Life after speed limits

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by chipj29

Sorry, I didn't realize he was talking about a No Wake Zone in front of your house. Unless boaters go through that area at higher speeds, and only slow down when MP is present...which I doubt is the case.

Boats go through the NWZ at high speed, full speed , ludicrous speed, whatever you can imagine.

Most boats go reasonably slow, however that speed drops incredibly when the MP are around. The most dramatic difference, laughable really, is how the NWZ line moves. When a patrol boat is around the NWZ begins and ends 200' to 400' OUTSIDE the NWZ. When the patrol in not around many boats bring back the throttle as they pass the marker.

Several times a day boats go through full speed, even at night. Now and then they have to replace the marker after it gets hit at night.

The most common violator is a very large cruise boat that passes more than once a day. I will not guess at its speed, but I have seen boats being overtaken by it have to go full throttle, in the NWZ, to get out of its way.

[chipj29]

Well that sucks that people don't obey the NWZ. And I mean that seriously. However, it is great that people slow down when MP is around to enforce the current law.

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by Bear Islander
Boats go through the NWZ at high speed, full speed , ludicrous speed, whatever you can imagine.

Most boats go reasonably slow, however that speed drops incredibly when the MP are around. The most dramatic difference, laughable really, is how the NWZ line moves. When a patrol boat is around the NWZ begins and ends 200' to 400' OUTSIDE the NWZ. When the patrol in not around many boats bring back the throttle as they pass the marker.

Several times a day boats go through full speed, even at night. Now and then they have to replace the marker after it gets hit at night.

The most common violator is a very large cruise boat that passes more than once a day. I will not guess at its speed, but I have seen boats being overtaken by it have to go full throttle, in the NWZ, to get out of its way.

Just a thought, but it that's a problem out in front of your place, and since I beleive you already have a webcamera in operation, why not point it in a direction that whould catch the violation on the web, and at an angle that would show the violator's bow number and/or boat name. I'd be willing to be that if you had these violations on tape and the MP could track them down a visit by a law enforcement officer would help your situation.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Boats go through the NWZ at high speed, full speed , ludicrous speed, whatever you can imagine.

Most boats go reasonably slow, however that speed drops incredibly when the MP are around. The most dramatic difference, laughable really, is how the NWZ line moves. When a patrol boat is around the NWZ begins and ends 200' to 400' OUTSIDE the NWZ. When the patrol in not around many boats bring back the throttle as they pass the marker.

Several times a day boats go through full speed, even at night. Now and then they have to replace the marker after it gets hit at night.

The most common violator is a very large cruise boat that passes more than once a day. I will not guess at its speed, but I have seen boats being overtaken by it have to go full throttle, in the NWZ, to get out of its way.

You must reflect on this BI. I am also appalled to hear this, probably more than you can imagine. Before I even comment on the ramifications, you MUST reflect on your positions and responses in this forum. Just re-read what you've said, and I think you'll find that your responses have been irrational, emotional, and resulting in no real solution. I'd be on your side on this one BI, believe me I am.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

You must reflect on this BI. I am also appalled to hear this, probably more than you can imagine. Before I even comment on the ramifications, you MUST reflect on your positions and responses in this forum. Just re-read what you've said, and I think you'll find that your responses have been irrational, emotional, and resulting in no real solution. I'd be on your side on this one BI, believe me I am.

I'm surprised you people are surprised. I suppose I have seen it for so many years it doesn't surprise me anymore. PWCs go through full speed the most, we don't even blink when they do it. I'm sure some have no idea it's a NWZ. One beautiful Cigarette (a real one) would go through at about 90. I thought maybe he was clueless. Then I found out he was from Cooks Point. That is within sight, so he must have known about the NWZ.

We had a neighbor that would throw tennis ball at them, but he is gone now.

A have a few videos but you can't read bow numbers from that distance. I have been thinking of setting a camera up with motion detection. Take a picture of every boat that goes through.

[EricP]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I'm surprised you people are surprised. I suppose I have seen it for so many years it doesn't surprise me anymore. PWCs go through full speed the most, we don't even blink when they do it. I'm sure some have no idea it's a NWZ. One beautiful Cigarette (a real one) would go through at about 90. I thought maybe he was clueless. Then I found out he was from Cooks Point. That is within sight, so he must have known about the NWZ.

We had a neighbor that would throw tennis ball at them, but he is gone now.

A have a few videos but you can't read bow numbers from that distance. I have been thinking of setting a camera up with motion detection. Take a picture of every boat that goes through.

I've seen boats buzz through there as well as we idle through on our SeaDoos. Idiots will be idiots, probably the same people that pass you in the breakdown lane (not the one on 93 that allows travel). Great spot for MP in an unmarked boat.

[Silver Duck]

BI

Why don't you and your neighbors petition to have the NWZ extended? I've always felt that it is too small, and adjust my behavior accordingly. I'd even be happy to show up at a hearing and speak in favor of expanding the NWZ!

Silver Duck

[Resident 2B]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

BI

Why don't you and your neighbors petition to have the NWZ extended? I've always felt that it is too small, and adjust my behavior accordingly. I'd even be happy to show up at a hearing and speak in favor of expanding the NWZ!

Silver Duck

Although I have not, in the past, agreed with BI in most of his positions, I acompletely agree with Silver Duck and I would completely support an extension of the No-Wake zone in that area of the lake. To me, this extension is in the best interest of the overall lake environment. The wakes of all boats must be considered when establishing and expandig No Wake Zones. In this case, the overall lake environment would be best served by expanding this No Wake Zone. We must be fair in these situations!

R2B

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I'm surprised you people are surprised. I suppose I have seen it for so many years it doesn't surprise me anymore. PWCs go through full speed the most, we don't even blink when they do it. I'm sure some have no idea it's a NWZ. One beautiful Cigarette (a real one) would go through at about 90. I thought maybe he was clueless. Then I found out he was from Cooks Point. That is within sight, so he must have known about the NWZ.

We had a neighbor that would throw tennis ball at them, but he is gone now.

A have a few videos but you can't read bow numbers from that distance. I have been thinking of setting a camera up with motion detection. Take a picture of every boat that goes through.

So. What does this have to do with the speed limit again?

They are breaking the speed limit in a NWZ for chrisakes. Does that mean a speed limit of 45 they will do 125mph ?

Get some common sense already, The issue is enforcement, not more laws.

[Chris Craft]

The reality of the situation is that if the speed boats were quite we would not be having this conversation now. I have talked to a few legislatures and they all say that is the main reason for the complaining. Most MP's will tell you that speed boats are not a safty concern. Most people that drive them have a very large amount of time under their belts. That is not to say that they are never involved in accidents but they are involved in very few. The noise is what bothers most people.

The Long Lake Accident we still do not know much about. They have kept the details of that accident very hush hush. We still do not know if Ray Trotts boat (the smaller one) had his lights on or not. There are a lot of other details that we still do not know about. I am sure it will all come out in the trial. Then we can talk about that accident with some facts.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Chris Craft

The reality of the situation is that if the speed boats were quite we would not be having this conversation now. I have talked to a few legislatures and they all say that is the main reason for the complaining. Most MP's will tell you that speed boats are not a safty concern. Most people that drive them have a very large amount of time under their belts. That is not to say that they are never involved in accidents but they are involved in very few. The noise is what bothers most people.

The Long Lake Accident we still do not know much about. They have kept the details of that accident very hush hush. We still do not know if Ray Trotts boat (the smaller one) had his lights on or not. There are a lot of other details that we still do not know about. I am sure it will all come out in the trial. Then we can talk about that accident with some facts.

I suspected that to be the truth. As an opponent to the speed limit I can honestly say that SOME not all of the owners of these GFBL boats are their own worst enemies in all this. If everyone had complied with noise ordinances and kept a low profile then we wouldn't even be talking about speed limits. It isn't really in their nature for most of these owners who are trying to get everyone to look at them, so they go bigger louder brighter. I really have no problem with the bigger, brighter, as I love to look at these boats. It's the louder I have the problem with. When I have to suspend my conversation until a boat goes by that's obnoxious.

[Bear Islander]

I'm not sure increasing the size of the NWZ will make any difference. It's already about three times as large as the law allows. And it isn't about wake its about slowing people down in a crowded area. The biggest advantage of the NWZ is it keeps many boats away. Before the NWZ was enacted that was the most scary place on the lake. Worse than Eagle island was.

In general I don't think laws that require intense enforcement are the best answer. The NWZ solved 99% of the problems it was intended to solve. If the MP could show up more often and make it 99.9% that would be great, it's not likely to happen however.

[KonaChick]

I'd say a 99% success rate is pretty good....

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

In general I don't think laws that require intense enforcement are the best answer.

An ironic quote considering your support of the speed limits.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by brk-lnt

An ironic quote considering your support of the speed limits.

A speed limit was not my first choice, a horsepower limit is infinitely easier to enforce.

However a speed limit is self enforcing to a degree. Having a speed limit sets a standard. It draws a line and tells both visitors and regulars what the standard of behavior is. A boater going 60 mph will know they are breaking the law.

I believe most people are law abiding and will obey the speed limit. I'm sure many will go a little over the limit and get away with it. But if you go to far over the limit, to many times, you will end up talking to the Marine Patrol. If they get a ticket or if it holds up in court will not make much difference.

If there is a scofflaw or two out there that ignores the law and repeatedly gets stopped for speeding, I'm sure they will eventually end up standing in front of a judge having an unpleasant conversation.

It's like our NWZ, 99% do it the right way. We need to keep our eyes open for that other 1%, but that is true everywhere, and will never change.

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

If there is a scofflaw or two out there that ignores the law and repeatedly gets stopped for speeding, I'm sure they will eventually end up standing in front of a judge having an unpleasant conversation.

With no new law, there will be no reason for people to scoff at it. Most experienced boaters believe the Coast Guard and existing rules are effective in defining proper speed for conditions. A purchased, feel-good speed limit law deserves to be scoffed at.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I'm not sure increasing the size of the NWZ will make any difference. It's already about three times as large as the law allows. And it isn't about wake its about slowing people down in a crowded area. The biggest advantage of the NWZ is it keeps many boats away. Before the NWZ was enacted that was the most scary place on the lake. Worse than Eagle island was.

In general I don't think laws that require intense enforcement are the best answer. The NWZ solved 99% of the problems it was intended to solve. If the MP could show up more often and make it 99.9% that would be great, it's not likely to happen however.

I do recall that area being very sketchy. It seems so long ago that I forgot just how bad it was. The problem is that there are boats coming from so many different directions into what seems like a funnel. Nobody wanted to give way. Of course I like to believe that it was a two pronged attack. The enacting of the NWZ coupled with the Certification of boaters seems to have had a pretty positive affect on that area as well as the rest of the lake. I'd like to see after this year where we stand in terms of full compliance with the certificates. It'll probably be a couple years before we see the full impact though as some people will still be driving without them until they are caught.

[VtSteve]

It's so much easier to get a consensus of opinion when the facts and the truth come out. If the intention of most people had been to,

1) Address the noise issue

2) Address the boaters speeding though congested areas

then,

I think you'd have had most people on board, assisting in the process. Instead of coming up with crap like wakes and erosion, not to mention malarkey about accidents and speed, we might all be talking about a new bill to add to the marine patrol's budget to enforce existing laws, and also expanding NWZ. This is how things work.

I'm certain that the lake would be a far better place if the law is not passed, and everyone proceeds along those lines. Now that "those" boat owners know what could happen, perhaps a little self-policing would be in order. It's rather obvious from the debates where the most problems are, and clearly obvious where the most upset people are.

In this day and age, having a marine patrol segment dedicated to certain trouble spots on a rotating basis is very doable.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

It's so much easier to get a consensus of opinion when the facts and the truth come out. If the intention of most people had been to,

1) Address the noise issue

2) Address the boaters speeding though congested areas

then,

I think you'd have had most people on board, assisting in the process. Instead of coming up with crap like wakes and erosion, not to mention malarkey about accidents and speed, we might all be talking about a new bill to add to the marine patrol's budget to enforce existing laws, and also expanding NWZ. This is how things work.

I'm certain that the lake would be a far better place if the law is not passed, and everyone proceeds along those lines. Now that "those" boat owners know what could happen, perhaps a little self-policing would be in order. It's rather obvious from the debates where the most problems are, and clearly obvious where the most upset people are.

In this day and age, having a marine patrol segment dedicated to certain trouble spots on a rotating basis is very doable.

Except that those are not the important issues.

Noise is not a prime concern, I would list it around number 8 or lower. Speeding through congested areas is not the issue. The Bear Island NWZ has been in place for about 15 years, with reasonable compliance.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Except that those are not the important issues.

Noise is not a prime concern, I would list it around number 8 or lower. Speeding through congested areas is not the issue. The Bear Island NWZ has been in place for about 15 years, with reasonable compliance.

What do you mean by this? NWZ's or any congested areas?

[Silver Duck]

BI

There's a legal limit to the size of an NWZ? How does that work?

Silver Duck

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

BI

There's a legal limit to the size of an NWZ? How does that work?

Silver Duck

The Bear Island NWZ is supposed to extend 150' north and south from the mail dock. In reality it extends about 400' south and 800' north of the mail dock.

If the northern part didn't extend 800' then it wouldn't make it to Pine Island, and boats could just drive around the NWZ.

I don't know how they screwed this up but 150' would never work. I wonder if they write it up as being small so they don't get a lot of resistance at the hearing.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

The Bear Island NWZ is supposed to extend 150' north and south from the mail dock. In reality it extends about 400' south and 800' north of the mail dock.

If the northern part didn't extend 800' then it wouldn't make it to Pine Island, and boats could just drive around the NWZ.

I don't know how they screwed this up but 150' would never work. I wonder if they write it up as being small so they don't get a lot of resistance at the hearing.

Gee maybe we should see about getting this corrected if it's unlawful

[ITD]

Dear Senators:

Once again we are seeing posts about how this is not a concern or that is not a concern. Another favorite is the "we tried to compromise", or "I would rather have had a horsepower limit", or fast boats make wakes that kill loons, or an accident a few years ago caused by a drunk not looking where he was going somehow magically would have been prevented by a speed limit.

The bottom line: A SPEED LIMIT WILL SOLVE NOTHING, a speed limit will cause enforcement officers to move to the Broads looking for speeders who don't exist or are few and far between taking them away from much more productive public safety oriented tasks.


Why????

So a few people on an island (or islands) can put the first notch in their belt in their effort to remove boats from the lake. Don't fall for it Senators, your job, is to see through frenzies stirred up by rabble-rousers and do the right thing. The right thing here is to defeat this bill.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I'm not sure increasing the size of the NWZ will make any difference. It's already about three times as large as the law allows. And it isn't about wake its about slowing people down in a crowded area. The biggest advantage of the NWZ is it keeps many boats away. Before the NWZ was enacted that was the most scary place on the lake. Worse than Eagle island was.

In general I don't think laws that require intense enforcement are the best answer. The NWZ solved 99% of the problems it was intended to solve. If the MP could show up more often and make it 99.9% that would be great, it's not likely to happen however.

Maybe if all of the speed limit proponents had put their time and energy into pushing for a solution to increased enforcement, something would have been done. After all these years, you May get the speed limit.

Seems pretty darn stupid to me given your comments about lack of enforcement for the speed limit areas already in place. Perhaps for the next 20 years a new thread can be in place for Why No Speed Limit Enforcement?

I remember traveling that area frequently years ago. It was pretty congested then. We usually slowed down in that area, primarily due to congestion and waves, but also because it narrows out and is close to land.

[Chris Craft]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

I suspected that to be the truth. As an opponent to the speed limit I can honestly say that SOME not all of the owners of these GFBL boats are their own worst enemies in all this. If everyone had complied with noise ordinances and kept a low profile then we wouldn't even be talking about speed limits. It isn't really in their nature for most of these owners who are trying to get everyone to look at them, so they go bigger louder brighter. I really have no problem with the bigger, brighter, as I love to look at these boats. It's the louder I have the problem with. When I have to suspend my conversation until a boat goes by that's obnoxious.

I agree. So why not go after tighter noise ordinences? Winni does have some of the stricktest that I am aware of but is it enforced? I really have no idea but I guess not? Muffling is getting better on speed boats. If you put "donki dicks" (sorry but that is what they are called) it really muffles the sound at wide open and idle noise drops off big time. This solution does not loose much power at all. This is something that I could be more likely to get behind..... in the interest of compromise.