MP - Seriously?

[bigpatsfan]

I guess what was missing in the MP conversation with Joanna16 was any mentioned of a storm or what Joanna16 should do during this storm. Instead it appears that the MP was sent out to enforce the “no rafting” statue and that was what this autobot did.

In reading the large number of posts on many different threads regarding MP officers, it appears that the officers need additional training not only on boating and criminal laws but more importantly on how to interact with the populace. When reading the posts, most people are complaining about the officers demeanor.

This is not surprising as the Marine Patrol, as a group, is the least trained police department in the State. The majority of the officers are part time officers and as a result do not benefit from Police Standards and Trainings full time academy.

The State should seriously look at either abolishing the MP division and have the State Police handle boating or significantly increase the MP officers training.

[Winnipesaukee]

Joanna, I'll take some bashing too.

First of all, if caught in a storm and you have two anchors, I recommend anchoring "Bahama" style with as much scope as possible. It limits swing which assures that the anchors will hold. Not to mention you have two anchors in the ground...

Second, I believe the law says you can break a law if it is reasonably safe to do so, in a case of emergency.

I'm very pro-cop, but it seems that many (but not all) members of the MP have been unwilling to provide boaters any kind of real aid, as evidenced by the OP's post and my experiences with them. I don't dislike them; they just need to tweak their "mission" a bit. Don't they close their doors at 2AM? Don't their boats even lack VHF radios?

I don't subscribe to SeaTow or BoatUS. If I ever need help for whatever reason, I'm sure I can simply give a call on the radio and request assistance, and someone will help me out. I would and have done the same for others. It is considered good seamanship for a boater to assist another if they are in need. I expect MP to be part of that network of seaman-like boaters, but again, doesn't seem to really be the case....

[bigpatsfan]

Their mission is fine:

The Marine Patrol’s mission is to provide a safe, enjoyable, and environmentally responsible use for all of the State’s public waters.

It is their execution that needs work.

[SIKSUKR]

Originally Posted by Winnipesaukee

Joanna, I'll take some bashing too.
I'm very pro-cop, but it seems that many (but not all) members of the MP have been unwilling to provide boaters any kind of real aid, as evidenced by the OP's post and my experiences with them.
I don't subscribe to SeaTow or BoatUS. If I ever need help for whatever reason, I expect MP to be part of that network of seaman-like boaters, but again, doesn't seem to really be the case....

I have to post in support of MP for a recent event.Two Saturdays ago I was to meet a friend at Braun Bay.I went over on my PWC while my girlfriend went with a couple friends in their boat.I get a call while waiting in Braun from them and they inform me they are dead in the water right by Eagle Island.It's pretty windy out so I'm a little concerned about how their boat will fair being dead.I move as fast as I can to get to them but that still takes about 10 minutes.When I arrived MP was already assisting them.They had been blown towards Pitchwood and MP saw them in trouble.MP tossed them a line and towed them back to a safe area and then called Seatow for them.He waited till Seatow arrived until leaving.Needless to say my friends were very happy that the MP arrived to help them.

[Woodsy]

I am a huge supporter of the NHMP and think they do a TREMENDOUS job given thier funding level, seasonal employees etc... They really do! Winiipesaukee regardless of what some of the detractors say, is one of the safest places to boat in the country and a lot of that has to do with the proffessionalism of the NHMP!

I just think in this particular instance it was a bit over the top given the storm and the lack of boats...

Woodsy

[KonaChick]

With the way these storms have been for the last few weeks if MP cruised the lake warning boaters of storms, that's all they'd be doing!

[Airwaves]

Rather than cruise the lake warning boaters of an impending storm they could just do a VHF broadcast when severe thunderstorm warnings are posted for the area.

During the severe weather at the end of bike week I heard NHMP HQ do a broadcast on their dispatch channel warning MP boats to find a secure area to ride out the storm, they certainly could do the same for the general boating population.

Just an aside, boaters on Winnipesaukee really should have a VHF with a wx alert feature for just these conditions since most over the air radio stations in the area are computers with no live person behind the mic to let you know when things like this are happening and satellite radio will be no help at all!

[kchace]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

Rather than cruise the lake warning boaters of an impending storm they could just do a VHF broadcast when severe thunderstorm warnings are posted for the area.

During the severe weather at the end of bike week I heard NHMP HQ do a broadcast on their dispatch channel warning MP boats to find a secure area to ride out the storm, they certainly could do the same for the general boating population.

Just an aside, boaters on Winnipesaukee really should have a VHF with a wx alert feature for just these conditions since most over the air radio stations in the area are computers with no live person behind the mic to let you know when things like this are happening and satellite radio will be no help at all!

While boating last year I heard the NHMP issue issue a storm warning via VHF ch16. It was timely and welcomed. It gave me a chance to get the boat tucked into a protected space.

Ken

[liberator211]

First and foremost I think the MP does a great job the majority of the time. They do surprise me from time to time with the way they harass me. Just last night I took a dusk cruise from Cummings Cove area into Paugus bay and left around 7:30. I went into the Weirs channel and the MP boat was also in the channel. We exchanged waves as we passed each other. As I departed the channel heading back towards Pitchwood around 8:00 I put up my stern light and turned my lights on. The MP was just sitting outside the channel off the flashing black marker near Hoits Point (no lights on). While pulling out I see three different jet skis still running without lights and another bonehead tubing with his lights on. This is now 8:15-8:30 and I am wondering why the heck the MP is not addressing either one of these issues. I take off and sure enough the lights go on and who does the MP pull over? Me of course; not the jet skiers who are still out or the bonehead with his kids tubing at near dark. I was far away from everybody including the MP so I knew I did not break any headway rules. We go through the whole thing of safety equipment, registration, boater’s license etc. After passing with flying colors they tell me they are going to issue me a ticket for not having properly displayed my running lights when we passed in the channel. Oh by the way they did not have any running lights on either when we passed in the Weirs Channel. Of course I did not bring that up or ask them why it was me and not the other knuckle heads they pulled over. I was able to apologize profusely and also receive a verbal warning but I mean come on. One last tidbit of information; I am young and own a go fast style boat so you now know the reason it was me who was pulled over and not the family tubing at dusk or the jet skiers. Has not been the first time I have been pulled-over nor do I expect it to be the last time. Have a good day everybody.

[Winnipesaukee]

You should have welcomed the ticket, asked the MP why their lights were off, and why they didn't pull over the boneheads on jet skis. Then you should have taken a picture of the MP boat and the jet skis.

[VtSteve]

Is this fairly new behavior on the lake? From many reports this year, it "appears" that a certain group of boaters has been targeted for some harassment. Possibly some is justified to make a statement, hard to tell since we only hear one side of the story. I'm not disputing your account at all, and it would appear that in your case at least, the MP not only has a problem with harassment, but one of upholding the law as well.

I realize I'm throwing this out there with no basis in fact other than posts here and elsewhere. I do that, because if there is a problem, it needs to be addressed so credibility remains intact. I know of at least one other lake where some powerful interests have influenced the targets the MP routinely single out.

[Woodsy]

VT...

I dont think a certian group of boaters has been singled out... its just not the way the NHMP operate. At Braun Bay I have seen them discuss the rules with everyone, not just us Hi-Po Boaters. I think there has been a decision this summer to crackdown a bit on rafting & other relatively minor violations. I think the NHMP has a bit less to do this year with boat traffic being waaaaayyyy down, so they have the manpower to concentrate on the lesser violations.

All in all I think they do a GREAT job!

Woodsy

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

VT...

I dont think a certian group of boaters has been singled out... its just not the way the NHMP operate. At Braun Bay I have seen them discuss the rules with everyone, not just us Hi-Po Boaters. I think there has been a decision this summer to crackdown a bit on rafting & other relatively minor violations. I think the NHMP has a bit less to do this year with boat traffic being waaaaayyyy down, so they have the manpower to concentrate on the lesser violations.

All in all I think they do a GREAT job!

Woodsy

That's all well and good. But I'm far more concerned about the jet skiers and the tuber at dusk than I am about someone that did put their light on. If I'm the skipper of that boat, I'll take my medicine. But I'll also instruct the MP to look over yonder for a real accident waiting to happen. Poor judgment, or selective call?

[tis]

I DO think the MP gets a "cause" each year. It seems one year it was the decibel law, another the 150', etc. Has anyone else noticed that over the years? I don't know if they sit down at a meeting and say: "This year we are going to concentrate on the (such and such) law" or if it just kind of happens. I think a lot of times it is when the law is new too.

Last I knew, MP will not tow anyone, but they will call someone for you.

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by tis

I DO think the MP gets a "cause" each year. It seems one year it was the decibel law, another the 150', etc. Has anyone else noticed that over the years? I don't know if they sit down at a meeting and say: "This year we are going to concentrate on the (such and such) law" or if it just kind of happens. I think a lot of times it is when the law is new too.

Last I knew, MP will not tow anyone, but they will call someone for you.

tis -- Rightly or wrongly I have to agree with you 100% .......

I am also a firm believer that (for the most part) the MP do a great job & are (usually) fair. But I had to laugh at your post tis, for each year we go up to the lake it has always been a question of "what will be MP's -itch- this season".

[Island-Ho]

Liberator - Your post indicates the alledged lighting infraction occurred between 8:15 and 8:30. This is very picky by MP, especially as you had turned on your lights before he stopped you. On 7/21 susnset was at 8:20pm, and lights are required between sunset and sunrise. MP probably waited until after the inquery and safety inspection before he wrote the ticket, so the time on the ticket will unfortunately be after sunset. I don't know what times are entered on a ticket, but you might want to compare those with actual sunset time. There is probably not enough accurate time noted to be of any use fighting it. Was the tuber there after he was finished with you? Maybe that was his next target.

[Airwaves]

Just to follow up on Island-Ho's thoughts

Even if the time of the ticket is at the end of the stop and after sunset wouldn't the MP boat call the stop into MPHQ when the stop was first initiated? So if you wanted to dispute the ticket and timeline the MPHQ should have the time of the inital stop written in their log.

BTW I beleive liberator said he was able to talk MP out of a ticket and just received a verbal warning.

As for MP targeting groups. If I had to venture a guess I'd say they are probably more focused on boats they believe might be able to go above the new speed limit law in anticipation of it taking effect. Kind of putting folks on notice this year. That, coupled with boat traffic being lighter they have less to do.

[John A. Birdsall]

Originally Posted by Island-Ho

Liberator - Your post indicates the alledged lighting infraction occurred between 8:15 and 8:30. This is very picky by MP, especially as you had turned on your lights before he stopped you. On 7/21 susnset was at 8:20pm, and lights are required between sunset and sunrise. MP probably waited until after the inquery and safety inspection before he wrote the ticket, so the time on the ticket will unfortunately be after sunset. I don't know what times are entered on a ticket, but you might want to compare those with actual sunset time. There is probably not enough accurate time noted to be of any use fighting it. Was the tuber there after he was finished with you? Maybe that was his next target.

If my memory serves me correctly lights are to be turned on 1/2 hr before sunset and 1/2 hour after sunrise. Now I have not looked at the regs about this for some time, but I believe that is the case, which says the lights need to be on at 7:50 PM

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by John A. Birdsall

If my memory serves me correctly lights are to be turned on 1/2 hr before sunset and 1/2 hour after sunrise. Now I have not looked at the regs about this for some time, but I believe that is the case, which says the lights need to be on at 7:50 PM

Sorry John, that isn't correct. Read the rule in the post above yours. It is during the hours of darkness between sunset and sunrise.

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by Nightwing
They don't have to carry VHF radios. The VHF channels commonly used for emergency broadcasts are programmed in the police radios on board and in dispatch.

Let me throw out this question then.
IIRC USCG regulations require commercial vessels to carry VHF and monitor VHF16.
Now I know that NH is a world unto itself and while USCG rules are accepted pretty much everywhere else in the US, not so in NH.
So, the question becomes are NH commercial vessels, and I would argue that the NHMP falls into this category, required under USCG rules to carry Marine VHF radios and monitor VHF 16?

BTW, I'll ask again. Did the NHMP issue a severe WX warning on VHF 16 for today's events?

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

Let me throw out this question then.
IIRC USCG regulations require commercial vessels to carry VHF and monitor VHF16.
Now I know that NH is a world unto itself and while USCG rules are accepted pretty much everywhere else in the US, not so in NH.
So, the question becomes are NH commercial vessels, and I would argue that the NHMP falls into this category, required under USCG rules to carry Marine VHF radios and monitor VHF 16?

BTW, I'll ask again. Did the NHMP issue a severe WX warning on VHF 16 for today's events?

I doubt that CC regs, even if they applied to the MP boats would require a separate VHF radio when the on board Motorola carries the marine channels. It is the difference between a clock and a clock radio. The clock radio tells time the same as a clock.

As far as weather warnings, since you have your VHF radio, tune in to WX1 or WX2 for up to date weather. They broadcast all the time, continuously.

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by Nightwing
I doubt that CC regs, even if they applied to the MP boats would require a separate VHF radio when the on board Motorola carries the marine channels. It is the difference between a clock and a clock radio. The clock radio tells time the same as a clock.

As far as weather warnings, since you have your VHF radio, tune in to WX1 or WX2 for up to date weather. They broadcast all the time, continuously.

Okay so clear this up for me since based on your past posts it appears to me that you may be, or have once been, an officer of the NHMP or MP Auxilary? (Not being nosy but it would explain what appears to be some of your "inside" knowledge?)

First off yes, USCG regulations reguire a VHF radio on commercial vessels and that it be tuned to chanel 16 at all times while underway. Some vessel are also required to carry a second VHF radio tuned to channel 13 (bridge to bridge) and a third SSB radio. This is in addition to whatever company radio might be involved.

The onboard Motorola NHMP vessels carry. You say it carries the VHF marine channels. Do those Motorola radios allow the MP crews two-way communications with recreational/USCG vessels (AirOps) on those channels or are we talking about a boat with a built-in scanner (monitor only) on board?

If they are equipped, do NHMP boats monitor VHF 16 at all times while underway as required by USCG regulation?

As for WX warnings, certainly you can tune your VHF Radio to WX (xx) for the latest, but since boats are required to monitor VHF 16, and older VHF radios don't have a scan feature, it would be NICE if the MP gave boaters a heads up, ya think? USCG Group Portland certainly does, but Group Portland (audible on Winnipesaukee) is concerned about it's own operating area, that does NOT include the Lakes Region of NH.

So, we still have TWO questions pending. Why don't MP boats have VHF Marine radios, and DID the NHMPHQ issue a marine warning broadcast today?

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

...So, we still have TWO questions pending. Why don't MP boats have VHF Marine radios, and DID the NHMPHQ issue a marine warning broadcast today?...

HERE is the contact page for the good folks over at NHMP.

I am sure they will happily and directly answer your pertinent questions...perhaps you can share the answers with us after you speak to them!

Skip

[Airwaves]

Since I am leaving on vacation for the coast of Maine Saturday what I will do is copy the last few posts and forward them to the NHMP contact page that you have linked to requesting they post the answer here on Winnipesaukee.com/forums.

Hopefully when I get back I'll have an answer.
AW

[Airwaves]

I copied and pasted posts number 30, 31, 32, 37, 38. 39. 40 to the link Skip gave us.

[NightWing]

Mr. Airwaves, I have followed many of your posts and have replied to a few of them.

I am of the belief that you take great pleasure in trying to make the MP look incompetent. You post questions on here that you tend to question the answers given. You seem to doubt everyone here even when RSA's are quoted directly.

This last go around about VHF radios and whether the MP broadcast a weather warning and do the MP boats meet CG regs which actually don't apply on NH inland waters.

I think the best thing is for you to direct all your questions, comments and suspicions about NHMP to their headquarters in Gilford. I am sure they would be happy to respond to you. After all, inquiring minds want to know.

[Airwaves]

Mr Nightwing
I question issues of safety regarding whether the MP have VHF radios onboard, utilize them and make general safety broadcasts to the boating public on Lake Winnipesaukee.

So because an RSA doesn't say a VHF Marine broadcast warning boaters of danger should be made, does that mean it shouldn't be made? Safety applies then only to ocean boaters?

Mr. Nightwing, please quote the RSA that says NHMP should leave the warning broadcasts on VHF 16 to the USCG aimed only at vessels on costal waters, after all you say I challenge RSAs even with they are directly quoted.

If you had bothered to read the post directly above your response you would have seen that I have submitted these questions to the NHMP.

As for questioning opinions on this forum....golly gee, I didn't realize that everything you say must be true because you say so....I'm so sorry

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

{snip}
So, we still have TWO questions pending. Why don't MP boats have VHF Marine radios, and DID the NHMPHQ issue a marine warning broadcast today?

Well I'm not with the NHMP (nor do I play one on TV) but I can guess as well as the next guy. They don't have VHF radios because they aren't needed and cost $$. Last I knew the NHMP are not commercial vessels, they'd fall into the category of Gov't use. I can't see the USCG regs as being applicable even on those boats operating off the coast.

As for #2 ... Probably not and because it's not in their charter. Same deal as towing. Frankly they are ample ways to get weather info these days from sources whose job it is to provide weather info. I'm not sure I'd want the NHMP to get into that "business" short of extreme emergency.

[Winnipesaukee]

VHF radios cost maybe $200 per boat to install. I personally believe every wind or machine-powered vessel should be required to carry one. Handhelds are as low as $40. There really is no excuse not to have one.

Let's look at it from another angle. I'm in my old small sailboat in a remote area of the lake (some cove in Moultonboro Bay let's say) and my gooseneck breaks. A tow into my house 1/2 mile away would be nice. The only boat I see is a MP boat a mile away. So I figure, "Wow, this is my lucky day," and try to hail them on 16. They don't answer and drive off.

How about this: there is a boat full of reckless drunks, getting too close to other boats on plane, throwing garbage overboard, etc. I go to call MP to report the incident but remember that they don't have VHF radios. So I get the bow numbers and call MP on shore, but not before the boat waked a kayak enough to swamp it.

These, of course, are hypothetical.

Nobody has justified the lack of radios yet. Besides a life jacket, VHF radios are the number one safety device on a boat.

[Kamper]

Originally Posted by Winnipesaukee

VHF radios cost maybe $200 per boat to install. I personally believe every wind or machine-powered vessel should be required to carry one. Handhelds are as low as $40. ... Besides a life jacket, VHF radios are the number one safety device on a boat.

I was going to make a cheap joke about #2 but the mood passed.


Before anyone buys a cheaper handheld, try to view the manual on-line. Some of them are only water 'resistant' not 'waterproof.' I got a Midland version for $60 a few years back and they included a plastic bag to make it completly water-proof.

The bargain versions are better than nothing bit are really more of the toy category than tool category. They make ok scanners if you enjoy monitorring the traffic from ashore. I already had an installed VHF and have since changed to a DSC model so I wasn't trying to get off cheap on my main gear. If it is all a person can afford right now, then get that piece of gear and hope for the best.

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...land#post28280

This link is to a thread where I reviewed the item I mentionned. Since then better bargain products have come on the market and I'm sure a good hand-held can be bought for under $100.

Good luck!

[Airwaves]

I'm just back from a lovely vacation on the coast of Maine. While on the coast I was listening to the USCG.

I found it interesting that the USCG Sector Northern New England issued a severe thunderstorm warning for INTERIOR NH a week ago Sunday. The same area that was devistated by wx leaving one woman dead recently.

Funny the USCG will warn boaters and of severe weather for an area outside of their AOR but the NH Marine Patrol doesn't take a similar responsibility for their own AOR! Go ahead and justify why the Marine Patrol won't do it for the boating public while they do make the announcements to their own crews all you want.

I was also surprised by the different approach of public safety people regarding interaction with tourists. The local PD did a sweep of the beach several times while I was there and listening. How many arrests? Zero. How many warnings? 94 during the first sweep. Warnings vs tickets.

It seems that some resort areas are much better at dealing with their "Golden goose" than others.

Looking back at the post that started this thread I'd say NH needs to get its act together or folks (like me) will continue generating money in NH but spend it in Maine.

Go ahead bash away

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

...Looking back at the post that started this thread I'd say NH needs to get its act together or folks (like me) will continue generating money in NH but spend it in Maine...

Ah, the good ol' days....

1992

[Kamper]

Originally Posted by bigpatsfan

...
The State should seriously look at either abolishing the MP division and have the State Police handle boating or significantly increase the MP officers training.

I vote for plan "B." For the sake of space, let's completely disregard the SP/HP integration issues. I think a properly trained cadre of specialists dedicated to the task will be better for the boating community than Troopers who would be more likley to be re-assigned to other duties (imo). Since most of the MP positions are seasonal there would be serious retension issues to work out with the unions, too.

As you suggested the temps/part-timers might benefit from additional training. I prefer to think they are all trying their best but there are a lot of details that are difficult to learn on the job.

[Lakegeezer]

While we can debate if the rafting law should be enforced during a weather emergency, another approach would be to challenge the law itself. Should the no-rafting areas laws be repealed?

The energy crisis is a longer term issue than an impending storm and a ban on rafting makes less sense than it did when fuel was cheap. Some areas of the citizen's lake are better than others for "hanging out on your boat". Braun Bay and Kona are examples of nice places - but use is limited by the rafting rules. This forces people to burn gas, while driving around looking for a legal spot to anchor. As other spots get crowded, there is pressure to add new no-rafting zones too. More driving around, less places to hang out. This doesn't make sense to me.

There are two alternatives. Eliminate all no-rafting zones or ban rafting for the whole lake. Perhaps a two year trial for each approach would be worth a shot.