From the Concord Monitor, 9/8/2009

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by Ryan

We should collect donations, lobby some politicians, and draft a bill to ban horses, but disguise it as something else...

Tonto no want to ban horses, just make horses go slower. Tonto make mess in pants when horse gallop by too close.

[hazelnut]

Don,

How is this thread still open? This is ludicrous.

I vote for a shut down on this one.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by elchase

Chip, I am very sorry for that mistake, and I have corrected it to properly credit the statement to Codeman. I don't blame you for getting upset and wanting to distance yourself from it. It was a really rude and uncalled-for thing to say by someone who claims to be so far above the fray.

Thank you.

[NoBozo]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Don,

How is this thread still open? This is ludicrous.

I vote for a shut down on this one.

If this thread were to be Closed...I would be ...Nodding Off while eating my oatmeal in front of this screen.. Older and Wiser. NB

BTW: Some of you people need to lighten up. The EL Man is just gearing up for a run for Congress on the Democrat side. ........Just sayin...

[ApS]

Originally Posted by tis

I think you will find both accidents mentioned, the Littlefield one and the one on Parker Island were alcohol related. It is kind of like common knowledge. Even the family of the gentleman who hit Parker Island says that he was not often sober. They are a very, very nice family by the way. We discussed the family member when we sat with them at a wedding and so I know about his issue firsthand. That particular member just had a lot of problems.
So neither of these accidents can be blamed on speed.

To understand the arguments of the opponents here, you'll find that none of these headline-making "incidents" can be traced to any blame whatsoever.
Yes, they were called "incidents" before these totally-unforeseen tragedies were later called "accidents".

You see, the tragedies on other lakes don't count, tragedies on the ocean don't count, the boat size can't be blamed in tragedies, radar doesn't work on boats, the boat weight can't be blamed in tragedies, visibility from the boat doesn't count, polls don't count, the "stuffing of e-ballots" from other states and countries is held blameless, organized weekend events by GFBLs can't be blamed, the introduction of increased boater-education can't be faulted, "drugs" are always prescription drugs, horsepower is of no concern to other boaters, and now it's, "SPEED is 'innocent of all charges'"?

Supporters can only place blame on the 20% of Winnipesaukee boaters who don't have alcohol on board.

I'm SO confused.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

To understand the arguments of the opponents here, you'll find that none of these headline-making "incidents" can be traced to any blame whatsoever.
Yes, they were called "incidents" before these totally-unforeseen tragedies were later called "accidents".

You see, the tragedies on other lakes don't count, tragedies on the ocean don't count, the boat size can't be blamed in tragedies, radar doesn't work on boats, the boat weight can't be blamed in tragedies, visibility from the boat doesn't count, polls don't count, the "stuffing of e-ballots" from other states and countries is held blameless, organized weekend events by GFBLs can't be blamed, the introduction of increased boater-education can't be faulted, "drugs" are always prescription drugs, horsepower is of no concern to other boaters, and now it's, "SPEED is 'innocent of all charges'"?

Supporters can only place blame on the 20% of Winnipesaukee boaters who don't have alcohol on board.

I'm SO confused.

You're not confused APS. You've made it abundantly clear that speed is always the issue, but only when your least favorite boats are involved. I've seen bad boy, Type AAA people and their arrogance in anything from 18' bowriders to cruisers to go fasts and everything in between.

Do GFBL crashes and incidents take place? Of course they do, thankfully, most are far away from all of us. But some happen here, no doubt. Crashing into an island is more than likely not caused by high-speed, but sometimes, maybe it is. Would you be disappointed when a boat crashes into an island at 25 mph, and it's a pontoon boat? Perhaps disappointed isn't the proper word. DISINTERESTED more accurate?

Let's say Littlefield was going 40 mph, even 50 mph. My guess is everyone in the Hartman boat would have been dead or partially crushed, but there would be prop marks somewhere. Let's say the Formula Cruiser last year (not a go fast by any means), was doing 35 mph or more. Would the island have been easier to overcome? Do you guys shake your fists in anger, shouting foul, when the speed comes in at or under your favorite SL?

I think the difference between you and me, and the countless others that don't have such a fever about a class of boats. We tend to zero in on the trouble makers first, then the inexperienced boaters that, innocently enough, cause problems for others, even themselves.

I shake my head everytime I hear of a Stepped go-fast that has flipped, or ejected their occupants. I shake my head when people drown needlessly in small fishing boats in the early spring fishing season. I shake my head when a sailboat, under power, cuts across my bow in the channel, arrogantly pronouncing his own right of way.

Yes APS, we would all appreciate it if serious boater training would occur, in all craft. Yes, I know, go fasts, especially stepped-hull designs, require more training, as do cats. But interestingly enough, the only people that want to do something about it are almost all opponents of the SL. Why is that APS? Why are the gang of five of the most vocal proponents so adverse to engaging in any discussion? Heaven forbid the SL opponents engage in discussion with the MP, assisting them, searching for answers, or even helping them out to spot problem boaters.

Some of your diatribes from years past reveal that the SL law amounts to only 15% or so of your disdain for many on the lake. Yet you do nothing to point out infractions, unless is your least favorite group. You, and some of the even nastier SL proponents, have been visibly absent from any and all safety discussions. Your cynicism and rants dissuade many SL supporters from engaging many of us in the discussion. When facts are brought up, you show pictures from old incidents, without revealing anything that could possibly harm your precious agenda.

In short, the pro SL people that boat more frequently than others, have far more experience than the boneheads, have offered absolutely nothing in the way of promoting safety, encouraging discussion that could possibly help to educate more boaters. You guys are a one-trick pony, and deserve the lake you get.

[NoBozo]

Will you look at THAT. The EL Man CAVED under the HEAT. (Post 101..Thanks) Who would have thunk??? NB






Don't hit me...

Originally Posted by NoBozo

Will you look at THAT. The EL Man CAVED under the HEAT.

From Webster's Dictionary:

Main Entry: 1troll
Pronunciation: \ˈtrōl\
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, probably from Anglo-French *troiller, *troller; akin to Anglo-French troil, trolle winch
Date: 15th century
transitive verb
1 : to cause to move round and round : roll
2 a : to sing the parts of (as a round or catch) in succession b : to sing loudly c : to celebrate in song
3 a : to fish for by trolling b : to fish by trolling in c : to pull through the water in trolling d : to search in or at ; also : prowl
intransitive verb
1 : to move around : ramble
2 a : to fish by trailing a lure or baited hook from a moving boat b : search, look ; also : prowl
3 : to sing or play in a jovial manner
4 : to speak rapidly

—noun
1 : NoBozo

[Lakegeezer]

From Wikipedia....

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response^[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.^[2]

[ApS]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...You're not confused APS. You've made it abundantly clear that speed is always the issue..."

Not so! My previous post was about drunks in 4½-TON boats. (The ones that actually do make the headlines that legislators read).

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...Do GFBL crashes and incidents take place? Of course they do..."

Probably more often than you'd think: Littlefield drove off because he was likely drunk. The Coast Guard asserts that as many as 40% of crashes go unreported. Isn't a drunk less likely to report his crash? (The non-fatal ones, anyway).

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...But some happen here, no doubt. Crashing into an island is more than likely not caused by high-speed, but sometimes, maybe it is..."

Lake Winnipesaukee has many more islands than most lakes. The latest collision fatality was due to alcohol and the impairment of judgement that inevitably comes from the first taste of it. BTW: I think the crash was less than 30-MPH, though first I'd like to learn what it takes to detach an anchor from its mount—to launch it—and hit a house 25-feet away. (With chain attached).

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...Would you be disappointed when a boat crashes into an island at 25 mph, and it's a pontoon boat? Perhaps disappointed isn't the proper word. DISINTERESTED more accurate..."?

Less disinterested if it was a hi-speed pontoon boat: Do you know the world's speed-record for a pontoon boat?

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...Let's say Littlefield was going 40 mph, even 50 mph. My guess is everyone in the Hartman boat would have been dead or partially crushed, but there would be prop marks somewhere..."

Maybe there were prop marks. Maybe going slower would have resulted in eliminating the only witnesses!

That's why I repeatedly use the phrase "re-enactment" to determine exactly what happened that night. Is Littlefield's Baja still available? Or has it been "recommissioned" to a new owner?

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...Let's say the Formula Cruiser last year (not a go fast by any means), was doing 35 mph or more. Would the island have been easier to overcome? Do you guys shake your fists in anger, shouting foul, when the speed comes in at or under your favorite SL...?"

If the collision were to have taken place just 50' to either side of the crash site, a house wouldn't be involved, nobody would have been killed—injuries and trauma to all involved—minimized. I think a "miss" against a shallower shoreline would have resulted in a "no report" to the NHMP.

The chief proponent of Lake Winnipesaukee's unlimited speeds agenda had overdriven her visibility due to the "liquid courage" that is brought to Winnipesaukee by 80% of boaters visiting here.

('Strange that those who should know their boats best—and know Winnipesaukee best—should create the biggest tragic headlines).

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...I think the difference between you and me, and the countless others that don't have such a fever about a class of boats. We tend to zero in on the trouble makers first, then the inexperienced boaters that, innocently enough, cause problems for others, even themselves..."

FWIW, I leave that to the NHMP.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...I shake my head everytime I hear of a Stepped go-fast that has flipped, or ejected their occupants..."

It's not just the "stepped" GFBLs that take lives, and most that do, eject all their occupants. We don't know how many were drunk.

(Because we skippers are ultimately responsible for them, let's call the occupants, "the passengers").

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...I shake my head when people drown needlessly in small fishing boats in the early spring fishing season..."

Some are drunk. Some don't let the weather affect their weekend. Some small craft are made dangerous by those "blameless" wakes. Sometimes, it's all three.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...I shake my head when a sailboat, under power, cuts across my bow in the channel, arrogantly pronouncing his own right of way..."

It's been the case for as long as there have been powerboats. Should US law be changed because you don't like "arrogant sailboats" on Lake Champlain?

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...Yes APS, we would all appreciate it if serious boater training would occur, in all craft. Yes, I know, go fasts, especially stepped-hull designs, require more training, as do cats. But interestingly enough, the only people that want to do something about it are almost all opponents of the SL. Why is that APS...?"

Because it's the 20% non-drinking family boaters (as in my family—when boating) who are too-often the victims?

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...Why are the gang of five of the most vocal proponents so adverse to engaging in any discussion? Heaven forbid the SL opponents engage in discussion with the MP, assisting them, searching for answers, or even helping them out to spot problem boaters..."

My guess is that we "Supporters" don't attempt to "smooze" the NHMP. We expect they will act appropriately with the laws they are charged with enforcing.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...Some of your diatribes from years past reveal that the SL law amounts to only 15% or so of your disdain for many on the lake. Yet you do nothing to point out infractions, unless is your least favorite group. You, and some of the even nastier SL proponents, have been visibly absent from any and all safety discussions..."

I brought a brand-new PFD "message" to the forum early this morning.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...Your cynicism and rants dissuade many SL supporters from engaging many of us in the discussion. When facts are brought up, you show pictures from old incidents, without revealing anything that could possibly harm your precious agenda..."

It's not just cynicism born of three generations' long-association with Lake Winnipesaukee. Those "old pictures" bring to mind what Santayana said best, "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...You guys are a one-trick pony, and deserve the lake you get..."

We'll see: Minus "the usual suspects"—it's a lake I can "live" with.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...In short, the pro SL people that boat more frequently than others, have far more experience than the boneheads, have offered absolutely nothing in the way of promoting safety, encouraging discussion that could possibly help to educate more boaters..."

1) When I perceived the problem, I wrote a letter that proved to be prescient by just three days.

2) This morning I posted (here) the Coast Guard warnings I just found on our newest PFD acquisition. I hope that promotes a clearer understanding of the speeding issues on all protected inland waters.

3) Seeing where this thread is otherwise headed...I'll take this opportunity to post my "signature piece" from last year's discussion:

[Kracken]

Maybe I need to reread my boating safety book. I always thought if a sailboat is being propelled by a motor, it is no longer considered a sailboat, and must obey the powerboat rules. Therefore if a sailboat under power cuts across VtSteve’s bow from the port side or entering a channel, the sailboat is the give-way boat. VtSteve has the right to shake his head.

[DoTheMath]

it seems that the SL, BWI and "performance boats" seem to have a bit of a "kin-ship" - a mutual-INclusivity on this forum, as mentioned on more than one occasion by SL proponents.

Thus - I am curious how the speed limit will "cure" the issue of boating while under the influence of alcohol!?

Let's just say - for conversations sake - that there is a speed limit on the lake of... I duuno... something as ridiculous as 45mph. Now, if you were under the influence of alcohol - basically, intoxicated by what is at least the legal limit of .08? or above and you are cruising across the lake at 40mph in, oh let's see... maybe a 24ft bowrider that weighs 5,500lbs (operating weight) with an 18lb stainless prop on it, btw . Are you LESS likely to get into some sort of "accident" because you are going UNDER the "posted" speed limit, and / or because of the boat you are piloting? Keep in mind, the operator is drunk at this point in this hypothetical scenario... Hmmm...

Again, I call back to the operator that it is THEIR responsibility to act and operate their boat in a manner that is safe and prudent for the prevailing conditions. Mind you, there is NEVER a set of conditions that prevails where boating while under the influence of anything that lessens your ability to operate your vessel - and react defensively to avoid an incident - 100%, is acceptable! People have all kinds of nicknames for a can of beer, one that stands out - "can's of courage" - be it when you are asking out a girl in a social setting, being challenged to do something by your buddies that you may otherwise not... AND quite possibly operating your boat beyond both its, and the operators capabilities. So, if the operator is intoxicated, do you really think that the SL will invoke an additional measure of safety... yeah, doubt it!

Someone mentioned in another thread / post about having an MP presence at the main town docks on weekends / Friday and Saturday nights, Meredith, Weirs, Wolfeboro, etc... keeping an eye out for a potential incident BEFORE it occurs. Great idea BTW - really, they do it at the bars on dry land, why not the water!? If you saw the authorities walking the docks, talking to boaters, just interacting with the boaters, wouldn't you think twice about getting tanked and coming back to your boat to face a conversation with the MP or that towns PD!?!? If a bar can hire a cop to be on detail at their door, why not appoint one to patrol the docks on the busy nights, I guarantee you would see a drop in BWI incidents, and by extension - "Capt. Boneheads"!

Speed - once again - is not the enemy people, an increasing lack of common sense and good judgement however... seems to be.

[NoRegrets]

Well said DoTheMath.

There is an emerging theme being spoken to in many postings. It is the alcohol that is the problem!!!! Let's suggest a 2 year trial law reinstating prohibition. Of course there will be a sun setting provision governed by intelligently written laws with objectives and criteria to measure the effectiveness. As the debate rages I will start a "Rum Running" operation (so I can make a lot of money!) and the SL problem as well as my budget problem would be solved

Then the next problem we will need to address is the allowable size of a boat on Winnipesauke. We will need to create a law limiting any vessel over the gross weight of 3 tons, no make it 4, no make it 5, no it should be 3.6, oh never mind, let us have a forum debate to set the limit and get these unsafe "bigger than anyone should need" cruisers off the lake for the safety of the children and environment.

Sorry for the sarcasm but I just could not resist. I could not find the smiley face for that.

I do enjoy the bantering in the threads but sometimes they do go to the edge and get a little heated but all survive. Congratulations to all who have survived the punches (both delivered and received). There is enough material in these posts to validate many positions and we will see how the media picks it up and how the politicians do their jobs.

I have not changed my mind and do not think we should have as many laws as we do but agree with many that b'heads need to be addressed whether their actions are alcohol induced or just poor genetics.

[onlywinni]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Now that the season is over, has anyone actually heard if any tickets were ever issued? I "heard" one ticket but it was thrown out in court.

anyone know?

Season is not over for me yet....The MPs still have a chance to catch me traumatizing(insert sarcasm here) the Winni Community in my Performance Boat...

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by onlywinni

Season is not over for me yet....The MPs still have a chance to catch me traumatizing(insert sarcasm here) the Winni Community in my Performance Boat...

yes there are definately some good days left on the water.. Have fun!

[VitaBene]

We went out yesterday afternoon/evening for a slow ride around Lee's Mills. Extremely quiet, a little cold- bring those blankets but the foliage was still looking good.

Enjoy the peace and quiet.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

We went out yesterday afternoon/evening for a slow ride around Lee's Mills. Extremely quiet, a little cold- bring those blankets but the foliage was still looking good.

Enjoy the peace and quiet.

sounds nice! I hear the water is pretty low. I haven't been up since August.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Kracken

"...I always thought if a sailboat is being propelled by a motor, it is no longer considered a sailboat, and must obey the powerboat rules...VtSteve has the right to shake his head..."

You are correct.

I always put one error in my posts to get it bumped to the top!

BTW: The newest PFD in the family has the the manufacturer's message printed on it that would be of interest to the boating public: it relates to its ineffectiveness in high speed tests.

Originally Posted by VitaBene

"...We went out yesterday afternoon/evening for a slow ride around Lee's Mills...Extremely quiet...Enjoy the peace and quiet..."

I'd be in favor of unlimited speeds after Columbus Day—and before Memorial Day—but fishermen (especially salmon fishermen) most likely would not.

Originally Posted by onlywinni

"...The MPs still have a chance to catch me traumatizing...the Winni Community in my Performance Boat..."

'Haven't seen an MP in a couple of weeks. Have at it!

(But don't become a headline).

Originally Posted by NoRegrets

"...There is an emerging theme being spoken to in many postings...It is the alcohol that is the problem!!!! Let's suggest a 2 year trial law reinstating prohibition..."

Prohibition—just for the skipper?

It wasn't working so well for that "lost skipper" who crashed here a few days ago: apparently, everybody aboard was trying to decide who the designated-driver was going to be!

BTW: Your views on "cheating in the polls" could change if you had thoroughly reviewed previous years' posts here at the Speed Limit forum.

Originally Posted by NoRegrets

"...Then the next problem we will need to address is the allowable size of a boat on Winnipesaukee..."

Actually, I agree with you: the boat we both would want banned is a 54-MPH sailboat!

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"...I am curious how the speed limit will "cure" the issue of boating while under the influence of alcohol...!?"

The beer cans that in previous seasons appeared at my shoreline didn't appear this year. Zero correlation?

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"...Speed - once again - is not the enemy people, an increasing lack of common sense and good judgement however... seems to be..."

With the presence of alcohol, common sense and good judgment aren't always "up to speed".

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

The beer cans that in previous seasons appeared at my shoreline didn't appear this year. Zero correlation?

With the presence of alcohol, common sense and good judgment aren't always "up to speed".

To your first point, you are correct, there is ZERO correlation to beer cans on your shoreline to people boating under the influence. The beer cans could have come from someone elses shoreline, where the people drinking were not driving. The beer cans could have come from boats where the passengers were drinking, and not the captain.

To your second point...NO QUESTION!!

[OCDACTIVE]

APS...... I don't know how to do this multiple posting however you say:

BTW: The newest PFD in the family has the the manufacturer's message printed on it that would be of interest to the boating public: it relates to its ineffectiveness in high speed tests.


What is your point?????? There is no hidden secret that there are lifejackets for specific activities. I personally wouldn't want to go wake boarding with a orange jacket around my neck .

My racing jacket costs in the hundreds of dollars and is specifically designed for high speeds.

I don't know why you bring this up other then to try to use scare tactics for those who are ignorant to the different specs. on life jackets.

[jmen24]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

BTW: The newest PFD in the family has the the manufacturer's message printed on it that would be of interest to the boating public: it relates to its ineffectiveness in high speed tests.

SO, WHAT DOES IT SAY, Jeez, you are worse than WMUR. Spit out a little, as if it is some great secret or it is going to change the orbit of the Earth or something. Just come out with the information, you obviously feel as though you have all the answers and YOUR people can only handle so much information at a time.

[DoTheMath]

And for once - you and I might - MIGHT - just agree on something!

Ok, so I mentioned above in my last post that alcohol - IMO, and others - contributes to the... we'll call it potentially "less than safe and intelligent" behavior of said boat operator!? Agreed!? (see my pp below, not sure how to do that multiple quote thingie either ).

Again, I call back to the operator that it is THEIR responsibility to act and operate their boat in a manner that is safe and prudent for the prevailing conditions. Mind you, there is NEVER a set of conditions that prevails where boating while under the influence of anything that lessens your ability to operate your vessel - and react defensively to avoid an incident - 100%, is acceptable! People have all kinds of nicknames for a can of beer, one that stands out - "can's of courage" - be it when you are asking out a girl in a social setting, being challenged to do something by your buddies that you may otherwise not... AND quite possibly operating your boat beyond both its, and the operators capabilities. So, if the operator is intoxicated, do you really think that the SL will invoke an additional measure of safety... yeah, doubt it!

Now, with that - you commented: With the presence of alcohol, common sense and good judgment aren't always "up to speed".
and herein lies where we AGREE! (cheers erupt! Peace and solidarity show evidence of being able to co-exist... ).

So, if we were to crack down on BWI - I would bet you we would see a direct correlation to a reduction in "dumb incidents" on the water, day and night! How can we do that? Plenty of ways... we could add local PD to the docks on detail, walking, talking and engaging the boaters, makes the "good folk" feel good and the drinkers think twice about getting tanked. Maybe put an MP out 500 ft from the same docks, lights flashing like they do with the fireworks / 4th weekend and again, people might - and probably will - think twice before they act.

Now, I am having issues with seeing any direct correlation between the SL and a lack of beer cans washing up on your beach this summer. I can't tell you the last time I pulled a beer can from the water, under or around my dock, in front of my house, that I didn't knock in there myself. Not sure where you live, but do we lay odds it's in a "heavily traveled" area that naturally increases the odds from an actuarial P.O.V where this could / may occur? Do we know if the cans from previous summers were thrown from a boat, do we know what kind of boat, was it a "performance boat", or a family boat, or maybe a giant cruiser / floating condo with a full-on galley? Was it going fast or was it going slow, was it day or night? Or was it one of your less-than-eco-responsible neighbors that may have allowed them to fall into the water and drift your way, and have since moved, or maybe started to recycle? I look at this from so many possible angles that it has caused me to break out my scientific calculator and work on a new algorithm to figure it out.

Ok, so after a loooooong process of working on this, I have come to the conclusion, and agree with "chipj" that... it is a coincidence! YES - just like the SL has "returned civility and alleviated all fear" to our fine lake this past summer, (where I, along with many others say it is the weather and economy), it is just a simple coincidence. Wait - that's a new angle I hadn't considered... the lack of empties on your beach is a collateral result of the poor economy! As people know, beer in greater container volume is cheaper, so to be more cost-concious they bought kegs, vs. cans to get a better value and thus, no empties to wash ashore.

All kidding / ribbing aside - again, it takes me back to the operator ACTING RESPONSIBLY, and not placing blame on the vessel, to the fact the people kill people, guns don't kill people. I have said for years, there needs to be much stricter laws governing alcohol (consumed) on / around boats, cuz for some reason people can't figure it out on their own. It seems simple enough, but people just don't get it. If I have people on MY boat, my wife and 4.5 year old son on MY boat, no matter if I'm driving it or a (capable) friend is, I ALONE AM RESPONSIBLE for that vessel and it's passengers - PERIOD!! Example - Hazelnut and I happen to be good friends - if I allow him to operate my boat, with or without me on it, I AM RESPONSIBLE for making that choice. I need to know (and do know) that he will act responsibly in all manners of doing so. I am accountable for not only my actions for giving him the keys, but trusting him - and his abilities to operate said vessel - and to not act irresponsibly while doing so.

I honestly think that is one of my biggest gripes over operators on this lake, the lack of accountability they seem to let guide and govern their actions behind (or next to) the wheel. Just stop and think, for 10 seconds before doing something - anything that has potential risk involved, what does your gut tell you!? Are you prepared to risk the lives of your loved ones and others, by throwing down that extra "I-didn't-really-need-that-last-Mojito" Mojito!? One bad mistake in judgement can change your life - and those of others - forEVER! A boat will NOT control itself, it is 100% up to the operator to control it - regardless of the size, style, horsepower, etc...

Ok, off my soapbox now - carry on...

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

I'd be in favor of unlimited speeds after Columbus Day—and before Memorial Day—but fishermen (especially salmon fishermen) most likely would not.

Well, it's a start. APS, at least you offer a compromise to your position. I personally do not think that it is enough of a compromise but heck, it's a start in the right direction.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Well, it's a start.*** APS, at least you offer a compromise to your position.* I personally do not think that it is enough of a compromise but heck, it's a start in the right direction.

I've offered other compromises this year.

Originally Posted by jmen24

SO, WHAT DOES IT SAY, Jeez, you are worse than WMUR. Spit out a little, as if it is some great secret or it is going to change the orbit of the Earth or something. Just come out with the information, you obviously feel as though you have all the answers and YOUR people can only handle so much information at a time.

I no longer have that PFD in front of me, but its message is basically, NOT tested at 50-MPH, and NOT advised for high-speed boat activities.

It would have made a good thread by itself, but the SL discussions are getting less valuable. (Featuring oversized pictures of oversized boats in other states and their newest paint jobs).

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...My racing jacket costs in the hundreds of dollars and is specifically designed for high speeds..."

Then you are amply protected for Winnipesaukee's new speed limits.
Others—not so much....

Originally Posted by chipj29

"...To your first point, you are correct, there is ZERO correlation to beer cans on your shoreline to people boating under the influence. The beer cans could have come from someone elses shoreline, where the people drinking were not driving. The beer cans could have come from boats where the passengers were drinking, and not the captain..."

Those conditions are present every year.

This is the first year of the SL law, and some boaters are staying away.