Sound travels at night

[rick35]

Maybe I am lucky that this was the first time I was jolted awake by a passing boat. I've been on the lake for almost 30 years and a property owner for 16 and this was by far the loudest I've every heard.

I'm not suggesting that there should be some new law that regulates decibles but I'm sure there are some who would love to see one.

Another new sound I heard this week was the sound of blaring music playing from a boat pulling wakeboarders down a little from our camp. I guess we've been lucky that it hasn't caught on like it has other places. I've seen posts in other boating forums about people installing powerful sound systems in their boats and mounting big speakers in their wakeboard towers. I don't appreciate loud music in our neighborhood at home and its even worse at the lake. It goes against the very reason why the lake has been a special place.

Its really about courtesy and respect for other people around us. Unfortunately there less of it these days.

[tis]

I must admit, I love the rumble of the boats too. Since there is a decibel law, I suppose that is the reason they have the law against the devices. MP couldn't tell if someone's boat could be above 82 because they switch to quiet when they see the MP.

[2Blackdogs]

Originally Posted by rick35

I've seen posts in other boating forums about people installing powerful sound systems in their boats and mounting big speakers in their wakeboard towers. I don't appreciate loud music in our neighborhood at home and its even worse at the lake. It goes against the very reason why the lake has been a special place.

Its really about courtesy and respect for other people around us. Unfortunately there less of it these days.

Just hope the wakeboarder falls down a lot.

They always turn down the noise when THEY want to talk!

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by rick35

Maybe I am lucky that this was the first time I was jolted awake by a passing boat. I've been on the lake for almost 30 years and a property owner for 16 and this was by far the loudest I've every heard.

I'm not suggesting that there should be some new law that regulates decibles but I'm sure there are some who would love to see one.

Another new sound I heard this week was the sound of blaring music playing from a boat pulling wakeboarders down a little from our camp. I guess we've been lucky that it hasn't caught on like it has other places. I've seen posts in other boating forums about people installing powerful sound systems in their boats and mounting big speakers in their wakeboard towers. I don't appreciate loud music in our neighborhood at home and its even worse at the lake. It goes against the very reason why the lake has been a special place.

Its really about courtesy and respect for other people around us. Unfortunately there less of it these days.

If the wakeboard boat in question was black and yellow it was ME. If it was the red, white and black Supra or any others it was not. And for the record our music is played just loud enough for the rider to hear, and is muted when the boat is stopped or driving but not towing. Been doing it in the same area for the last 4 years and never a complaint. We don't just drive around with music cranking, trying to be obnoxious. We are careful where we go, how close to shore and other boats we are, and are mindful of others enjoying their watersports as well. Actually we get a lot of thumbs up and waves from people watching the riders.

If you want to talk about lack of courtesy, how about all the boats in the area that have no idea of what 150' looks like??? Do you know how many times in the course of a weekend we have close calls, get cut off or just witness stupidity? A guy in a scarab on Saturday cruised by my boarder who was in the water waiting to be pulled at no more than 50' away. We yelled, blew the horn and "saluted" and he just smiled and drove on. Some of the residents on the island, just down from me, are offenders. Maybe you???

As far as a particularly loud boat that night, I was awake and by a campfire at that time and do not recall anything out of the ordinary. Night traffic in general has been almost non-existent lately, and with the stepped-up MP patrols in the area due to a few phone calls it has been more peaceful lately.

Any music requests? Maybe "Who let the dogs out?" in honor of the concentrated trolling efforts recently of 2BD?

[rick35]

Wasn't me. Even with fewer boaters out there seem to be as many knuckleheads who have no respect for the 150 foot rule. I always stay way away from anyone pulling a tube or skiier. You never know when the rider might go down and even 150 feet is not enough.

[VtSteve]

Same here this weekend, with the gorgeous weather. Every idiot within 100 miles had to be here. SOS though.

1) Too Close, Waaaaay too close for comfort
2) Tubting, even wakeboarding between anchored boats in beach area in about 6' of water

3) Some idiot in a GSBL (go slow be loud) boat, racing two PWC's FROM THE BEACH

4) Police boat stopped a PWC, no issues I saw, and a dinghy in the beach area. After 45 minutes total, police boat took off never to be seen again.

5) Large cruisers making larger waves, too close

6) One GFBL boat going waaaaaay too fast and too close in the bay.

7) Many smaller boats refusing to change their straight line course (center of channel) regardless of whether there was a blowboat or another boat towing someone on a tube.


Police CG presence? I'd give them an F overall for the busiest weekend of the year. Laws broken? Too many to count.

[Bear Islander]

Rick35

That boat went between Bear and Pine Islands as well. There has been a boat doing this for years. Usually Friday or Saturday nights between midnight and 2 AM. Very load and very fast, I wait to hear if he will hit the no wake marker, but he never does. Either very lucky or good night vision.

The old marker has a big metal thing that got hit real bad. The newer one is much lighter and will do less damage.

And he ALWAYS goes by south to north.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Rick35

That boat went between Bear and Pine Islands as well. There has been a boat doing this for years. Usually Friday or Saturday nights between midnight and 2 AM. Very load and very fast, I wait to hear if he will hit the no wake marker, but he never does. Either very lucky or good night vision.

The old marker has a big metal thing that got hit real bad. The newer one is much lighter and will do less damage.

And he ALWAYS goes by south to north.

Sounds like an ideal candidate for the MP to wait for. Have you phoned in the boat's coordinates and MO?

[codeman671]

I did notice that someone hit the red/white spar at the tip of Bear this weekend, either Friday or Saturday night. The top was almost sliced off. I know my stereo did not do that

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Sounds like an ideal candidate for the MP to wait for. Have you phoned in the boat's coordinates and MO?

The MP were around the NWZ last night blue lighting a few boats. But over night I think there is only one boat on duty.

I wonder if he will do it next year? It will be harder to get away with if he is breaking the law all the time instead of just busting the zone.

[B R]

Isn't he already breaking the law? Sounds like he's going through no wake zones without slowing down; probably going too fast for conditions already. What will the speed limit do?

I'll take a guess that he'll still be doing this next year.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by B R

Isn't he already breaking the law? Sounds like he's going through no wake zones without slowing down; probably going too fast for conditions already. What will the speed limit do?

I'll take a guess that he'll still be doing this next year.

Yes he is breaking the law now, but only at one place on the lake. He may be easier to catch when is breaking the law all over the lake.

By next year I should have an infrared camera with motion detection isolated on the NWZ. Then I can email his picture to the MP.

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Yes he is breaking the law now, but only at one place on the lake. He may be easier to catch when is breaking the law all over the lake.

By next year I should have an infrared camera with motion detection isolated on the NWZ. Then I can email his picture to the MP.

How do you know he'll be breaking the law all over the lake next year. You've witnessed him buzzing through the NWZ so you know he's broken that law but what other law has he broken besides that and how do you know he'll be breaking it next year. Have fun with boats going 25 mph or less by your house each night next summer...hopefully you're a night owl.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

How do you know he'll be breaking the law all over the lake next year. You've witnessed him buzzing through the NWZ so you know he's broken that law but what other law has he broken besides that and how do you know he'll be breaking it next year. Have fun with boats going 25 mph or less by your house each night next summer...hopefully you're a night owl.

Next year he will be speeding unless he changes his ways. I don't know how fast he has been going, but it is way way over 25.

Boats going by don't bother me at any speed. The lights and the sound are relaxing actually. If I didn't like the site and sound of boats, I wouldn't live on a point.

You seem to be stuck on your own stereotyped image of speed limit supporters. Your boat hating islander theory is mutually exclusive.

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Next year he will be speeding unless he changes his ways. I don't know how fast he has been going, but it is way way over 25.

Boats going by don't bother me at any speed. The lights and the sound are relaxing actually. If I didn't like the site and sound of boats, I wouldn't live on a point.

You seem to be stuck on your own stereotyped image of speed limit supporters. Your boat hating islander theory is mutually exclusive.

Once again I ask how do you know he intends to "speed" at night once the law is passed??

[Islander]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

Once again I ask how do you know he intends to "speed" at night once the law is passed??

Are you Trolling again?

I don't get it. What are you after? Will it give you "closure" to catch the opposition in a semantic error? Do you have to make every thread about speed limits? How can anybody know the intent of an unknown person? He is breaking one law now... if he does the same thing next year he will be breaking two. What is your point?

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by Islander

Are you Trolling again?

I don't get it. What are you after? Will it give you "closure" to catch the opposition in a semantic error? Do you have to make every thread about speed limits? How can anybody know the intent of an unknown person? He is breaking one law now... if he does the same thing next year he will be breaking two. What is your point?

No not trolling just asking a question pertainting to BI's post...isn't that clear?

[2Blackdogs]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

Once again I ask how do you know he intends to "speed" at night once the law is passed??

Once again?

KC, why the "shove" aspect to these questions at this thread?

First, we are to "shove" our fingers into our ears against noisy boaters?

Second, we are to "shove" concerns about lakefronts being struck....right after one WAS hit?

One poster wrote here, "Good luck trying to enforce this" and intended to, "boat as I always have". Let me ask you, doesn't that "shove-it-attitude" of a poster here fit the template perfectly to be Bear Islander's targeted night-time offender?

.....Since it only takes a handful of boaters to ruin it for everybody, there's a lot of arrogant "shoving" going on here.....

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

Once again?

KC, why the "shove" aspect to these questions at this thread?

First, we are to "shove" our fingers into our ears against noisy boaters?

Second, we are to "shove" concerns about lakefronts being struck....right after one WAS hit?

One poster wrote here, "Good luck trying to enforce this" and intended to, "boat as I always have". Let me ask you, doesn't that "shove-it-attitude" of a poster here fit the template perfectly to be Bear Islander's targeted night-time offender?

.....Since it only takes a handful of boaters to ruin it for everybody, there's a lot of arrogant "shoving" going on here.....

There's an saying..."one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch" , it's also a song by The Osmond Brothers and now I'm really feeling old.

[B R]

i guess with the speed limit in place, MP hears this guy and then starts chasing him around the lake? doesn't sound all that safe to me. sounds like the probability of an accident goes up significantly.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by B R

i guess with the speed limit in place, MP hears this guy and then starts chasing him around the lake? doesn't sound all that safe to me. sounds like the probability of an accident goes up significantly.

You are using faulty logic. By your way of thinking our highways would be safer if we didn't have speed limits on them. Because then the police would not be chasing offenders. But that's not the way it works, is it! Do you really think boats will run from the Marine Patrol? Where will they run to? Where can they hide? Winni is a closed environment.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Islander

You are using faulty logic. By your way of thinking our highways would be safer if we didn't have speed limits on them. Because then the police would not be chasing offenders. But that's not the way it works, is it! Do you really think boats will run from the Marine Patrol? Where will they run to? Where can they hide? Winni is a closed environment.

German autobahns (no day time speed limit, for the most part, night time limit of 130 kmh (80 MPH or so)) have historically had a lower accident rate than US highways. Many US police departments have a no high speed chase policy because it turns out the chase is typically far more dangerous for the general public than the offense that started the chase.

That said, I see your point and honestly do not expect to see any high speed chases on this lake...

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

By next year I should have an infrared camera with motion detection isolated on the NWZ. Then I can email his picture to the MP.

Choose wisely, most "motion detection" cameras work horribly outdoors and will trigger many false alarms.

Get something with a decent cut filter and adjustable imager settings and you should get some good shots with just the moonlight. You'll likely want at least D1/4CIF resolution as well. Megapixel would be good, but probably not strickly necessary.

[2Blackdogs]

Originally Posted by B R

Isn't he already breaking the law? Sounds like he's going through no wake zones without slowing down; probably going too fast for conditions already. What will the speed limit do? I'll take a guess that he'll still be doing this next year.

Next year, BI's night-time offender will be identified by an unseen officer with radar.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

The MP were around the NWZ last night blue lighting a few boats. But over night I think there is only one boat on duty.

I wonder if he will do it next year? It will be harder to get away with if he is breaking the law all the time instead of just busting the zone.

First off, I agree with the original theme of the thread, which is common courtesy, where the heck is it? We had a few of those types on Winni many, many years ago, most areas do.

BI, what the heck? He runs nightly at high speed and very loud through a NWZ and you're wondering if he'll do it next year? I guess you're saying the enforcement is so lacking that you need to be breaking a law everywhere to occasionally get the perp? I'd be far more worried, and very annoyed, about someone doing that in a NWZ than someone going 50 mph at night. Different breed of arrogant.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

First off, I agree with the original theme of the thread, which is common courtesy, where the heck is it? We had a few of those types on Winni many, many years ago, most areas do.

BI, what the heck? He runs nightly at high speed and very loud through a NWZ and you're wondering if he'll do it next year? I guess you're saying the enforcement is so lacking that you need to be breaking a law everywhere to occasionally get the perp? I'd be far more worried, and very annoyed, about someone doing that in a NWZ than someone going 50 mph at night. Different breed of arrogant.

The NWZ was created because of congestion in a narrow passage. There are probably no boats in the NWZ when he goes through at 1 or 2 am. And it's not every night, just now and then on weekends. I'm not saying it's OK. I would love it if the MP were waiting for him when he came through some night.

I have the MP on my scanner. Every hour each boat out reports their location. That time of night it's usually one boat on a large lake.

All in all the guys that really get me are the ones that follow behind you when your tubing. That is world class stupid, yet legal if he is back 150'. It doesn't happen often, but once is to many.

Steve it seems boats busting a NWZ gets you angry. If so don't live next to a NWZ.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Steve it seems boats busting a NWZ gets you angry. If so don't live next to a NWZ.

I don't, but you do. Yes, busting a NWZ irritates me. I guess I'm just still stuck in the past with what you claimed irritated you, not the recent proclamations as to what you're really concerned about. Yes, congestion sucks, we all have to deal with it somehow. I hate the boneheads. I hate boats cutting me off, and those that are way too close. Boats following those with tubers or skiers also bother me.

But I do state what I mean, and do not obfuscate the message, nor do I mislead the reader. I try to focus on real issues and try to participate in solving them. One of the very first things I would have done over there, is push hard for years for increased MP funding, not more laws. But then again, I addressed the problems stated, not hidden agendas.

[SAMIAM]

I'm probably the only person on the forum who welcomes NWZ violators.....I live in a no wake zone and it's nice to have a few waves to clean my beach every now and then.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I don't, but you do. Yes, busting a NWZ irritates me. I guess I'm just still stuck in the past with what you claimed irritated you, not the recent proclamations as to what you're really concerned about. Yes, congestion sucks, we all have to deal with it somehow. I hate the boneheads. I hate boats cutting me off, and those that are way too close. Boats following those with tubers or skiers also bother me.

But I do state what I mean, and do not obfuscate the message, nor do I mislead the reader. I try to focus on real issues and try to participate in solving them. One of the very first things I would have done over there, is push hard for years for increased MP funding, not more laws. But then again, I addressed the problems stated, not hidden agendas.

This hidden agenda stuff is either crap or bad memory. It's the opposition that keeps talking about safety, so naturally the pro-limit side responds about safety. And I'm sure that for some on "my" side it is only about safety. But I have been telling people for years that "its not just about safety" or that "safety is not my first concern".

Read this post by Woodsy from 2005. In it Representative Pilliod, the author of the original bill, clearly states it is all about "Fear". He also makes it plain he thinks high performance boats don't belong on the lake, and that they should go to the ocean.

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ad.php?p=23856

"...However I will tell you that I am, I have thousands literally, of supporters on the lake who are just scared and that’s what it amounts to. Fear. It has nothing to do with death rate, or anything else, the numbers of arrests for speed and all the rest of it..."

..."why don’t you go on the ocean which these boat/boats were designed for"....

You can read down a few posts and see what others, including yours truly, has to say about it.

So you see Steve this hidden agenda stuff is pure baloney. So please either stop posting about it or tell me specifically what you think has been hidden.

[VtSteve]

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...&postcount=506
Bear Islander - 4-15-2008

""Is 45 mph safer than 55 mph? Yes. "

Thank You! That is all the justification I need for HB847

All the rest of the rhetoric is justification, denial amd misdirection. Plus a sad attempt to rewrite the Coast Guard statistics. A 45 mph speed limit will make the lake safer."

Bear Islander 4-15-2008
"I didn't pick 45. I would have chosen a higher number. But that is the legislation we have. I have chosen to support it.

If every speed is safer than the one higher, then a speed limit will make the lake safer."

Bear Islander 4-16-2008
"I wish the 150' rule were really the panacea you think it is. Unfortunately it is not a magic shield against boating accidents. It did not prevent last years fatal accident, or the one 5 years ago. It would not have made any difference if there was a 150' rule on Long Lake last summer.

Violations of the 150' rule are possibly the most common boating complaint on this forum. It has been pointed out many times that large numbers of boaters seem unaware of its existence.

Even if the 150' rule worked as well as we all wished it did, it would not change the fact that slower is safer."

Ok enough, I'm busy today.

You've used water quality, erosion, kids camps, referenced 90mph in a NWZ, noise, just about everything. The past two weeks or so, you get into the Congestion. You just plain think having the speed limit would cut down on congestion. In various threads, you say you never said this was about safety, waves, pollution, whatever. In another reference, you even state that you would have made the daytime limit higher than 45.

I know it's sometimes confusing to stay focused when responding to so many different issues. But if you had always stated that congestion and lowering the mount of boat traffic on the lake was paramount, then that would have been the focus of your arguments. Until lately, it never has been. And unfortunately, I have wasted far too much time going back through your posts trying to come up with a central theme. There are many Central Themes, which have of course changed over time. Now it's congestion.

I guess you're correct, there has been no Hidden Agenda. I remember the discussions over waves and how the law would help that. I was puzzled, then we moved onto another facet of the debate. Your real agenda didn't actually dawn on me until sometime last month. That's about the time you finally stated it. If you stated this much earlier, then forgive me, I must have missed it.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...&postcount=506
Bear Islander - 4-15-2008

""Is 45 mph safer than 55 mph? Yes. "

Thank You! That is all the justification I need for HB847

All the rest of the rhetoric is justification, denial amd misdirection. Plus a sad attempt to rewrite the Coast Guard statistics. A 45 mph speed limit will make the lake safer."

Bear Islander 4-15-2008
"I didn't pick 45. I would have chosen a higher number. But that is the legislation we have. I have chosen to support it.

If every speed is safer than the one higher, then a speed limit will make the lake safer."

Bear Islander 4-16-2008
"I wish the 150' rule were really the panacea you think it is. Unfortunately it is not a magic shield against boating accidents. It did not prevent last years fatal accident, or the one 5 years ago. It would not have made any difference if there was a 150' rule on Long Lake last summer.

Violations of the 150' rule are possibly the most common boating complaint on this forum. It has been pointed out many times that large numbers of boaters seem unaware of its existence.

Even if the 150' rule worked as well as we all wished it did, it would not change the fact that slower is safer."

Ok enough, I'm busy today.

You've used water quality, erosion, kids camps, referenced 90mph in a NWZ, noise, just about everything. The past two weeks or so, you get into the Congestion. You just plain think having the speed limit would cut down on congestion. In various threads, you say you never said this was about safety, waves, pollution, whatever. In another reference, you even state that you would have made the daytime limit higher than 45.

I know it's sometimes confusing to stay focused when responding to so many different issues. But if you had always stated that congestion and lowering the mount of boat traffic on the lake was paramount, then that would have been the focus of your arguments. Until lately, it never has been. And unfortunately, I have wasted far too much time going back through your posts trying to come up with a central theme. There are many Central Themes, which have of course changed over time. Now it's congestion.

I guess you're correct, there has been no Hidden Agenda. I remember the discussions over waves and how the law would help that. I was puzzled, then we moved onto another facet of the debate. Your real agenda didn't actually dawn on me until sometime last month. That's about the time you finally stated it. If you stated this much earlier, then forgive me, I must have missed it.

I don't see what those quotes prove. Like I said, the opposition wanted to focus on the safety issue so that is what I responded to.

45 IS safer than 55.

That IS all the justification that is necessary (however there is a lot more)

Coast Guard statistics DO support HB847

A 45 mph speed limit WILL make the lake safer

I DID NOT pick 45

45 IS lower than I believe necessary

Bigger boats DO cause more pollution

Bigger wakes DO cause more erosion

Water quality IS dropping

Children's camps ARE limiting their boating

There IS fear in the lake community

The lake DOES have a thrill-seeking reputation

Tourism IS negatively effected by the above

Every word is true. Every word is consistent. Every argument points to a reason I support speed limits. I am not limited to one argument. I can have more than one agenda!

[COWISLAND NH]

Bigger boats DO cause more pollution

Bigger wakes DO cause more erosion

Water quality IS dropping

QUOTE]

What's next...no boats on the lake over 18 feet??? YADDA YADDA YADDA.
Careful what you vote for....I don't want to be swimming to the island in ten years!

[SIKSUKR]

First,boats that didn't fit winnfabs and their supporters idea of what should be on the lake were labeled Go Fast Be Load.Then the lake has been labeled dangerous because of the "Cowboy" and "Wild West" attitudes.Now any boat that can go much faster than 45 is labeled a "Thrillseeker".The scare tactics continue even after the law was signed in.What's next?Will it be those evil"Mechanical Monsters" that used to be called power boats?

[Ryan]

How about this logic:

0 MPH is safer than 1 MPH. We should ban movement on the lake.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

First off, I agree with the original theme of the thread, which is common courtesy, where the heck is it? We had a few of those types on Winni many, many years ago, most areas do.

It's really not nearly as bad as people would have you think. Winnipesaukee is a very polite and low-key place to boat. We truly are spoiled.

[2Blackdogs]

Because we expect too much of our boaters?

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

Because we expect too much of our boaters?

Perhaps, but I think it's because the majority are courteous and thoughtful; so much so, that the occasional boneheads really stand out (not unlike posters on this forum). Maybe they have risen to our expectations?

[2Blackdogs]

Originally Posted by Dave R

Perhaps, but I think it's because the majority are courteous and thoughtful; so much so, that the occasional boneheads really stand out (not unlike posters on this forum). Maybe they have risen to our expectations?

Rising to your expectations, maybe.

To mention the word "sound", and before still another Boating thread ends up in a certain sub-forum......

What I'm seeing is too many boaters arrive from out of state at this lake (and this site) and declare that they are exactly what this lake needs in the way of the ideal boater......As if to say, "I am an above-average boater and have the certificate to prove it".

We can't ALL be above-average!

What I hear instead, is stereos and exhausts that are anathema to a scenic lake crowded with islands, with loons, with views of mountains, and fully ringed with residences great and small.

What I see instead, is the collective self-absorption of boaters suddenly become a world unto themselves.

Suddenly nearsighted when approaching wildlife, kayaks and sailboats even at casual speeds......but at closing speeds even greater than the appearance, given the direction and velocity of the target-kayak or target-sailboat.

Posters on this forum, btw, stand out for at least two reasons. One, because they are not afraid to criticize the inconsiderate, negligent, reckless or dangerous operation of other operators in the face of those who would put their heads in the sand so as not to see.

Or two, they boat on Winnipesaukee's waters because their own states' lakes are "too restrictive" for their concept of boating or boat.

Prior, Winni's boaters HAD been among the most considerate in my experience.

Perhaps it was because they had more to lose with their little boat, or that insurance wasn't a consideration at one time for one's boat. I've never insured any of my boats, for example. I drive them as though any loss, including theft, would be a personally significant loss. Others like me would leave a skier to retrieve a dropped ski because they could. Others could be counted on to pick up the trash left by others or Mother Nature.

I ask, is the lake for our use AND abuse? Today, many drivers are too high above the lake's surface to reach down for those things that don't belong on the lake. Do they, themselves, belong on the lake?

Today, too many recent boaters (and even some new residents) consider a swimmer to be approved roadkill. Even though, like last year's sinking Cobalt in the middle of the lake, they would end up as swimmers themselves!

Those of us who are actual residents are at the mercy of noise, speed, alcohol, arrogance, ignorance, self-absorption, the distracted, the "above-average certified boater", the night......and sometimes.....all the above.

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

Rising to your expectations, maybe.

To mention the word "sound", and before still another Boating thread ends up in a certain sub-forum......

What I'm seeing is too many boaters arrive from out of state at this lake (and this site) and declare that they are exactly what this lake needs in the way of the ideal boater......As if to say, "I am an above-average boater and have the certificate to prove it".

We can't ALL be above-average!

What I hear instead, is stereos and exhausts that are anathema to a scenic lake crowded with islands, with loons, with views of mountains, and fully ringed with residences great and small.

What I see instead, is the collective self-absorption of boaters suddenly become a world unto themselves.

Suddenly nearsighted when approaching wildlife, kayaks and sailboats even at casual speeds......but at closing speeds even greater than the appearance, given the direction and velocity of the target-kayak or target-sailboat.

Posters on this forum, btw, stand out for at least two reasons. One, because they are not afraid to criticize the inconsiderate, negligent, reckless or dangerous operation of other operators in the face of those who would put their heads in the sand so as not to see.

Or two, they boat on Winnipesaukee's waters because their own states' lakes are "too restrictive" for their concept of boating or boat.

Prior, Winni's boaters HAD been among the most considerate in my experience.

Perhaps it was because they had more to lose with their little boat, or that insurance wasn't a consideration at one time for one's boat. I've never insured any of my boats, for example. I drive them as though any loss, including theft, would be a personally significant loss. Others like me would leave a skier to retrieve a dropped ski because they could. Others could be counted on to pick up the trash left by others or Mother Nature.

I ask, is the lake for our use AND abuse? Today, many drivers are too high above the lake's surface to reach down for those things that don't belong on the lake. Do they, themselves, belong on the lake?

Today, too many recent boaters (and even some new residents) consider a swimmer to be approved roadkill. Even though, like last year's sinking Cobalt in the middle of the lake, they would end up as swimmers themselves!

Those of us who are actual residents are at the mercy of noise, speed, alcohol, arrogance, ignorance, self-absorption, the distracted, the "above-average certified boater", the night......and sometimes.....all the above.

In my opinion a bad boater is a bad boater...what does it matter what "state" they are from? Is this YOUR hidden agenda 2bd? Where do you think all your fellow supporters over on BI are from? It ain't NH!! As far as the Cobalt sinking in the middle of the lake what does this have to do with anything? Are you now saying that innocent swimmers are being run down by big bad boats? This is bordering on the absurd, truly.

[SIKSUKR]

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

Rising to your expectations, maybe.

To mention the word "sound", and before still another Boating thread ends up in a certain sub-forum......

What I'm seeing is too many boaters arrive from out of state at this lake (and this site) and declare that they are exactly what this lake needs in the way of the ideal boater......As if to say, "I am an above-average boater and have the certificate to prove it".

We can't ALL be above-average!

What I hear instead, is stereos and exhausts that are anathema to a scenic lake crowded with islands, with loons, with views of mountains, and fully ringed with residences great and small.

What I see instead, is the collective self-absorption of boaters suddenly become a world unto themselves.

Suddenly nearsighted when approaching wildlife, kayaks and sailboats even at casual speeds......but at closing speeds even greater than the appearance, given the direction and velocity of the target-kayak or target-sailboat.

Posters on this forum, btw, stand out for at least two reasons. One, because they are not afraid to criticize the inconsiderate, negligent, reckless or dangerous operation of other operators in the face of those who would put their heads in the sand so as not to see.

Or two, they boat on Winnipesaukee's waters because their own states' lakes are "too restrictive" for their concept of boating or boat.

Prior, Winni's boaters HAD been among the most considerate in my experience.

Perhaps it was because they had more to lose with their little boat, or that insurance wasn't a consideration at one time for one's boat. I've never insured any of my boats, for example. I drive them as though any loss, including theft, would be a personally significant loss. Others like me would leave a skier to retrieve a dropped ski because they could. Others could be counted on to pick up the trash left by others or Mother Nature.

I ask, is the lake for our use AND abuse? Today, many drivers are too high above the lake's surface to reach down for those things that don't belong on the lake. Do they, themselves, belong on the lake?

Today, too many recent boaters (and even some new residents) consider a swimmer to be approved roadkill. Even though, like last year's sinking Cobalt in the middle of the lake, they would end up as swimmers themselves!

Those of us who are actual residents are at the mercy of noise, speed, alcohol, arrogance, ignorance, self-absorption, the distracted, the "above-average certified boater", the night......and sometimes.....all the above.

By now you probably have heard that hi speed boats are running over kayaks on the lake and has become so bad that we had a speed limit passed to eliminate that problem.It has now been brought to my attention that swimmers are being run down intentionally also.Interesting though is the thoughts of some of our local residents like the above quoted BD who tells us in this post that only people like himself are qualified to recreate on Lake Winni.If you are from another state(which I am not) or you disagree with his twisted view of the world,you should be banned from ever being on the lake.This is where these warped thinking people who have already started the ball rolling are going folks.WAKE UP and see what's going on people.I don't know about you but it this kind of thinking that should scare the heck out of all of us!

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

This is where these warped thinking people who have already started the ball rolling are going folks.WAKE UP and see what's going on people.I don't know about you but it this kind of thinking that should scare the heck out of all of us!

Seems to me you're being overly dramatic here. Polls showed NH people wanted this (yes I know you disagree with the results of the poll), the house voted for HB 847 by a wide margin, then the senate voted for it, now the governor has signed on as well. And just like people would legislate,say, against someone relieving himself in a town park, people have similarly said they don't want another beautiful resource (Winni) defiled. And the house, senate, and governor listened. I've heard all the arguments about "fear mongering" and such but people are able to see through the BS of politics and polititians and make up their own minds. People we talk to are very happy and excited about the new limits.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

By now you probably have heard that hi speed boats are running over kayaks on the lake and has become so bad that we had a speed limit passed to eliminate that problem.

As the kayaker on this forum who has posted the most about why kayaking has become dangerous on the lake, I have never once posted that high-speed boats are running over kayaks.

What I have posted is that SOME high-speed boaters are traveling faster than their ability to spot smaller, slower boats in time and that I have personally had high-speed boats unintentionally violate my 150 foot zone because they were going too fast. And this has happened way too often while I’ve been kayaking on winni.

I’ve never suggested that a speed limit will eliminate all safety issues – anymore than highway speed limits solve all safety issues on the highway – both are merely tools that are used to make both activities safer for everyone.

Congestion, BWI, and ignorance/disregard for existing boating laws are also major problems on the lake – but all these problems become even more dangerous with higher speeds. With all else being equal, slower is safer.

[SIKSUKR]

I never claimed that you did.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

Congestion, BWI, and ignorance/disregard for existing boating laws are also major problems on the lake – but all these problems become even more dangerous with higher speeds. With all else being equal, slower is safer.

These ARE the problems on the lake. Enforcement of the current rules will alleviate these major problems. A feel good law based on lies and hype will not.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

I never claimed that you did.

And I didn't say that you claimed that I did. But I am interested in where you (or anyone else visiting this forum) heard that "hi speed boats are running over kayaks on the lake." Who ever suggested that was happening?

Originally Posted by Ryan

These ARE the problems on the lake. Enforcement of the current rules will alleviate these major problems. A feel good law based on lies and hype will not.

The current rules are being enforced - but there is no way to enforce the current rules over 100% of the lake 100% of the time.

How is this a "feel good law," anymore than a highway speed limit is one?

The law was based on people's testimony that a lake speed limit was needed. I gave my own testimony, which was based on my own actual experience and on documented statistics - and I did not exaggerate in any way and I do not lie.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

but there is no way to enforce the current rules over 100% of the lake 100% of the time.

Your logic is severly flawed. If you can't enfore existing laws, how will the new SL be enforced? I'm not sure if you saw any of my posts from the past week, but there was very little MP presence on the lake last weekend. It was heavily congested. Gas prices are keeping MP boats docked, but not keeping boats off the lake. The law is an empty prayer and after it's shown ineffective, you're going to have to come up with some magic to get it renewed.

Originally Posted by Evenstar

How is this a "feel good law," anymore than a highway speed limit is one?

Because there have been numerous, documented cases where it has been shown that speed, and speed alone were the direct result of accidents on highways. These facts just didn't exist in Concord.

[KonaChick]

Evenstar you attribute speed to the reason these boats violated the 150" rule? I don't see the connection as I can violate that rule whether I'm putting along at 10 mph or 100 mph. Why would speeding make me more apt to violate that rule??

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

Evenstar you attribute speed to the reason these boats violated the 150" rule? I don't see the connection as I can violate that rule whether I'm putting along at 10 mph or 100 mph. Why would speeding make me more apt to violate that rule??

Evenstar attributes the majority of her posts to her own personal interpretations of things.

She could make great strides in lake safety by simply riding with the NHMP boats and acting as a human radar gun. No electronic detector would ever be able to warn the nasty power-drunk GFBL boaters traveling faster than their ability to see that the Evenstar 5000 was watching them. Of course, she would have to be sure to not be wearing her BLUE bikini and YELLOW lifevest and waving her ORANGE paddle tips ****

[Jeti]

We're just talkin' about the future
Forget about the past
It'll always be with us
It's never gonna die, never gonna die

Rock 'n' roll ain't noise pollution
Rock 'n' roll ain't gonna die
Rock 'n' roll ain't no pollution
Rock 'n' roll is just rock 'n' roll

[2Blackdogs]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Any music requests? Maybe "Who let the dogs out?" in honor of the concentrated trolling efforts recently of 2BD?

"Trolling" was best described as a poster who joins a cat-lover's forum then proceeds to say, "I love driving over cats".

I'm opposed to anybody driving over the rights of others to the detriment of a full enjoyment of Winni's natural attributes or to driving over any other boater, for that matter. AND cats.

The "150-rule" was not the best way to deflect your own contribution to the noise level.

Especially on weekends, Winni's high noise level can impact on-shore telephone use, ordinary conversations, those asleep, those listening to music, nature, or just listening to the wind in the pines. Not to mention the noise level that can impact boating emergencies, sounded signals, the sounds of warnings, cries for help, telephoning for help, and the hampering of an actual boating rescue or capsize.

"Driving over others" includes those who are so intolerant of others that they still use switchable exhaust among their neighbors, throw wine bottles in the lake, and turn up the stereo to play "Who let the Dogs Out". Expect a post from me when those who think their personal concept of boating does not "impact" other boaters or lake residents.

KC, Winni's boating is entirely recreational in nature, but can have serious consequences. "Driving up to your cottage" is not recreational in nature.

Coastal Laker, for every marina you should enter with "Captain's Call" at the appropriate setting, there are thousands of Winni residents asleep.

All the above was brought to mind by stumbling across the site www.rottenneighbors.com.

Who might be the next Winni boater featured on a video someday?!?!

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs

"Trolling" was best described as a poster who joins a cat-lover's forum then proceeds to say, "I love driving over cats".

I'm opposed to anybody driving over the rights of others to the detriment of a full enjoyment of Winni's natural attributes or to driving over any other boater, for that matter. AND cats.

The "150-rule" was not the best way to deflect your own contribution to the noise level.

Especially on weekends, Winni's high noise level can impact on-shore telephone use, ordinary conversations, those asleep, those listening to music, nature, or just listening to the wind in the pines. Not to mention the noise level that can impact boating emergencies, sounded signals, the sounds of warnings, cries for help, telephoning for help, and the hampering of an actual boating rescue or capsize.

"Driving over others" includes those who are so intolerant of others that they still use switchable exhaust among their neighbors, throw wine bottles in the lake, and turn up the stereo to play "Who let the Dogs Out". Expect a post from me when those who think their personal concept of boating does not "impact" other boaters or lake residents.

KC, Winni's boating is entirely recreational in nature, but can have serious consequences. "Driving up to your cottage" is not recreational in nature.

Coastal Laker, for every marina you should enter with "Captain's Call" at the appropriate setting, there are thousands of Winni residents asleep.

All the above was brought to mind by stumbling across the site www.rottenneighbors.com.

Who might be the next Winni boater featured on a video someday?!?!

KC, Winni's boating is entirrely recreational in nature, but can have serious consequences. "Driving up to your cottage" is not recreational in nature.

I have NO IDEA what you mean by this or what your point is. MY point is that you're in much more danger driving up to your "recreation" destination than you are when you're sleeping at your recreation destionation. I have no clue what you're trying to reference by that statement.