Bad economy/speed limit=bad news for lake businesses

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Loony Singer

I'm a supporter of a speed limit on the Lake (maybe not exactly the bill that's in force now), and I have to say that it's really unfortunate that the speed limit has gone into effect during this severe economic downturn.

As this thread has already demonstrated, when the renewal of the bill is up for discussion, it's gonna be impossible to figure out how much of any downturn in business was due to the speed limit vs. other factors, especially the economy. The arguments will be heated on both sides, with no real factual basis...just lots of opinions, coming fast and furious.

Here's an idea...how about postponing the start of the two years of the current speed limit until the recession is over? I almost hate to suggest it, because I know that some folks will try to leverage this into killing the law altogether, but this might make sense all the way around.

Oh, and Dave...thanks for posting the listing of businesses that have supported the speed limit bill. I'll be sure to patronize them

Although I disagree with your position on the limits themselves you do make a good point that it will be difficult to determine the economic downturn with the other factors going on in the world. However I have to ask even if there was no economic downturn, How could we attribute any losses directly to the limits? I am an opponent of them, but there will be no concreate evidence to be used either way. It will always be a matter of opinion.

There are certain industries geared towards faster boats i.e. poker runs, gas etc. However all boats still burn gas and all boats are welcome in poker runs so again it will be speculative to attribute any loss directly due to the limits.

These could be offset by more cruisers on the lake for example...

I am not condoning the limits at all. I think they will hurt a whole lot more then they will help, however I don't know if there will be an actual way to meter this.

My only thought is if the state would release how many go fast boats i.e. certain length, certain H.P. were registered this year opposed to past years. This again though could stem back to the overall economy one could argue.

To break it down I think that the discussion is valid and worth while because it keeps people thinking and trys to improve the lakes region the way we see fit. The only way we will be able to determine the impact will be from discussing what we have personally seen and heard. Through those observations we are free to form our own opinions and voice them come 2011.

So overall how ever you feel on the limits it is good to point out anything or anyone you have seen that has changed their plans due to them.

[secondcurve]

OCDACTIVE:

You don't put forth a very convincing argument that the speed limit will negatively impact the economy in a meaningful way for one simple reason, by your own admission you just purchased a go fast boat with full knowledge that there is a speed limit.......

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Although I disagree with your position on the limits themselves you do make a good point that it will be difficult to determine the economic downturn with the other factors going on in the world. However I have to ask even if there was no economic downturn, How could we attribute any losses directly to the limits? I am an opponent of them, but there will be no concreate evidence to be used either way. It will always be a matter of opinion.

There are certain industries geared towards faster boats i.e. poker runs, gas etc. However all boats still burn gas and all boats are welcome in poker runs so again it will be speculative to attribute any loss directly due to the limits.

These could be offset by more cruisers on the lake for example...

I am not condoning the limits at all. I think they will hurt a whole lot more then they will help, however I don't know if there will be an actual way to meter this.

My only thought is if the state would release how many go fast boats i.e. certain length, certain H.P. were registered this year opposed to past years. This again though could stem back to the overall economy one could argue.

To break it down I think that the discussion is valid and worth while because it keeps people thinking and trys to improve the lakes region the way we see fit. The only way we will be able to determine the impact will be from discussing what we have personally seen and heard. Through those observations we are free to form our own opinions and voice them come 2011.

So overall how ever you feel on the limits it is good to point out anything or anyone you have seen that has changed their plans due to them.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by secondcurve

OCDACTIVE:

You don't put forth a very convincing argument that the speed limit will negatively impact the economy in a meaningful way for one simple reason, by your own admission you just purchased a go fast boat with full knowledge that there is a speed limit.......

That is true I bought a go fast boat even though there are speed limits.... However, I will not be using it at the lake near as much as I would have. I would have left her at the dock year round boosting economy at many gas pumps and with a 100 gallon tank that is a lot of $$$. Plus I would want to go to as many places on the lake as I could with this being her first year. Now I plan to keep her in my driveway so I can go out of Portsmouth and down to Naragansett Bay taking revenue I would have spent in the lakes region totally out of state which is an absolute shame in my opinion. I have dreamed my whole life of having a boat like I just bought and to run her on the place I know blind folded, but now I either can just get off plain or be looking over my shouldar all the time.

Either way the lakes region will be adversely effected as well as the state of NH because I will be leaving half the time.

I mentioned earlier that it will be very difficult to measure the actual impact and all we can do is share our plans. Well chaulk me up as money lost, for I am going elsewhere the majority of the time directly due to the limits and NOT due the overall economy for I have decided not to participate in the slowdown.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Either way the lakes region will be adversely effected as well as the state of NH because I will be leaving half the time.

Not necessarily so. As has been pointed out before, many who have left the lake precisely because of the GFBL's may find the lake more enjoyable and therefore return. I myself plan to boat more, and especially on weekends. The net overall economic impact might well be quite positive in spite of your departure.

[Irrigation Guy]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Not necessarily so. As has been pointed out before, many who have left the lake precisely because of the GFBL's may find the lake more enjoyable and therefore return. I myself plan to boat more, and especially on weekends. The net overall economic impact might well be quite positive in spite of your departure.

Are you going to boat more because there will be less boats in general or because you were previously afraid of the big fast boats wizzing around in all those congested area's? I am being facetious because I never saw any GFBL's being bullies while my wife isn't a big fan of congestion and boats going all directions. The two are entirely different.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Either way the lakes region will be adversely effected as well as the state of NH because I will be leaving half the time.


Not necessarily so. As has been pointed out before, many who have left the lake precisely because of the GFBL's may find the lake more enjoyable and therefore return. I myself plan to boat more, and especially on weekends. The net overall economic impact might well be quite positive in spite of your departure.

You may be right and are entitled to your opinion.. There will be no way to really tell.. But I can say for certain that I am someone who would most definately be contributing to the economy of the area and now will not be. Probably 70% less then what I would have.

You will need probably two or three smaller boats to make up for that, realatively speaking. This would cause more congestion and perhaps cause more people not to go.

A few things I know about the GFB and their owners: Normally (there are always exceptions to the rule with any group) but Normally we only go fast when it is safe to do so, we normally know what the hell we are doing in a boat, and usually have to spend more to do it.

So overall I feel the economy and lake itself will suffer.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

But I can say for certain that I am someone who would most definately be contributing to the economy of the area and now will not be. Probably 70% less then what I would have.

You will need probably two or three smaller boats to make up for that, realatively speaking. This would cause more congestion and perhaps cause more people not to go.

So overall I feel the economy and lake itself will suffer.

Again not necessarily so. (hopefully) you don't eat and drink 3 times as much as the small boater when you go out to eat. Furthermore,increased tourism in the region (and not just boating) brings money to many businesses not precisely on the shoreline of Winni. Could be a win/win for the lake's region.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Again not necessarily so. (hopefully) you don't eat and drink 3 times as much as the small boater when you go out to eat. Furthermore,increased tourism in the region (and not just boating) brings money to many businesses not precisely on the shoreline of Winni. Could be a win/win for the lake's region.

True.... Only time will tell but I think your conclusions are a little too hopefull.

Smaller boats use less fuel. Less expensive to registar and carry less people (normally)

Canoes and Kayaks don't normally go to lunch as a group.

We can only wait and guess what may happen with the smaller groups you mention. But I can speak for myself as well as many other friends who have GFB and the lake is not going to be on their priority list.

I love the lake so I will definately be there some of the time because my family is there.. But I know I would have spent a whole lot more then I will be which hurts the economy.

I will not guess or speculate as to what other "groups" of individuals may or may not do. I just know what I and my friends will do and that is contribute to economys elsewhere unfortunately.

[hazelnut]

OCDACTIVE you have done a wonderful job presenting very valid points in this forum without dismissing anyone's points as pathetic or ridiculous etc. I applaud your methods of posting rational clear concise information. Everyone is indeed entitled to their opinions and it is clear that you have been borderline ridiculed by some members of the forum yet you have remained steadfast and consistent in your demeanor. I truly applaud you for that. Regardless of my absolute agreement on your positions I take offense to those who dismiss your/our concerns with regard to how we might enjoy our vessels during the day and at night. Mind you I am not an owner of a craft that could even carry your wake. However I am told I should not even go out at night because I want to do 35-40MPH. Oh well. I hope our paths cross someday this summer and we'll chat it up. Good luck with the new boat.

[VitaBene]

Regardless of speed limits (or no speed limits), we will be out on the lake for our usual 45-50 engine hours and countless floating hours. I hope all of you enjoy the upcoming boating season as much as my family and friends do!

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Loony Singer

Here's an idea...how about postponing the start of the two years of the current speed limit until the recession is over? I almost hate to suggest it, because I know that some folks will try to leverage this into killing the law altogether, but this might make sense all the way around.

This speed limit bill is supposed to be about safety. If safety is such a problem on the lake, postponing the implementation of a speed limit based on economic downturn is a very bad idea. Safety doesn't care about how much money people have to spend.

Originally Posted by Boater

When this law is reconsidered for 2011 and beyond economic impact should not be a consideration. The only consideration should be whether it achieved its intended purpose of making the lake safer for small boats and others using the lake. I suspect that it won't make a big difference since the lake is already very safe but remember that NH now has an extremely Liberal legislature that thinks regulating every aspect of your lives is a good thing.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by Boater

In the current economic, energy and environmental climate I personally don't understand why anyone would buy a huge, noisy, high-speed, gas-guzzling boat, especially if they know about the 45 MPH speed limit. This is as crazy as the soccer moms using their enormous Excursions and Escalades to do errands. I don't want to outlaw them, but what are these people thinking?

I don't agree with this at all. While you may not think it is a good idea, plenty of people do. And in this country, they are able to exercise their freedom of choice. They are thinking that they can afford it, they enjoy it, and they will do it.

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Again not necessarily so. (hopefully) you don't eat and drink 3 times as much as the small boater when you go out to eat. Furthermore,increased tourism in the region (and not just boating) brings money to many businesses not precisely on the shoreline of Winni. Could be a win/win for the lake's region.

Your theories may prove to be true, but we'll never really know. What you're describing would happen over a period of 5-7 years. Kayakers and timid boaters aren't going to just come out of the woodwork this year because the relatively small number of fast boats impacted by the new laws are cutting back on their hours in Winni.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Either way the lakes region will be adversely effected as well as the state of NH because I will be leaving half the time.


Not necessarily so. As has been pointed out before, many who have left the lake precisely because of the GFBL's may find the lake more enjoyable and therefore return. I myself plan to boat more, and especially on weekends. The net overall economic impact might well be quite positive in spite of your departure.

Also to clairify, those who I thought would return to the lake were canoers and kayakers.. (for the record I like to do both).. but I do not recall ever sinking 3 bills in the gas tank of one or taking family and friends to lunch at the naswa in one either..

Just making a point...


Economeys of scale.... It will take a lot more of them to make up for a few GFBs...