation.

As always, please feel free to PM me anytime if you have specific legal or technical questions...if I can't get you a direct and correct answer I'll point you in the direction of someone that can!

Debate away.....

Skip

Skip...you had me at Prima Facie!

[Skip]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

Skip...you had me at Prima Facie!

Good one!

But really, in everyone's defense....unless you've slugged this out in the trenches it is very difficult for the layman to appreciate the nuances of the law, especially here in the "Live Free or Die State". In reality, I would guess that very few of you have spent a day defending yourself in Court over a minor traffic offense.

I'll hold back a little longer on the synopsis I have formulated as to how this particular statute will play out if enacted as proposed...mainly cause I've got a kick out of reading a lot of the give and take here.

But reading some of your responses, I think a number of you would do very well presenting a case in front of many of the judges I have had the honor of appearing before over the years....

[Bear Islander]

My layman's interpretation of what Skip just said is, if you are out in the middle of the Broads, all by yourself, going 60 (or even more) in an otherwise safe manner, the chances you will get a ticket are near zero. And I have no problem with that.

One reason a boating violation will show up on your driving record is because the opposition took a "NO LIMITS" attitude and refused to work toward a compromise. Had they been more reasonable, we might have had legislation that made more of us happy. Or at least less unhappy.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

One reason a boating violation will show up on your driving record is because the opposition took a "NO LIMITS" attitude and refused to work toward a compromise. Had they been more reasonable, we might have had legislation that made more of us happy. Or at least less unhappy.

Maybe I missed it , but I don't remember seeing YOU willing to compromise on anything. Like maybe 60/15 day/night speed , which to me , makes a whole lot more sense.

[Bear Islander]

I have been married for 31 plus years. Obviously I can compromise!

Compromise is how you get things done in most cases. I have said from the beginning I want a horsepower limit not a speed limit. My second choice would have been a 60/30 speed limit. But nobody went with that.

So I had to compromise and support 45/25.

[Dick]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I have said from the beginning I want a horsepower limit not a speed limit.

It is very common that big bass boats with 250 hp outboards will put in a lake and just use their bow mounted electric motor to go fishing. This is especially true for smaller lakes. Horsepower limits is a horrible idea! It would deny many bass boats from access.

Who would decide what the horsepower limit would be and on what lakes or rivers? My bass boat is 22 ft. and weighs in at 4,000 lbs. fully loaded with livewell water, 50 gal. of fuel, gear, 2 adults, and 4 deep cycle batteries. It takes 250 hp just to lift all this and get it up on plane.

Horsepower rating on a watercraft is mainly based upon size (length & width) and weight. Therefore, if you had your way by limiting horsepower, you might as well be banning all large boats. Is that really what you want to do?

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

...One reason a boating violation will show up on your driving record is because the opposition took a "NO LIMITS" attitude and refused to work toward a compromise. Had they been more reasonable, we might have had legislation that made more of us happy. Or at least less unhappy...

I agree, and also want to point out that this will, over time, prove to weaken the proposed law.

There are very clear cut and well accepted principles (whether we agree with them or not) for the determination of particular speed zones in the State. And while there is little dispute that gross offenses such as Reckless Operation & Boating or Driving While Intoxicated violations cross all boundaries for reporting purposes whether on OHRVs, snowmobiles & motor vehicles the lines are very blurred when you are now dealing with a boat speed limit.

Remember, judges are human beings, and virtually all of the judges I have dealt with over the years are very fair & understanding human beings, especially at the District/Municipal Court level. If you get a ticket for a boat speed limit infraction and you have an otherwise "clean" motor vehicle record, many judges will be hesitant to assess points on your driver's record for a recreational speeding offense. As it stands now, many judges will simply place an offense on file with no finding if you appear before them and plea your case.

Now, if you already have a lengthy motor vehicle record and come in with a boat speeding ticket, that same common sense the judge let prevail on the innocent or "placed on file" verdict the good guy got just in line ahead of you, well...don't expect the same courtesy.

This will also open up potential conflicts with neighboring states that have reciprocal agreements with New Hampshire regarding the reporting and points over "traffic" offenses. While speeding on a roadway in NH is akin to speeding on a roadway in, say, Maine....boating and highway speeding are definitely apples & oranges. If Maine and other States that do not recognize boating speed limits balk at including NH boating offenses in their data bases, there is nothing the State of New Hampshire can do. Likewise a Maine resident (or any resident that's State does not have reciprocal boating points offenses) will be able to easily petition their respective Motor Vehicle Department to have any such NH bases annotations removed.

One of the issues that was so difficult in implementing nationwide reciprocity (and we're still not there yet) is the lack of a universal motor vehicle code across the States. One of the fears in implementing and maintaining the system is when an individual State defines an act as a reportable offense that some or many of the reciprocal States do not recognize.

Bear Islander is being painfully honest is his assertation that: "...One reason a boating violation will show up on your driving record is because the opposition took a "NO LIMITS" attitude and refused to work toward a compromise. Had they been more reasonable..."

While that is an honest appraisal of the situation, it would be hard to characterize it as a rational or well thought out policy. The devil is always in the details, and this detail may prove to be very "devilish" when boating points are attempted to be tied to out-of-state license holders.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

I could possible get clocked going 46 and that according to the law is reason enough to give me a ticket. OK so I get a ticket and if that's not bad enough it also goes on my NH driving record. ARE YOU SERIOUS!?!?!? and yes I'm yelling about this!! I can't believe that NH is also going to punish me by points on my drivers license for an infraction on my boat. Is that even legal? You do NOT I repeat DO NOT even need a valid drivers license to operate a boat on NH waters, just a valid Safe Boating Certificate (and I won't even get into the confusion on that).

As an avid opposer, I am actually not that upset about a boating infraction going against my license. I agree that it is ridiculous that they would put this into effect since it is only necessary to have a boating certificate. I think that the points should only be issued on certain offenses though, and there should be a spread as to the # of points per violation type as per the existing rules on the road. Violating the 150' rule for instance should be punishable, however given that MP never seems to stop for this I don't think it will have much effect. According to the law on the road you could get ticketed for 1mph over but you don't. When was the last time you or anyone you know was busted for 1mph over? Or the infamous 3mph over for that matter?

This would not be my main concern. The speed limit itself and the overall need for it is.

Originally Posted by hottrucks

Oh wait my boat doesn't even have one......who's going to shell out $$ for ALL the boats that don't have them or are inacurate.....

I would like one of those nice dash mounted ones with big #'s please

I'll take a GPS speedo with a tattletale, that way I can tell if my pontoon can truly do 3mph over the limit during the day

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Thankfully the states in question are all part of the United States of America. We are free to move and visit from state to state as we choose. Residents of Massachusetts require no permission to move to, or vacation in, New Hampshire. Each citizen has equal say regardless of length of residency.

Let's go to some of the world class hospitals in the Boston area and look for the license plates of people coming down from New Hampshire for life saving medical treatments. On second thought, let's not do that, because they have every right to be here.

The "minds" of WinnFAb will put an end to that in due time...

Anyone view their website, lately?

Originally Posted by online Concord Monitor

The supporters of WinnFab (advocates of a speed limit on the lake) must be either stupid or intellectually dishonest. They reported that a boating accident last week that threw two individuals from a speeding boat was proof that a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee is necessary.

This past weekend my neighbor and I rescued a couple who were also thrown from their boat and they weren't wearing any life preservers. The reason you haven't heard WinnFab talking about this accident is because it was a sailboat. Shouldn't that be proof that a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee should be something less than 4 knots?

http://www.cmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dl...1029/OPINION03

[Bear Islander]

That link does not go to WinnFABS, this one does.

http://www.winnfabs.com





I think you should point out that the article you are quoting is 2 1/2 years old.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

That link does not go to WinnFABS, this one does.

http://www.winnfabs.com

I think you should point out that the article you are quoting is 2 1/2 years old.

Here's the date of the article, for those who do not wish to see that which is self evident...

August 05. 2005 8:20AM

Then, again, an agenda can cause selective vision...

[Hottrucks]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I think you should point out that the article you are quoting is 2 1/2 years old.

Kinda like that drunk that killed a guy in his GFBL hmmmm???? OH I forgot he was speeding....@ 28 mph


On a side note has anyone calibrated there boat speedo's this year yet?

Oh wait my boat doesn't even have one......who's going to shell out $$ for ALL the boats that don't have them or are inacurate.....

I would like one of those nice dash mounted ones with big #'s please

[chmeeee]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

OK, Just so we all understand.

For data to be considered the accident must take place in NH, on Winnipesaukee, during daytime (where was this said?), involve fatalities, must be boat-to-boat, involve speeds more than 3 mph over 45 mph, have taken place in the last 5 years, and most importantly there must be no alcohol whatsoever involved.

Well yes, I do think that in order to be considered the accident should be relevant to the proposed law. Thank you for laying it out.

[Woodsy]

QUOTE=Bear Islander;62238]This is incorrect! There have been accidents and deaths at speeds greater than proposed by HB847. These accidents and deaths are part of the data. Therefore your statement is not true.

I fully understand that you believe these accidents and deaths do not support the need for speed limits. But to say they do not exist is a lie.[/QUOTE]

Bear Islander...

HB-847 proposes both DAYTIME and NIGHTTIME speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee ONLY. I had earlier proposed a compromise, essentially a night time speed limit. It was in this light that I rationally responded to the above highlighted sentence in your post.

However, if you want to split hairs I will be happy to do so. Although it does seem like trying to reason with you is very similar to trying to reason with a spoiled 3 year old child.

HB-847 is Lake Winnipesaukee specific, so one would think your response should be Lake Winnipesaukee specific. However, if you can come up with an incident/accident that occured on a different NH lake, I'll accept it.

So I ask you again... in very simple terms... When was there EVER a DAYLIGHT fatal boat vs. boat collision that occurred at a speed greater than 45 MPH on Lake Winnipesaukee? How about ANY boat vs. boat DAYLIGHT collision that occurred at a speed greater than the 45 MPH? Again.. Please post the accident specifics!

I did not put a time frame on the accident data. I merely stated that the last fatal accident that occurred as the result boat vs. boat occurred at night, 5 years ago at an estimated speed of 28MPH... and there was ALCOHOL involved!

Woodsy