No Wake at the Barbers Pole...???

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

I've never in my life read bigger LIES in a post. This entire post is a lie. The former owner of my house is dead. So unless you dug him up and used your hand to guide his signature you are telling lies.

A quick call to one who was involved reveals 5 of HN's neighbors who signed a petition during a previous attempt for the NWZ. I sent their names to him by PM...not sure if any of these 5 were the previous owners of his house. Dead people can indeed not sign but they can sign while alive and then be allowed to die. Interesting article today. Seventeen minutes to pass through the 1200' or so proposed NWZ? I could swim it faster than that! HN found only 2 people pro NWZ? Perhaps he needs to read the testimony of the many people who sent their opinions after the July hearing which include their locations as well. Also read the names of people of the BP who signed in as pro NWZ in July. What a joke....two people in favor of the NWZ. And you talk of slimy people in their caves. "I see your true colors shining through" to use your previous Cyndi Lauper quote.

[Seaplane Pilot]

TB,

Since we are referencing music (your reference to Cyndi Lauper), here's one for you and your friends at WINFABS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__VQX2Xn7tI

It has such a nice ring to it. I think it should be the SOBNH theme song!

Take it to the bank.

SP

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

I've never in my life read bigger LIES in a post. This entire post is a lie. The former owner of my house is dead. So unless you dug him up and used your hand to guide his signature you are telling lies.

And there it is again, yet another in a long series of lies (hence the term Pathalogical), from Turtle Boy himself.

Him and his gang of three must have a fairly weak case (obviously), to have to resort to lies all of the time. Somehow, they got a group of renters on an island to sign petitions in the dark of night, and sneak it on through.

The very same way they were pretty slick in getting signatures from Nashua and on up for a lake speed limit non boaters knew nothing about. They were so fearful of the truth, that they got the legislature to make the SL permanent before any facts or figures could be released. Wonder why that was?

I sincerely hope that those that don;t particularly like this form of "discussion", at least read through these threads. Perhaps after all this time, you can better judge what the uproar was really about.

Don't forget, this is not a dead issue. TB and his gang, like Ed/BIM/Warren will make sure that they continue to fabricate stories for each and every new law they want. So while the lake was sheer pleasure this year and last (except in the BP area), it might just be a hazard where anything goes according to this group tomorrow, or next May.

Wait until they start pushing for a special Lake Winnipesaukee Association patrol. One that adheres to the wishes of people that let them in power. Trust me, it's been done before elsewhere. Anyone that trusts any of these people is not rational.

And to TB. You've told more lies on this forum than anyone I've ever even heard of, much less witnessed. But what the heck, this is the internet, and you can say whatever. But the rantings of the little gang of friends across from BI go way beyond speed limits and a NWZ. These people are absolutely nuts about lots of things.

As for your latest rant? Don't forget, HN stated many times a NWZ was good for him personally. I know you've never commented to him on that, because to do so, would be civil.

[Yankee]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

A quick call to one who was involved reveals 5 of HN's neighbors who signed a petition during a previous attempt for the NWZ. I sent their names to him by PM...not sure if any of these 5 were the previous owners of his house. Dead people can indeed not sign but they can sign while alive and then be allowed to die. Interesting article today. Seventeen minutes to pass through the 1200' or so proposed NWZ? I could swim it faster than that! HN found only 2 people pro NWZ? Perhaps he needs to read the testimony of the many people who sent their opinions after the July hearing which include their locations as well. Also read the names of people of the BP who signed in as pro NWZ in July. What a joke....two people in favor of the NWZ. And you talk of slimy people in their caves. "I see your true colors shining through" to use your previous Cyndi Lauper quote.

So 1 call to some unknown informant illicits the "fact" that there were or are 5 "neighbors" of HN who were in favor of the NWZ? And just how do you have access to this petition? This is nonsense.

Furthermore, please do not take offense of no one believes you that "many people" sent their opinions after the hearing...unless you provide some proof. Remember tourists and non-residents do not count.

While I am at it, what is your opinion of how the BP NWZ was enacted? From your responses in this thread you apparently have no problem with the FACT that the people who SIGNED the petition were just visiting, do not own property and are not residents of the Town of Tuftonboro. Are you are OK with the FACT that it was snuck through the system in an underhanded way?

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by Yankee

So 1 call to some unknown informant illicits the "fact" that there were or are 5 "neighbors" of HN who were in favor of the NWZ? And just how do you have access to this petition? This is nonsense.

Let's hear from HN. I suspect he is calling these 5 neighbors and may be surprised at what he hears. It's nice to see his lies exposed.
And did VtSteve just mention Nashua? Yeah thats a long way from the lake...but not as far as the SBONH signatures from all over the country and China. My favorites were Erica Blizzard's and Jimmy Hoffa's. Yup, signatures from all over the country...that's real honesty for you. Only two people in favor of the NWZ? This story gets better and better.
BTW, these 2 letters in the LDS this week go a long way at shining some sunlight into your cave. Will there be more? I would bet that in the not too distant future, SBONH's "friends"...Forsythe, Boutin, Hickel...will drop SBONH like a hot potato.

[Yankee]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Let's hear from HN.

No, let's hear it from you. I directly asked you the question. You are the one you are the one who's claiming it to be true, yet tell us nothing in anyway to substantiate it.

Again, what is your opinion of how the BP NWZ was enacted?

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Let's hear from HN. I suspect he is calling these 5 neighbors and may be surprised at what he hears. It's nice to see his lies exposed.
And did VtSteve just mention Nashua? Yeah thats a long way from the lake...but not as far as the SBONH signatures from all over the country and China. My favorites were Erica Blizzard's and Jimmy Hoffa's. Yup, signatures from all over the country...that's real honesty for you. Only two people in favor of the NWZ? This story gets better and better.
BTW, these 2 letters in the LDS this week go a long way at shining some sunlight into your cave. Will there be more? I would bet that in the not too distant future, SBONH's "friends"...Forsythe, Boutin, Hickel...will drop SBONH like a hot potato.

This is AWESOME! Yes TB did PM me and get this, the 5 people he mentions are either DEAD or have since sold, one he mentions is JTA in this thread (maybe the other BP thread) go check out his post. So TB how's it feel to have egg on your face? Remember I live there TB they ARE my friends my CLOSE friends and yes they ARE opposed to a NWZ. Nice try though. I'm done talking to you on this subject as all you do is lie and now that everybody has concrete proof I'll let you climb back into your shell and hang on to whatever dignity you have left.

Here is how it breaks down, TB referenced 5 property owners
#1 is dead I own that house now
#2 sold and the lot was divided into two lots BOTH signed AGAINST NWZ
#3 Is a poster in this thread JTA go read his position where he says NO NWZ is needed.
#4 Sold and moved to a Condo in Gilford new owner is against NWZ
#5 has not been to the island in 8-10 years.

hahahahaha No phone call needed buddy but your records are WAY out of date. Maybe those folks supported a NWZ back in the day but most of them are long gone from Cow Island.

Good try but once again you only show..

"You with the sad eyes
don't be discouraged
oh I realize
it's hard to take courage
in a world full of people
you can lose sight of it all
and the darkness inside you
can make you fell so small

But I see your true colors
shining through
I see your true colors
and that's why I love you
so don't be afraid to let them show
your true colors
true colors are beautiful
like a rainbow "

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

A quick call to one who was involved reveals 5 of HN's neighbors who signed a petition during a previous attempt for the NWZ.

Exactly as I said...5 of your neighbors were in favor of a NWZ. Not quite so black and white as you might lead one to believe. And how about people on the small islands and mainland. Two people in favor of a NWZ? ha ha ha ha .
Then again, aren't you the one who went to bars and arcades and was not able to find a single person in favor of the SL? Your abilities for deception and lies know no bounds. You have no shame. True colors indeed.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Exactly as I said...5 of your neighbors were in favor of a NWZ. Not quite so black and white as you might lead one to believe. And how about people on the small islands and mainland. Two people in favor of a NWZ? ha ha ha ha .
Then again, aren't you the one who went to bars and arcades and was not able to find a single person in favor of the SL? Your abilities for deception and lies know no bounds. You have no shame. True colors indeed.

Nice try with the misdirection but... You look foolish. Our petition has 98% of the abutters signing AGAINST the NWZ. The CURRENT proposal. I am so done engaging a person who out and out lies and then can not apologize when he is caught lying. It is BLACK AND WHITE 100% Black and white. The CURRENT property owners in the Barbers Pole channel overwhelmingly DO NOT support a NWZ in the area. What is so hard for you to comprehend? So you want to reference dead people and former property owners in your argument? Ok...

[Yankee]

I see dead people and others who no longer live here...they demand a no wake zone at the Barber Pole channel.

[VtSteve]

So whats ya gonna do now TB? Punt? Call the other two and have a consult?

It doesn't sound to me like HN was surprised by what he heard. It sounds to me like you've dished out some bald-faced lies, just like you and yours did during the SL debate. I'm beginning to wonder if any three people could possibly be so dishonest in real life? Only paid lobbyists that I know of can do this with a straight face.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

So whats ya gonna do now TB? Punt? Call the other two and have a consult?

It doesn't sound to me like HN was surprised by what he heard. It sounds to me like you've dished out some bald-faced lies, just like you and yours did during the SL debate. I'm beginning to wonder if any three people could possibly be so dishonest in real life? Only paid lobbyists that I know of can do this with a straight face.

Not surprised at all. All of us Islanders are a very close knit bunch. We have campfires at each others houses. We share resources, the very nature of living on an island dictates we do so. We spend a considerable amount of time together. We are all very close, this is not your average "neighbor I only see and wave at once in a while." Mainland folk would be surprised just how close island neighbors are with each other. So while TB who lives on the other side of the lake pretends he knows my neighbors better than me, we can all laugh at him. The reality is that on the island we spend a substantial amount of time at each others houses. We all walk through each others properties to go visit other neighbors. Rarely can you make it through a neighbors property without being invited in for a chat or a snack or drink. It is a completely different way of life. I love it and it has been amazing. With that said we all have spent a considerable amount of time this summer discussing the pro's and con's of this NWZ. While we all agreed that there would be many, MANY benefits to this proposed NWZ we as a group wholeheartedly agreed that the negatives outweighed the positives. We also were all disgusted by the process with which this was enacted. It was in our collective opinion that we could not support a law like this that had absolutely no basis with regard to safety. There is and was no safety issue. It was merely going to be a self serving initiative and we all agreed that we couldn't support it. Now let me tell you that this is pretty amazing due to the varied political viewpoints my neighbors and I have. One of my neighbors is a supporter of the SL. I still love the guy. While we agree to disagree on that one we have shared many a campfire and we have discussed our completely different perspectives on all things politics, the one thing we both agree on is that this NWZ proposal was a joke and is not necessary.
We are all happy to see that the process has worked for once. We owe a great debt of gratitude to all that came out and especially SBONH for their support.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Wolfeboro_Baja

Regarding ALL the discussion that's been had in this thread and the two letters to the editor posted here, how can the BP NWZ not be wide enough for two boats to pass each other while maintaining the minimum 150' between both crafts and shore? Using Google Earth, I measured the width of that area; the minimum width I found, shore to shore, was 825 ft while other areas were greater than 900 ft. Two boats passing each other would need an absolute minimum of 450' to allow for distances between themselves and shore on either side. Even if you allow 500', that STILL leaves 300'+ to maintain distance from other boats and shore. What am I missing when so many people are saying it's too narrow?!?!?

Nobody from SBONH-NHRBA will advise this BP visitor?

Originally Posted by gtagrip

Why is it that all are in agreement with what SBONH exposed this scam except 3 or 4 people in this forum. They tried to sneak a NWZ through the process and got called on it. I guess it's only the sneaks in this forum that are upset about it.

1) As I am scarcely benefited by the NWZ—and had nothing to do with it in any of its four proposals—please leave out the insinuation that ApS is part of this proposal.

2) However, having lingered at the BP in a small boat, I can now readily support BP residents regarding this "Visitor-Abuse" issue.

3) BTW: Who will go "on record", saying:

"There will NEVER be a NWZ at Barber Pole!"

[Yankee]

Once again I have tried and failed to translate Acre Per Second's parsi. Can anyone help me to understand what the he11 he is talking about?

[hazelnut]

I'll tell ya what, I will let you in on a little secret:

http://www.quicktopic.com/18/H/2DcQnXwaD2qL

Knock yourself out TB and read that. It's the COW ISLAND FORUM. Yup that's the place where MY NEIGHBORS and I discuss all things Cow Island. All those folks posting on there are the real LIVING residents and current property owners. You'll have to dig through all the day to day minutia of Island life (forum is not threaded) but the discussion about the NWZ is in there.

Enjoy the reading.

[VtSteve]

It sounds like some very real constraints are needed for the Sophie C.

It also sounds like we need a version of Snopes.com dedicated to debunking the posts of the usual gang. If TB tells me it's a sunny day, I'm Still going to look outside and see for myself

From Hazelnut

Our petition has 98% of the abutters signing AGAINST the NWZ

Keep your guard up. TB and the boys will be trying to get petitions signed in Nashua and Manchester again.

"Boats as large as 200' pass through a narrow passage at speeds up to 400 mph. Do you agree that this area, where you can reach across the channel and shake hands with island people, should be a NWZ."

In another petition;

"The lake was as wonderful as it had been when the Indians paddled their canoes 400 years ago (except the BP area, where boats go faster than the speed of light). Do you agree that all boats should, by law, go no faster than 6 mph on Lake Winnipesaukee? The speed limit passed should be made permanent, before any of you know what the outcome is."

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

I'll tell ya what, I will let you in on a little secret:

http://www.quicktopic.com/18/H/2DcQnXwaD2qL

Knock yourself out TB and read that. It's the COW ISLAND FORUM. Yup that's the place where MY NEIGHBORS and I discuss all things Cow Island. All those folks posting on there are the real LIVING residents and current property owners. You'll have to dig through all the day to day minutia of Island life (forum is not threaded) but the discussion about the NWZ is in there.

Enjoy the reading.

And click the attachment on post #70 of this thread(knock yourself out HN) if you want to hear from some other islanders and mainland residents who live on the BP (didn't hear from any renters though). Your neighbors on Squirrel and Little Birch must love you...nothing like neighborly relations.

[VtSteve]

Those comments were discussed in depth earlier on TB. I think it's been pointed out that it's very hard to talk to the neighbors on squirrel.

Since you don't care to discuss your earlier "revelations", we can only assume most of what you guys come up with is a steaming pile. You've been proven to be "somewhat" disingenuous? Hazelnut seems to be pretty current, and quite active in the real world there. Thank goodness there are still people left that actually care about the truth. You do not appear to be one of them TB, and now everyone knows that.

But please, continue to tell us stories about all of your friends in the BP area, maybe we could do something about the Sophie C while we're at it.

[hazelnut]

Steve drop it. It's not worth it. TB is grasping at straws. He obviously doesn't read anything thoroughly. If he did he would already know that the Squirrel Islanders are transient. The house is rented 100% of the summer. But thems are facts and facts don't matter to good ole Turtle Boy. Hahahaha

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Steve drop it. It's not worth it. TB is grasping at straws. He obviously doesn't read anything thoroughly. If he did he would already know that the Squirrel Islanders are transient. The house is rented 100% of the summer. But thems are facts and facts don't matter to good ole Turtle Boy. Hahahaha

Hmmmm...just reread the testimony from the link on post #70 of this thread. Many people, well over 20, describe themselves as owners or co-owners, people like the Phillips, Lights, Kirby's , Wolcotts, Boris', Hilbink's, Fernalds, Brown's....but thems are facts and facts don't matter to good ole VtSteve and HN. Maybe these people are all liars as well as owners.Oh yeah, only 2 people in favor of the NWZ. I hope some of the people in the BP point this out to the person writing the LDS article. It would show a bit more sunlight into your caves, similar to that shown last week with the 2 letters to the editor.

[hazelnut]

Does anyone else want to take this and spell out the obvious? I'll get it started. TB what was the reason given by the state that the original hearing was deemed invalid? I'll give you three guesses and the first two don't count. Hahahaha.

[Yankee]

Beat me to it Hazelnut!

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Does anyone else want to take this and spell out the obvious? I'll get it started. TB what was the reason given by the state that the original hearing was deemed invalid? I'll give you three guesses and the first two don't count. Hahahaha.

So, 20 plus people in favor of a NWZ. But thems are facts and facts don't matter to good ole HN. Tell me again how only 2 people were in favor of the NWZ. hahahaha

We got our SL...you need to get over it...you really are a nasty and denigrating person as has been pointed out in the past; hope they get their NWZ...their testimony is compelling and it seems inevitable they will eventually prevail.

[Yankee]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

So, 20 plus people in favor of a NWZ. But thems are facts and facts don't matter to good ole HN. Tell me again how only 2 people were in favor of the NWZ. hahahaha

We got our SL...you need to get over it...you really are a nasty and denigrating person as has been pointed out in the past; hope they get their NWZ...their testimony is compelling and it seems inevitable they will eventually prevail.

Apparently the obvious needs to be stated. The petition that you are refering was rejected outright:

Requoting OCD in post# 220:

"the Original Petition fails to provide the requisite number of signatures with supporting proof that the co petitioners are either residents or property owners pursuant to RSA 270:12,I. Based upon my response within section IV, (sub. 3), the Appellants Motion to Reopen pursuant to RSA 541:3 are granted.

The original petitioners must provide proof that a minium number of the original 25 co-petitioners listed in the original document are residents or property owners in Tuftonboro by use of official town record.

Since many petitioners are of the same family / property this will be impossible to do."

This is yet another in a LONG line of your lame attempts to intentionally and feebly misdirect the truth. Why do you keep digging the hole that you're in deeper?

[hazelnut]

Thanks Yankee, apparently reading is not TB's forte. Hahahaha

[Yankee]

No problem Hazelnut. When people such as ReptileBoy promote circumvention of the laws in this state/country for their own selfish interests it really, really pisses me off!

And no, ReptileBoy I am not a member nor do I know anyone associated with SBONH.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

So, 20 plus people in favor of a NWZ. But thems are facts and facts don't matter to good ole HN. Tell me again how only 2 people were in favor of the NWZ. hahahaha

We got our SL...you need to get over it...you really are a nasty and denigrating person as has been pointed out in the past; hope they get their NWZ...their testimony is compelling and it seems inevitable they will eventually prevail.

Wow!

STATISTICS:

On July 21, 2010, three (3) persons testified and twelve (12)
persons signed to record themselves in support of the petition. One (1)
person testified, and one (1) person signed to not speak, but be
recorded against the petition. Hon. John A. Veazey, State
Representative provided a history of the area known as Barber’s Pole.
Prior to and/or after the hearing, fifty-seven (57) people sent via mail,
e-mail or facsimile public commentary. The hearing was closed to public
comment at the conclusion of the business day on Friday, July 23, 2010.

Sounds like a tidal wave of support there TB.

Was Mr. Phillips the Coach? He was my favorite. He sounded eloquent enough to be Warren Clark. You guys must have been planning this since you first came across some old filings.

TB, you really should pass this off to WC, he's a much better liar than you are, lot's smoother as well. One thing to consider. Right here on this forum, you and others, have completely contradicted your prior statements about how wonderful and peaceful the lake has been, For Two Years Now.!!!

Everyone's keeping track at this point, because sure as there's an idiot missing from someone's village, you guys will come out with some outlandish (and contradictory) story for next year's misery.

[gtagrip]

Still waiting for TB to answer the question poised by Yankee. But since the silence is so defining, I think we all know the answer.

Acres, yes, I do consider you to be in the 3 or 4.

[Kracken]

There is one member who has been outed and proven to be deceitful.
(posting under multiple names – caught)

There is another member who has been caught in multiple lies.
(talking to dead people-caught)

There is a third member that is completely incoherent.
(We shall see prove it speeders and kayaks )

Why are we wasting our time debating with deceitful, lying and incoherent people?

[Turtle Boy]

Well VtSteve (and hn)...you won...you have driven me off the forum for good. Your angry, degrading, and intimidating replies are one thing, but having received a PM with this link below showing your collection of assault weapons and warning me I should keep quiet for my own good was the last straw. Another notch in your belt for having driven another SL supporter off the forum. A founding member of SBONH...you are looking real good. Yeah I'm sure SBONH will have a lot of clout in Concord. Maybe they'll vote for your legislation out of fear. Here's your link for anyone else who might want to challenge you.

http://www.600rr.net/gallery//browse...mageuser=42657

At least I was sent your last name and Vt Address...my family might at least might get some closure should something bad happen. SBONH is going to go a long way with people like you on board. All my best,goodbye TB

[VtSteve]

You certainly didn't receive it from me.

It amazes me how far some of you guys will go, and for what?

Number one, that's not my gallery.
Number two, I have never owned a gun on my life, ever.
Number three. I have never owned a motor cycle, and have nothing whatsoever to do with anything your twisted mind can come up with.
The fact that someone has the same screen name as I do on a motorcycle forum doesn't interest me at all. I have no interest in bikes, nor guns.

I can tell you this sir, you have a very unique problem. You've been found to be lying multiple times. You obviously don't like that.

It's a surprising thing for me to see your post, I would have though even you'd be beneath it. I was wrong.

But after seeing this link, I shouldn't be amazed at all.

http://www.ftexploring.com/askturtle...urtleboy1.html

[VtSteve]

Feel free to post my last name and address right here TB.

I must say, I don't think I've ever had the displeasure of dealing with a more dishonest and disingenuous person.

And another thing TB.

I'll personally give Don access to my PM's immediately. I can tell you this with a straight face right now, You're lying again. Only this time, you've gone too far. If you try to doctor up something and say it's from me, I will give the authorities access to my entire account, starting with Don's access first.

[Turtle Boy]

By the way, this VTSteve sounds like a bad dude. His name is Steve , he's from VT, and the internet is full of his galleries showing pictures of all his assault weapons, such as at http://www.600rr.net/gallery//browse...mageuser=42657 He's probably a much more dangerous entity than . You might want to warn TB about getting too hot with him.

Here's the PM that was shared with me...you tell me how I should feel, esp. in light of your intimidating and degrading posts. I have left out your last name, town, and whom you're more scarier than. I'd be thrilled to have you prove this VtSteve is not you, if you can, given the distress you have caused for me and my family. Given your intimidating posts I'm not sure what to believe. And I am not a prude about guns but I don't print pictures of mine on line. PS that turtle boy link is not me.

[VtSteve]

That doesn't seem like much of a PM to me TB.

So, My name is Steve and I'm from Vt?
Brilliant! Absolutely Brilliant.
Now I've figured out how I can answer that Thread How Did You Come Up With Your Screen name.


Well TB, I'm not on any bike forum, don't own any guns, have no gun galleries, no motorcycles, none of that. AND, There Was Never Any Threatening Message From Me To Anybody.

I think that's pretty clear No?

I have a very complete record of every PM I've ever sent. So bring it on.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

By the way, this VTSteve sounds like a bad dude. His name is Steve , he's from VT, and the internet is full of his galleries showing pictures of all his assault weapons, such as at http://www.600rr.net/gallery//browse...mageuser=42657 He's probably a much more dangerous entity than . You might want to warn TB about getting too hot with him.

Here's the PM that was shared with me...you tell me how I should feel, esp. in light of your intimidating and degrading posts. I have left out your last name, town, and whom you're more scarier than. I'd be thrilled to have you prove this VtSteve is not you, if you can, given the distress you have caused for me and my family. Given your intimidating posts I'm not sure what to believe. And I am not a prude about guns but I don't print pictures of mine on line. PS that turtle boy link is not me.

Who sent you the PM? It sounds like it was not Steve.

I hope Don gets to the bottom of this. This is an internet forum where sometimes tempers flare, but there should be no threatening tolerated by anyone.

[VtSteve]

Inquiring minds would love to know. Sounds to me like he's hedging a little bit.

I'll see what Don can do for me.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

By the way, this VTSteve sounds like a bad dude. His name is Steve , he's from VT, and the internet is full of his galleries showing pictures of all his assault weapons, such as at http://www.600rr.net/gallery//browse...mageuser=42657 He's probably a much more dangerous entity than . You might want to warn TB about getting too hot with him.

Here's the PM that was shared with me...you tell me how I should feel, esp. in light of your intimidating and degrading posts. I have left out your last name, town, and whom you're more scarier than. I'd be thrilled to have you prove this VtSteve is not you, if you can, given the distress you have caused for me and my family. Given your intimidating posts I'm not sure what to believe. And I am not a prude about guns but I don't print pictures of mine on line. PS that turtle boy link is not me.

Say what? Am I missing something here?

[VtSteve]

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...48&postcount=1

TB's a creative little lad isn't he?

[Turtle Boy]

I have notified Don as well. No one said you sent it but Don will indeed verify that it was sent.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...48&postcount=1

TB's a creative little lad isn't he?

Sure he is! I was thinking he was starting to sound like APS!

[hazelnut]

Steve Don sees every single PM, he does not need permission. Apparently this little fact escaped our little Turtle friend before he started lying YET AGAIN!

This is yet another example of completely lying by Turtle boy. However here is my favorite part, Turtle Boy is now crying that we are mean and denigrating. Hmmm lets see if my memory serves me correctly. Who is the ONLY person on winnipesaukee.com to EVER harass me about my teaching abilities? Who is the ONLY person to EVER make rude and outright nasty comments about what I do and how I treat my students? I'll give you all a chance to research TB's posts. Please do so and see what a nasty, mean, completely condescending a$$ he is. Now he wants to sit here and cry that we caught him lying TWICE now!

Please do us all a favor and disappear forever, or better yet reinvent yourself as your buddy did. Come up with a new screen name and start over. You have embarrassed yourself one time too many and it is time to cut your losses and leave us alone. I am so sick of the lying and character assassinations on this site. What certain members did to Scott and now what YB is doing here is DISGUSTING. Furthermore Don I was completely pissed off that you would let TB question my job and how I do it. Now I'd love to see what this latest BS is all about.

I have chosen (at my own peril for sure) to share a TREMENDOUS amount of personal information about myself on this forum. Many know me as a teacher that has a home on Cow Island. Everyone knows where that house is as well. Fortunately many on this forum have become good friends, even some who I have disagreed with. UNFORTUNATELY only ONE person on this forum has taken this personal information and attacked me. The one and only TURTLE BOY! Now he is making up lies in an attempt to attack yet another person on this forum. This is completely and utterly disgusting behavior and not one member of this forum should be subjected to it. I am not sure about anyone else but I HAVE HAD IT!!!!!!! Enough is enough. This guy is nothing but a cancer on this forum.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Steve Don sees every single PM, he does not need permission. Apparently this little fact escaped our little Turtle friend before he started lying YET AGAIN!

This is yet another example of completely lying by Turtle boy. However here is my favorite part, Turtle Boy is now crying that we are mean and denigrating. Hmmm lets see if my memory serves me correctly. Who is the ONLY person on winnipesaukee.com to EVER harass me about my teaching abilities? Who is the ONLY person to EVER make rude and outright nasty comments about what I do and how I treat my students? I'll give you all a chance to research TB's posts. Please do so and see what a nasty, mean, completely condescending a$$ he is. Now he wants to sit here and cry that we caught him lying TWICE now!

Please do us all a favor and disappear forever, or better yet reinvent yourself as your buddy did. Come up with a new screen name and start over. You have embarrassed yourself one time too many and it is time to cut your losses and leave us alone. I am so sick of the lying and character assassinations on this site. What certain members did to Scott and now what YB is doing here is DISGUSTING. Furthermore Don I was completely pissed off that you would let TB question my job and how I do it. Now I'd love to see what this latest BS is all about.

I have chosen (at my own peril for sure) to share a TREMENDOUS amount of personal information about myself on this forum. Many know me as a teacher that has a home on Cow Island. Everyone knows where that house is as well. Fortunately many on this forum have become good friends, even some who I have disagreed with. UNFORTUNATELY only ONE person on this forum has taken this personal information and attacked me. The one and only TURTLE BOY! Now he is making up lies in an attempt to attack yet another person on this forum. This is completely and utterly disgusting behavior and not one member of this forum should be subjected to it. I am not sure about anyone else but I HAVE HAD IT!!!!!!! Enough is enough. This guy is nothing but a cancer on this forum.

Again...Don will verify what was and wasn't sent. And as far as your teaching abilities go....go back and review what the comment was in response to...you and your buddy are scary indeed. You 2 are probably the most responsible for harassing more people who have disagreed with you off the forum. One of my favorites was calling someone pond scum. I have seen eloquent posters like fat jack, frank m, evenstar and ski man hounded off the forum by you and your buddies because they disagree with you.

Now I await proof there are 2 Vt Steves...havn't seen it yet.

[Yankee]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Number two, I have never owned a gun on my life, ever.
Number three. I have never owned a motor cycle

Damn, and I was just beginning to like you!!

[VtSteve]

I'll try to be as civil as one can be, given the circumstances and developments of today being as they are.

Absolutely nobody is trying to scare anyone away from anywhere. The developments in this forum today, are a direct reflection of certain people being called out for posting lies. Before that, certain people were caught using tactics that most folks deem sneaky. Those tactics were further supported by people that seemed to have turned up missing.

I don't think it's particularly mean or nasty to point these things out, because they are patently obvious to anyone following this wonderful story. But it's one thing to disagree, or even get angry when called out. But it's yet another to accuse someone of sending messages like you inferred, and still another to post someone's gallery and claim it's mine. It's not, plain and simple. This is a simple case of professional trollers using slander and lies to stifle any conversation they don't agree with.

If you can't debate the topic, and refuse to back up your own statements, this is what you have left. Your insinuations and attacks are personal, slanderous, and pretty much indicative of what you stand for. I post my opinions in a public forum, without hiding, and for all to see. I can be wrong, I can be right. But trust me on this, I won't lie.

It's pretty ironic how you guys continue to berate and badger HN, a man who's put forth the most valid and selfless information on the thread topic overall. HN is also a guy that spent some serious time debating whether or not his own selfish reasons for agreeing with you on the NWZ overrode the public's interest. He decided it was not, and consulted and discussed it with the people he lives with on the Island. Regardless of whether I agreed with him or not, I respect how he spent personal time on the issue, and discussed it with his neighbors.

That's the way real life is supposed to work. Not sneaking around behind people's backs, lying about contacts and petitions, and even resorting to fake personal and slanderous attacks when you've been found out. It's called having character.

[RANGER CANOE CO]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

By the way, this VTSteve sounds like a bad dude. His name is Steve , he's from VT, and the internet is full of his galleries showing pictures of all his assault weapons, such as at http://www.600rr.net/gallery//browse...mageuser=42657 He's probably a much more dangerous entity than . You might want to warn TB about getting too hot with him.

Here's the PM that was shared with me...you tell me how I should feel, esp. in light of your intimidating and degrading posts. I have left out your last name, town, and whom you're more scarier than. I'd be thrilled to have you prove this VtSteve is not you, if you can, given the distress you have caused for me and my family. Given your intimidating posts I'm not sure what to believe. And I am not a prude about guns but I don't print pictures of mine on line. PS that turtle boy link is not me.

Sir, as a new member, I find your accusations disturbing against another member here. It is impossible to hack into someones user name controls, to then send a PM. There are 3 members on this site with "VT" user names, 2 of them with zero posts. So,,, Post the alleged threatening PM you supposedly received, that you are so threatened and afraid of, for all to read. If you do not as per my request. Then Sir, you are not telling the truth, and you are a disservice to this web site.

[Turtle Boy]

As I said, we'll leave it to Don to verify that TB was indeed warned; any person would be disturbed to hear this and then see the link. Clearly it is in my best interests to have 2 VtSteves given the nature of the link. Again, Don can verify that said was warning was legit. In the meantime, as per this AM's LDS, I see more light has been shed on the gang of two and their accusations of lying and dishonesty. Oh wait, the person's last name is Clark...has to be related to WC. Or you would only have to change 3 letters to change Clark to Chase.

Majority of people on Barber Pole Road want a no wake zone
Nov 23, 2010 12:00 am
To the editor,

Michael Kitch’s article (Saturday, Nov. 20) concerning the no wake zone (NWZ) in the Barber Pole requires some clarification. As someone who has summered for 27 years in my parents’ cottage in this area, I am aware of three attempts since 1997 to get a NWZ in place. The area in question is the 390-feet between the buoy and Squirrel Island. This narrow and congested passage can be a logistical nightmare in the summer, given the 150-foot passage law. People in the Barber Pole recognized this and over these 13 years a majority of people from Barber Pole Rd., Squirrel and Little Birch Islands, and many people on the Cow Island passage in the Barber Pole have signed-on in favor. Incidentally, several of the Cow Islander’s who have signed-on in the past were neighbors of the person quoted in your article as being only able to find two people in favor of the NWZ. One only has to read the names of people who signed in favor of the NWZ at the hearing last July and read the letters submitted subsequently to the DOS to realize just how many people are in favor. Seventeen extra minutes to traverse the channel? My calculation using the length of the proposed area was less than two minutes!

Also keep in mind the stated objective when SBONH was formed last year was to oppose the speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee. To this end they started an online petition whereby people from all over the country and beyond were encouraged to sign because “your lake could be next”. Now Mr. Verdonck objects to the manner in which Barber Pole residents input was obtained? Furthermore, at the second hearing in October, appellants from outside the Barber Pole were allowed to testify, but no one in favor of the NWZ.

I find it compelling that the DOS would rule in favor of this NWZ, citing serious safety issues, and then reverse its ruling on a technicality. I was one such technicality in that the property that I will inherit is still in my parents’ name so I was not considered a landowner. Other names were similarly disqualified because they were spouses who did not appear on the deed etc. The statutes regarding the submission of signatures are vaguely worded and the original petitioners were told only that “25 signatures were needed”.

The area in question is indeed a safety hazard with many of its residents in favor of a NWZ. The DOS agreed. They need to do the right thing and institute this NWZ before a serious accident occurs.

C. Clark

Tuftonboro

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Majority of people on Barber Pole Road want a no wake zone
Nov 23, 2010 12:00 am
To the editor,

One only has to read the names of people who signed in favor of the NWZ at the hearing last July and read the letters submitted subsequently to the DOS to realize just how many people are in favor.

C. Clark

Tuftonboro

I can't believe this didn't make the front page....oh, that's right...that's because it's an opinion piece - where facts do not matter.

[hazelnut]

Yup that's it TB you win! You're right, this C. Clark fella knows my neighbors better than I do.

WOW! You and C. Clark must be omniscient. Please can you tell me what residents of Rattlesnake Island are thinking? Better yet how about the folks that live in Suissevale, what issues are plaguing them pray tell.
By all means don't bother reading the COW ISLAND forum where the current living property owners that live in the channel (myself included) openly discuss our opposition to a NWZ in the channel. No, no, no take Mr. C. Clark's word for it. Don't bother listening to facts where 99% of the folks that have houses in the channel vehemently oppose the NWZ INCLUDING the YMCA Camp directors. No why would you listen to that? Why would you care that at the October 1st hearing the room was filled with the disgruntled residents of Barbers Pole Road and Cow Island that were pissed off that your little sneaky friends tried to pull a fast one. Let's ignore the fact that the state squashed the ruling because none of the "names" could be verified on the original petition. Funny though the state had no problem whatsoever verifying the names on the petition to re-open the hearing. Hmmm that's odd?

You and Mr. C. Clark can go live in your land of make believe and lies.
The state researched all those names submitted to the DOS and figured out what we all knew, none of them were residents or property owners. But hey that doesn't matter to you or Mr Clark, cuz thems the facts. We all know what happen when you are confronted with facts don't we? You lash out, lie, and then cry wee wee wee all the way home when people prove you are lying.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

As I said, we'll leave it to Don to verify that TB was indeed warned; any person would be disturbed to hear this and then see the link.

Like the segment from Monday Night Football, "C'MON MAN!"

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

As I said, we'll leave it to Don to verify that TB was indeed warned; any person would be disturbed to hear this and then see the link.

Which of course, was your intent, to get people disturbed. You threw it out there with the hopes of trashing your opponent, knowing full well you and your buddies had no idea what you were talking about. Nor, did you care. It was an intentional act, like a chop block. Take the penalty, but inflict some damage. Again, lack of character. IMHO, of course.

[Skip]

For those of you that subscribe or purchase the Sunday Union Leader, you can find an editorial penned by Ed Chase regarding th Barber's Pole No-Wake issue. The letter is featured prominenetly on the main editorial page of today's paper.

Of interest is the correct prediction he makes that one of the goals of the leader of SBONH is to revoke the current speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee.

Being showcased on the main editorial page, his letter is sure to get a great deal of exposure and hopefully will generate significant intelligent debate in reference to the concerns he airs.

Interesting letter Ed!

[Yosemite Sam]

Originally Posted by Skip

For those of you that subscribe or purchase the Sunday Union Leader, you can find an editorial penned by Ed Chase regarding th Barber's Pole No-Wake issue. The letter is featured prominenetly on the main editorial page of today's paper.

Of interest is the correct prediction he makes that one of the goals of the leader of SBONH is to revoke the current speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee.

Being showcased on the main editorial page, his letter is sure to get a great deal of exposure and hopefully will generate significant intelligent debate in reference to the concerns he airs.

Interesting letter Ed!

What could Ed Chase say that he hasn’t already said about the Barber’s Pole NWZ, SBONH president (Active Cult Member), or Lake Winni Speed Limit, that he hasn’t already said numerous times?

I’m not saying I disagree with him, I’m just curious as to what new exciting news he could possibly have.

Here is an article that was in the Concord Monitor on November 22, 2010:

“The New Hampshire Department of Safety has reversed its earlier decision that had established a no-wake zone in the narrow and often busy Barber's Pole channel of Lake Winnipesaukee as the result of a request from a group of boaters headed by a member of a performance boating club calling itself the Active Thunder Cult.
The Department of Safety made this reversal based on a technicality raised by this boating group, despite having earlier found that without the no-wake designation, present law "does not provide adequate safety" and that "no-wake speed along this route within Lake Winnipesaukee will improve public safety; maintenance of residential, recreational and scenic values . . . and environment and water quality."
Using the moniker "Safe Boaters of New Hampshire," the group, whose founder has stated a primary mission of having Lake Winnipesaukee's boating speed limit repealed, has arranged so that most boaters may again travel full throttle through the narrow, two-way channel, even after the Department of Safety had determined that "There is not sufficient availability and practicality of enforcement" to ensure safety in the channel absent no-wake speed limitations.”
ED CHASE
http://www.concordmonitor.com/articl...1/safe-boaters

[sunset on the dock]

Can anyone print the UL letter/editorial?...I was unable to track it down on the UL site....thanks.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Can anyone print the UL letter/editorial?...I was unable to track it down on the UL site....thanks.

I heard through the grapevine it's basically a cut and paste from every other paper he has sent it to.

Poor guy it must kill him that the residents of the area are happy with the State's decision.

Next stop USA Today and then it's off to CNN.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Can anyone print the UL letter/editorial?...I was unable to track it down on the UL site....thanks.

This is it:


The New Hampshire Department of Safety has reversed its earlier decision that had established a no-wake zone in the narrow and often busy Barber's Pole channel of Lake Winnipesaukee as the result of a request from a group of boaters headed by a member of a performance boating club calling itself the Active Thunder Cult.

The Department of Safety made this reversal based on a technicality raised by this boating group, despite having earlier found that without the no-wake designation, present law "does not provide adequate safety" and that "no-wake speed along this route within Lake Winnipesaukee will improve public safety; maintenance of residential, recreational and scenic values . . . and environment and water quality."

Using the moniker "Safe Boaters of New Hampshire," the group, whose founder has stated a primary mission of having Lake Winnipesaukee's boating speed limit repealed, has arranged so that most boaters may again travel full throttle through the narrow, two-way channel, even after the Department of Safety had determined that "There is not sufficient availability and practicality of enforcement" to ensure safety in the channel absent no-wake speed limitations.

[hazelnut]

I rest my case.

Thanks for the repost Skip. Additional thanks to Yosemite Sam for the post from the 11/22 Concord Monitor. I'm wondering if the Boston Globe got a copy?

[Skip]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

I rest my case.

Thanks for the repost Skip. Additional thanks to Yosemite Sam for the post from the 11/22 Concord Monitor. I'm wondering if the Boston Globe got a copy?

You're welcome.

And in all fairness, doesn't SBONH mail its press releases to all available news outlets as well?

While I realize that the letter had been posted in a number of papers, including a few days ago in the Concord Monitor, the reason for my post was because of where it appeared in the Sunday Union Leader. It wasn't buried in the usual pages containing dozens of letters to the editor, but was one of two letters selected for exclusive printing on the paper's main editorial page.

It is unique that the paper's editor chose to single it out, so I felt it was newsworthy to bring it to the attention of those interested in this particular thread.

[Yosemite Sam]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

I rest my case.

Thanks for the repost Skip. Additional thanks to Yosemite Sam for the post from the 11/22 Concord Monitor. I'm wondering if the Boston Globe got a copy?

Somehow the article in the UL didn't excite me too much ....I wonder what Skip saw in this article that I didn't? I was hoping for some earth shattering news that we all hadn't heard before...Oh well!
I almost went out and bought todays Union Leader.... that was too close for comfort.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam

Somehow the article in the UL didn't excite me too much ....I wonder what Skip saw in this article that I didn't? I was hoping for some earth shattering news that we all hadn't heard before...Oh well!
I almost went out and bought todays Union Leader.... that was too close for comfort.

See post 357 for the answer to your question.....

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Skip

You're welcome.

And in all fairness, doesn't SBONH mail its press releases to all available news outlets as well?

While I realize that the letter had been posted in a number of papers, including a few days ago in the Concord Monitor, the reason for my post was because of where it appeared in the Sunday Union Leader. It wasn't buried in the usual pages containing dozens of letters to the editor, but was one of two letters selected for exclusive printing on the paper's main editorial page.

It is unique that the paper's editor chose to single it out, so I felt it was newsworthy to bring it to the attention of those interested in this particular thread.

Really Skip

Your original post had me thinking that Mr. Chase came up with something new other than the usual rantings of the insane. A Press Release and a rambling editorial that actually says nothing are hardly the same thing. I don't want to split hairs or argue with you, as I have said before, because I value your opinions. However, this "editorial" is nothing but slander, drivel, conjecture, etc. etc. etc.

For example, I quote: "...has arranged so that most boaters may again travel full throttle through the narrow, two-way channel."
Oh really? really? But what about the Speed Limit? It's working right? No, no, no, this is the ONLY place on the lake where people travel full throttle? They actually slow down in the broads and as soon as they hit that channel WHAMO! It's full throttle baby!!! hahahahahahaha. Thank you SBONH for arranging that.

I really don't know why I am bothering to reply to this editorial though. The more it gets posted the more Mr. Chase looks like a fool so he's actually helping our cause. I should forward it to the Globe myself.

I'm actually not directing this at you Skip, you were just merely passing on the info. In your defense you were unaware that we had already seen and heard this before.

[Skip]

Nope, no offense taken...and I did appreciate your compliment a few posts back.

Thank you!

[VtSteve]

It's from Ed Chase, so I certainly think most likely it is.

Skip, what do you think about that "article". I'll bet many people are afraid to have their 2 year olds boat out there now, with less than 26 HP boats to defend themselves.

I wonder what makes people boat FULL THROTTLE through that really narrow area, but nowhere else?

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

It's from Ed Chase, so I certainly think most likely it is.

Skip, what do you think about that "article". I'll bet many people are afraid to have their 2 year olds boat out there now, with less than 26 HP boats to defend themselves.

I wonder what makes people boat FULL THROTTLE through that really narrow area, but nowhere else?

Steve obviously you haven't heard, I wave a black and white checkered flag at my dock and it encourages boaters to goose the throttle.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Steve obviously you haven't heard, I wave a black and white checkered flag at my dock and it encourages boaters to goose the throttle.

I just new you were a full throttle boater

Why can't you just go 6 mph like everyone else?

[VtSteve]

So. TB has never responded to my requests to produce what he says were threatening PM's, and he has never responded to my statements that he was just plain wrong. Don, obviously, has done nothing.

Now Skip, the above all high and mighty, posts a revelation that has been posted by the same idiot that posts the same letter everywhere. Great job Skip. You're a good ditto head now. Is this what you meant by acting like an adult?

Nice fact checks as well, I know what you guys stand for now.



So an honest question:

How do people go Full Throttle through the BP channel when the speed limit is working so well elsewhere?


Amazing turnaround.

[classic22]

Public service announcement. Final word from the department of safety regarding the No wake zone. I think it speaks for it self.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

the residents of the area are happy with the State's decision.

Finally, somebody's saying,

"There will NEVER be a NWZ at Barbers Pole".

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Finally, somebody's saying,

"There will NEVER be a NWZ at Barbers Pole".

What the ? Did you forget to take some meds or something?

Ok you know what I will say it, if this makes you happy. I have no idea what point you are trying to make but here goes APS:

There will never be a No Wake Zone at the Barbers Pole (if I have any say).


There I said it SO WHAT?!?!

You are one weird dude.

[sunset on the dock]

Sometimes people with the least respect for the truth are the most likely to call others liars. Today's front page article in the LDS is a perfect example. A certain NUT who lives in the BP and his little green mountain buddy seem to have taken a few "liberties" in this regard. My favotite was their assertion that only 2 people were in favor of the NWZ. Did you go to those same bars and arcades as last year to take your poll of BP residents? Oh yeah...20 minutes to get through the NWZ...sure...if you're doing the dog paddle. I think these people deserve and will get their NWZ.



Local News
Barber's Pole residents will try again for NWZ
By Michael Kitch
Dec 03, 2010 12:00 am
TUFTONBORO — Many of those who reside and summer along Barber's Pole, the channel between Cow Island and Tuftonboro Neck will likely renew their effort to have the stretch of water designated a "no wake zone."

Tom Hilbink, who owns property on Little Birch Island, was among several residents to say yesterday that, after the New Hampshire Department of Safety (DOS) rescinded its order granting their petition for a "no wake zone" on procedural grounds, they expected to submit a new request as soon as possible.

Barber's Pole stretches for about 2,000 feet — about twice the length of the Weirs Channel — from the southeastern tip of Little Birch Island, off the mouth of Orchard Cove, to where the eastern shoreline of Cow Island recedes to the west. Between the buoys to the west and the shore to the east, the channel is about 390 feet wide.

Legal residents, or property owners, of the township in question are the only ones who may petition the commissioner of safety to place operating restrictions, including limits on the maximum horsepower or speed of boats, on lakes, ponds and rivers. After holding a public hearing the commissioner may adopt rules to impose restrictions found to serve the public interest. Altogether restrictions have been imposed on more than 50 lakes and ponds through this process.

Petitions for a "no wake zone" at Barber's Pole failed in 1988, 1997 and 2008, in part because the New Hampshire Marine Patrol opposed them. Last May, residents tried again. A hearing was held on July 21 and on July 30 Commissioner John Barthelmes issued the order.

However, the order was appealed by a group including Scott Verdonck, the president, and Bob Flannery, the political director, of Safe Boaters of New Hampshire, the organization formed in opposition to legislation to limit speeds on Lake Winnipesaukee. They successfully claimed that some of the petitioners failed to qualify as either residents or property owners of Tuftonboro and the order was rescinded.

The overwhelming majority of those who attended the public hearing and submitted written comments to the DOS favored the "no wake zone." Moreover, David Barrett of the Marine Patrol withdrew his agency's challenge to the measure and declined to take a position either for or against it.

Safety was the uppermost concern among advocates of the "no wake zone."

The Boris family has owned Squirrel Island since the 1860s. Vanessa Boris told DOS that that the volume and speed of boat traffic through the passage made travel between the island and the mainland difficult and dangerous. Describing the situation as "truly chaotic," she likened crossing the channel to crossing I-93. Many of those supporting the "no wake zone" said that swimmers, anglers, kayakers and canoeists were increasingly at risk from powerboats that frequently ignored the 150-foot rule, requiring vessels to maintain headway speed only when within 150 feet of swimmers, rafts, docks, moorings and shorelines, as well as other vessels.

In addition to the hazards of congestion and speed in the channel, many property owners traced increasing erosion along the shorefront to the number, size and speed of boats, whose wakes have undermined trees and shrubs lining the water. Others said that roiling waters have damaged their docks.

Several residents noted that a "no wake zone" at Barber's Pole would be comparable to similar zones designated between Governor's Island and Eagle Island in Gilford and Chase Island and Farm Island in Nineteen Mile Bay.

Opponents of the "no wake zone" discounted concerns for safety. Michael Burke wrote to DOS saying that there are very few days during the boating season when traffic through Barber's Pole is heavy and then "the vast majority of boaters slow down to no wake speed in accordance with the 150-foot rule." Like others, he called for more education and enforcement of the existing rules rather than more restrictions.

Others said a "no wake zone" would slow travel between the islands and the mainland. Testing the claim of a resident of Sandy Island that 20 minutes would be added to the trip, Thomas Light of Little Birch Island said he paddled the length of the channel in 12 minutes, doubting anyone would have to travel slower than a 55-year-old in a canoe.

In framing his recommendation to the commission, the hearings officer, C.N. Duclos, noted that the testimony echoed much of what was presented in 2008, including a video of vessels passing through Barber's Pole, which he did not find persuasive. Instead, he gave greater weight to Barrett's decision not to contest the petition. Those opposed to a "no wake zone," Duclos said, did not indicate that any activity in the channel would be restricted or eliminated if it were imposed. Consequently, he concluded that a "no wake zone" would control, without greatly restricting, the diverse uses of the public water at Barber's Pole.

Barrett said yesterday that in dropping his challenge to a "no wake zone" at Barber's Pole "didn't mean I endorsed it either." He said that the number of citations and accidents in the area did not support the restriction. However, he indicated that if another petition was submitted, he would not challenge it.

Likewise, Verdonck said that Safe Boaters of New Hampshire would not oppose designating Barber's Pole a "no wake zone." But, at the same time, he emphasized that the organization will insist that any petition and public hearings be widely publicized to provide all interested parties with an opportunity to participate in the process. He said that his membership was troubled that a legal notice in a newspaper failed to adequately inform interested parties that a change in operating protocols on the lake was being contemplated. At Verdonck's request Representative John Hikel (R-Goffstown) has filed legislation requiring those petitioning for restrictions on the use of public waters to notify all abutters of the forthcoming hearing by certified mail.

Meanwhile, Representative Betsey Patten (R-Moultonborough) has also introduced legislation that would authorize the DOS to adopt operating restrictions in the public interest without necessarily holding a public hearing.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Sometimes people with the least respect for the truth are the most likely to call others liars. Today's front page article in the LDS is a perfect example. A certain NUT who lives in the BP and his little green mountain buddy seem to have taken a few "liberties" in this regard. My favotite was their assertion that only 2 people were in favor of the NWZ. Did you go to those same bars and arcades as last year to take your poll of BP residents? Oh yeah...20 minutes to get through the NWZ...sure...if you're doing the dog paddle. I think these people deserve and will get their NWZ.



Local News
Barber's Pole residents will try again for NWZ
By Michael Kitch
Dec 03, 2010 12:00 am
TUFTONBORO — Many of those who reside and summer along Barber's Pole, the channel between Cow Island and Tuftonboro Neck will likely renew their effort to have the stretch of water designated a "no wake zone."

Tom Hilbink, who owns property on Little Birch Island, was among several residents to say yesterday that, after the New Hampshire Department of Safety (DOS) rescinded its order granting their petition for a "no wake zone" on procedural grounds, they expected to submit a new request as soon as possible.

Barber's Pole stretches for about 2,000 feet — about twice the length of the Weirs Channel — from the southeastern tip of Little Birch Island, off the mouth of Orchard Cove, to where the eastern shoreline of Cow Island recedes to the west. Between the buoys to the west and the shore to the east, the channel is about 390 feet wide.

Legal residents, or property owners, of the township in question are the only ones who may petition the commissioner of safety to place operating restrictions, including limits on the maximum horsepower or speed of boats, on lakes, ponds and rivers. After holding a public hearing the commissioner may adopt rules to impose restrictions found to serve the public interest. Altogether restrictions have been imposed on more than 50 lakes and ponds through this process.

Petitions for a "no wake zone" at Barber's Pole failed in 1988, 1997 and 2008, in part because the New Hampshire Marine Patrol opposed them. Last May, residents tried again. A hearing was held on July 21 and on July 30 Commissioner John Barthelmes issued the order.

However, the order was appealed by a group including Scott Verdonck, the president, and Bob Flannery, the political director, of Safe Boaters of New Hampshire, the organization formed in opposition to legislation to limit speeds on Lake Winnipesaukee. They successfully claimed that some of the petitioners failed to qualify as either residents or property owners of Tuftonboro and the order was rescinded.

The overwhelming majority of those who attended the public hearing and submitted written comments to the DOS favored the "no wake zone." Moreover, David Barrett of the Marine Patrol withdrew his agency's challenge to the measure and declined to take a position either for or against it.

Safety was the uppermost concern among advocates of the "no wake zone."

The Boris family has owned Squirrel Island since the 1860s. Vanessa Boris told DOS that that the volume and speed of boat traffic through the passage made travel between the island and the mainland difficult and dangerous. Describing the situation as "truly chaotic," she likened crossing the channel to crossing I-93. Many of those supporting the "no wake zone" said that swimmers, anglers, kayakers and canoeists were increasingly at risk from powerboats that frequently ignored the 150-foot rule, requiring vessels to maintain headway speed only when within 150 feet of swimmers, rafts, docks, moorings and shorelines, as well as other vessels.

In addition to the hazards of congestion and speed in the channel, many property owners traced increasing erosion along the shorefront to the number, size and speed of boats, whose wakes have undermined trees and shrubs lining the water. Others said that roiling waters have damaged their docks.

Several residents noted that a "no wake zone" at Barber's Pole would be comparable to similar zones designated between Governor's Island and Eagle Island in Gilford and Chase Island and Farm Island in Nineteen Mile Bay.

Opponents of the "no wake zone" discounted concerns for safety. Michael Burke wrote to DOS saying that there are very few days during the boating season when traffic through Barber's Pole is heavy and then "the vast majority of boaters slow down to no wake speed in accordance with the 150-foot rule." Like others, he called for more education and enforcement of the existing rules rather than more restrictions.

Others said a "no wake zone" would slow travel between the islands and the mainland. Testing the claim of a resident of Sandy Island that 20 minutes would be added to the trip, Thomas Light of Little Birch Island said he paddled the length of the channel in 12 minutes, doubting anyone would have to travel slower than a 55-year-old in a canoe.

In framing his recommendation to the commission, the hearings officer, C.N. Duclos, noted that the testimony echoed much of what was presented in 2008, including a video of vessels passing through Barber's Pole, which he did not find persuasive. Instead, he gave greater weight to Barrett's decision not to contest the petition. Those opposed to a "no wake zone," Duclos said, did not indicate that any activity in the channel would be restricted or eliminated if it were imposed. Consequently, he concluded that a "no wake zone" would control, without greatly restricting, the diverse uses of the public water at Barber's Pole.

Barrett said yesterday that in dropping his challenge to a "no wake zone" at Barber's Pole "didn't mean I endorsed it either." He said that the number of citations and accidents in the area did not support the restriction. However, he indicated that if another petition was submitted, he would not challenge it.

Likewise, Verdonck said that Safe Boaters of New Hampshire would not oppose designating Barber's Pole a "no wake zone." But, at the same time, he emphasized that the organization will insist that any petition and public hearings be widely publicized to provide all interested parties with an opportunity to participate in the process. He said that his membership was troubled that a legal notice in a newspaper failed to adequately inform interested parties that a change in operating protocols on the lake was being contemplated. At Verdonck's request Representative John Hikel (R-Goffstown) has filed legislation requiring those petitioning for restrictions on the use of public waters to notify all abutters of the forthcoming hearing by certified mail.

Meanwhile, Representative Betsey Patten (R-Moultonborough) has also introduced legislation that would authorize the DOS to adopt operating restrictions in the public interest without necessarily holding a public hearing.

Vanessa Boris is quoted to say it is "truly Chaotic" in the BP area. Although other have said the SL was working wonders on the entire lake. What happened?

[VtSteve]

So I guess the Cow Island people don't really matter? There's a pretty good record in the BP thread as to who gave testimony and appeared at the "Hearing".

I also notice absolutely nothing in the letter praising the SL law for making the lake so safe and wonderful



I also might point out to you that you might want to go back and read what HN was saying about the Cow Island residents, and then review who he said were the original petitioners.

Truly not a group that makes decisions based on input from all sides.

[gtagrip]

[QUOTE=VtSteve;145200]So I guess the Cow Island people don't really matter? There's a pretty good record in the BP thread as to who gave testimony and appeared at the "Hearing".

I also notice absolutely nothing in the letter praising the SL law for making the lake so safe and wonderful

But this one is a piece of work



So whomever controls the DOS controls the lake? No need for any public input anymore. Why would this be? The letter points out, as do many others, that there was an Overwhelming support for this particular NWZ. I would think that a public hearing would leave you victorious. Is it too much bother to deal with the people anymore?[QUOTE]

I think I've heard somewhere many times by the pro SL crowd, that the people of NH own the lake. Waiting for the spin on this statement.

[ApS]

SOTD's new article advises that this entire BP NWZ discussion has been disingenuous:

Both Director Barrett and SBONH-NHRBA have withdrawn their objections!

Originally Posted by hazelnut

There will never be a No Wake Zone at the Barbers Pole (if I have any say). There I said it SO WHAT?!?! You are one weird dude.

If "one weird dude" is what it takes to disclose your genuine position, then that's what it will take.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

So I guess the Cow Island people don't really matter? There's a pretty good record in the BP thread as to who gave testimony and appeared at the "Hearing".

In response to this discussion, I toured the Barbers Pole area myself.

I noted the peaceful "tour-boat" behavior of the YMCA boat, and was astounded at what I heard from the only "YMCA guy" at the hearing.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I also notice absolutely nothing in the letter praising the SL law for making the lake so safe and wonderful

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

SOTD's new article advises that this entire BP NWZ discussion has been disingenuous:

Both Director Barrett and SBONH-NHRBA have withdrawn their objections!

As I recall, SBONH never had an objection to the NWZ. They objected to the process of notification, or lack thereof.

It certainly is not OT APS. Pro SL supporters have consistently stated all year how marvelous and peaceful the lake has been since the law passed. The BP area was never mentioned. As you know, in order to get the BP NWZ passed, a small group of people from two islands snuck in a petition and had a little meeting. As far as I know, hardly anyone, if anyone, on Cows Island even knew about it.

Once it was out in the open, a group of SL supporters on this board made comments about Big Fast Boats Flying Through the area, Full Throttle cowboys, and all that. When asked about this obvious contradiction? We're still waiting for the real responses.

I might also add that Hazelnut, being one of the few honest people involved in the active area, stated fully that the NWZ would benefit him mostly. The biggest problem was the waves. I understand it's an issue for the island owner that leaves a small boat for his renters to travel back and forth from the island to their cars.


It was a great thread APS, and some pretty honest and thoughtful statements came out of it. People like yourself decided it was a perfect opportunity to label everyone not in agreement as a cowboy. All of you forgot how peaceful and pristine the lake was, and painted pictures of chaos and wildness. After all was said and done, the petitioners had not played by the law, and it was reversed. The NWZ supporters were so angry, it led to some pretty viscous attacks, including some pretty outlandish and totally fabricated statements directed at me.

So while you like to portray certain people in a bad light, I think you need to look around at who you're hanging with. Given some of your own statements, I'd say maybe you're with the right group?

When a simple NWZ topic cannot be discussed with both sides giving honest opinions, it's really pretty sad. But I'm quite sure many of you don;t see it that way.

[BroadHopper]

If the SL law is so amazing, why do we need a no wake zone?

Now back to CG Rule 6......

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Pro SL supporters have consistently stated all year how marvelous and peaceful the lake has been since the law passed. The BP area was never mentioned.

Once it was out in the open, a group of SL supporters on this board made comments about Big Fast Boats Flying Through the area, Full Throttle cowboys, and all that. When asked about this obvious contradiction? We're still waiting for the real responses.

Well here it is. It has been consistently pointed out in this forum that the SL was one piece of a puzzle or a facet for a safer and more enjoyable lake. Yet every time there is an accident on the lake, you and your little magpies chime in "I thought the SL was supposed to make all of the lake's problems go away". The same can be said for the BP NWZ. It's like trying to argue with an 8 year old. Today's letter in the LDS points this out quite precisely. The concept is simple once you take away your spin.

[VtSteve]

In order to take anyone seriously, it's important to point out that Director Barrett does not agree with you guys. It's also not wise for a little group to make fun of the USCG rules of navigation. Continually bringing up drunken boating is something that would normally be in the spotlight of reasons to enforce, not ridicule. Mr. Ed Chase now has decided that mentioning drunks on the water creates a new perception.

As has been said many times, speed was not a problem on Winni before, nor is it now, never was. If you are so concerned about a small group of "cowboys", focus your writing talents there. I will note that most proponents of safe boating, the vast and overwhelming majority, supported increased enforcement. They also support the MP in any way possible. Your little group has consistently made fun of Director Barrett, the 150' rule, and now the USCG rules.

But we move on, and let the public become informed as to what the USCG rules actually say. Information is a wonderful thing, especially when the facts are reported, not letters to the editor that continually seek to divert attention from reality. As I stated before, anyone that doesn't understand CG Rule 6, or any of the other internationally-accepted rules of boating, should not be on the water.

Those that don't obey the rules are always pretty obvious to spot. There were 8 tickets issued for speeding on Winni this past summer, presumably some of those were in NWZ's. The problems on waterways are far too frequent and serious for people to take such a personal, and selfish view of narrow agendas. Coast Guard Rule 6 is directly aimed at problem boaters and repeat offenders. It's definitely a very useful rule that is far more flexible, and useful for preventing the type of incidents that paddlers and small boaters everywhere complain about.

Most SL opponents support wider enforcement, and want to rid the waterways of all drunks and reckless boaters. This includes everyone, not just some.

[hazelnut]

I've done it before and I'll do it until you all get it:

http://www.quicktopic.com/18/H/2DcQnXwaD2qL

Go there and read. Take the time to weed through the mundane day to day trivial conversations we friendly neighbors have with each other, Read through it all APS, BIM, SOTD etc. Educate yourself on the real fact that these are my neighbors and I. The REAL living breathing residents of Cow Island, many of the posters are the people in the actual channel. Read about how we unanimously do not think a NWZ is warranted for the channel.

Can't WAIT for the spin

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Can't WAIT for the spin

And here it is. According to yesterdays LDS article, the majority of letters to the DOS (wasn't it about 30?) were in favor of the NWZ. Oh, I forgot...they're all a bunch of slimy lying renters. Some of your comments must make you real popular with these neighbors.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

And here it is. According to yesterdays LDS article, the majority of letters to the DOS (wasn't it about 30?) were in favor of the NWZ. Oh, I forgot...they're all a bunch of slimy lying renters. Some of your comments must make you real popular with these neighbors.

I could care less what a group of sneaky liars think about me. They only show up once in the past 10 years and they lied about why they were there. I absolutely 100% DO NOT CARE what those people think about me. The rest of my neighbors and I are disgusted with them. The letters WERE from those two or three families and that was proven, call the state, why do you think the decision was rescinded?

SOTD you are funny, thanks for helping me prove further what disingenuous people theses people are. They should hang their heads in shame. If these are friends of yours it speaks volumes of your character. I'd shy away from publicizing any association you may have with them. As of now you seem to have character in my eyes. You have a certain belief (which is wrong) but at least you stand by it.

Did you read? Did you see? Yup all those folks on the Cow Forum, close friends and neighbors of mine, we don't support a NWZ. It's OK I understand that it's a tough pill to swallow when you are confronted with concrete proof. I don't expect an apology or anything. All I want is for you to stop telling my neighbors and I what you think we support. It's frustrating for all of us and we have been emailing back and forth discussing your posts. In the end we get a chuckle out of it though. Imagine that people that don't know us are telling us what we are thinking.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

I could care less what a group of sneaky liars think about me. They only show up once in the past 10 years and they lied about why they were there. I absolutely 100% DO NOT CARE what those people think about me. The rest of my neighbors and I are disgusted with them. The letters WERE from those two or three families and that was proven, call the state, why do you think the decision was rescinded?

SOTD you are funny, thanks for helping me prove further what disingenuous people theses people are. They should hang their heads in shame. If these are friends of yours it speaks volumes of your character. I'd shy away from publicizing any association you may have with them. As of now you seem to have character in my eyes. You have a certain belief (which is wrong) but at least you stand by it.

Did you read? Did you see? Yup all those folks on the Cow Forum, close friends and neighbors of mine, we don't support a NWZ. It's OK I understand that it's a tough pill to swallow when you are confronted with concrete proof. I don't expect an apology or anything. All I want is for you to stop telling my neighbors and I what you think we support. It's frustrating for all of us and we have been emailing back and forth discussing your posts. In the end we get a chuckle out of it though. Imagine that people telling that don't know us are telling us what we are thinking.

Concrete proof?....just check out yesterdays LDS. And letters to the DOS show significant support from both sides of the BP. But how come these people weren't hanging out in the bars and arcades you visit?

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Concrete proof?....just check out yesterdays LDS. And letters to the DOS show significant support from both sides of the BP. But how come these people weren't hanging out in the bars and arcades you visit?

A letter from Ed Chase constitutes what exactly?

Your feeble attempts to characterize good people as drunks is pretty wild indeed. Especially given that you guys never talk about you know who, who's bar over served someone that caused a bad accident.

I think it's pretty embarrassing for someone to keep repeating fales statements, which are proven to be false. SOTD, these people know and talk to the MP, as well as legislators. They not only know who you are, they read all of your statements. The legislators that got the rug pulled over their eyes in the SL law also read all of this stuff. They read how you, and your buddies, disparage the reputations and character of people, and measure it along with your lies.

Yes, I can say lie without being mean. Because it's true grasshopper.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

It's also not wise for a little group to make fun of the USCG rules of navigation.

Because those same rules are mirrored in NH law... ...That "little group" would be the NH Legislature.

Every weekend, USCG rules appear too complicated for weekend boaters. OTOH, Winnipesaukee's Speed Limit happens to be simple enough—is enforceable—and has been enforced!

Newly rejecting the Legislature's years of deliberations would embarrass any newly-elected Legislators. The state would be returning to the "Cow-Hampshire" of old.

SBONH-NHRBA's pipe-dream will languish forever.

1) From the Marianas Islands to Maine, the Coast Guard has jurisdiction over more square miles of water than all the square miles of land in the USA! (So, shall we return to those quaint night-time rules that allow a flashlight instead of requiring real lighting?)

2) Replace the NH buoy system with the Coast Gurad's ATONs to endanger night-time boaters?

3) "Red-right-returning" rules?

4) Or shall we just allow Director Barrett and the NHMP to do their job using the State's long-established infrastructure—or have SBONH "Federalize" still one more realm of NH citizens' lives?

BTW: Viewing the Cow Islander forum shows me it's virtually the same tight little group as here.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

it's important to point out that Director Barrett does not agree with you guys.

He has obviously distanced himself from the BP issue—realizing instead—the democratic process will take precedence over and above his own views.

Perhaps the Director now knows who he works for?

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Continually bringing up drunken boating is something that would normally be in the spotlight of reasons to enforce, not ridicule.

IMO, New Hampshire has developed a very poor reputation for keeping drunks off the roadways: In recent fatal collisions on Lake Winnipesaukee, alcohol-excess wasn't found to be particularly worthy of successful prosecution by the state.

Lt. Dunleavey once stated (as a Sergeant) that 40% of boaters had alcohol on board. VtSteve is not suggesting that alcohol is just being transported—and not consumed on Lake Winnipesaukee?

Because of its tragic outcome, SL supporters cannot ridicule SBONH-NHRBA's most recent collision.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

As has been said many times, speed was not a problem on Winni before, nor is it now, never was. If you are so concerned about a small group of "cowboys", focus your writing talents there. I will note that most proponents of safe boating, the vast and overwhelming majority, supported increased enforcement. They also support the MP in any way possible. Your little group has consistently made fun of Director Barrett, the 150' rule, and now the USCG rules.

Not worthy of response, that last sentence is absurd on its face!

Kayakers take note: SBONH-NHRBA dismisses USCG Rule 5 repeatedly on this forum.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Those that don't obey the rules are always pretty obvious to spot. There were 8 tickets issued for speeding on Winni this past summer, presumably some of those were in NWZ's.

Maybe 130-MPH in a NWZ?

How short is memory.

I still see a few Cowboys every weekend; unfortunately, those few Cowboys are enough to overwhelm the ability of the the NHMP to "do its job" on weekends.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Most SL opponents support wider enforcement, and want to rid the waterways of all drunks and reckless boaters. This includes everyone, not just some.

We've heard these very same platitudes before—like just before Governor Lynch signed the SL bill upon hearing of the SBONH-predecessor's very outspoken President fatally breaking both the substance and the spirit of Rule 5.

Platitudes have never abounded so fully as in this thread.

It's in Vermont water?

[Seaplane Pilot]

[QUOTE=VtSteve;145266]Your feeble attempts to characterize good people as drunks is pretty wild indeed. Especially given that you guys never talk about you know who, who's bar over served someone that caused a bad accident.QUOTE]

Excellent point - and one that should be exposed more than it has been. It's amazing how these "industry" supporters of the SL and WINFABS earn their millions in the hospitality industry, especially by selling alcohol. I can just see these businesspeople swallowing hard, thinking how much they hate the "THUNDER BOAT COWBOYS" while they're depositing all this money in the bank.

Let them keep digging their own graves - they look more and more rediculous every day.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Concrete proof?....just check out yesterdays LDS. And letters to the DOS show significant support from both sides of the BP. But how come these people weren't hanging out in the bars and arcades you visit?

And here it is folks, read what SOTD wrote... I'll give you a second. Ok, so I give him proof, I give him a link to a website so he can read what my neighbors and I are discussing and what does he do? He insults and ridicules me. Save these posts when SOTD starts crying that we are big mean bullies.

If you can't fight facts with facts make up lies and disparage people. These are the tactics of the little band of three on this website.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

BTW: Viewing the Cow Islander forum shows me it's virtually the same tight little group as here.

:

Completely false statement. Besides myself OCD has posted a few informative posts. But here we go with facts again those just don't seem to matter to you guys?

[VtSteve]

[QUOTE=Seaplane Pilot;145294]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Your feeble attempts to characterize good people as drunks is pretty wild indeed. Especially given that you guys never talk about you know who, who's bar over served someone that caused a bad accident.QUOTE]

Excellent point - and one that should be exposed more than it has been. It's amazing how these "industry" supporters of the SL and WINFABS earn their millions in the hospitality industry, especially by selling alcohol. I can just see these businesspeople swallowing hard, thinking how much they hate the "THUNDER BOAT COWBOYS" while they're depositing all this money in the bank.

Let them keep digging their own graves - they look more and more rediculous every day.

Well that's our opinion of course. But we label it as such, and let people figure it out. I'm all for civility and open discussions. But when someone writes a letter to a paper, which makes blatant accusations, slanders the reputations of good people, and uses partial quotes out of context, and claims these are Facts, I will address them. When someone uses the term Thunder Clubs, I know for sure they don't know anything about the subject.

I'm quite sure that everyone here knows the difference between facts and opinions, and knows very well what the intentions are of the posters. Personally, I hold no malice towards any one group or type of boat, be it a sailing vessel or a canoe. The one thing all boats have in common is that they are on the water, and each and every one of them has a skipper who's responsibilities include;


Rule - 2, Responsibility, requires that due regard shall he given to all dangers of navigation and collision. This rule allows the mariner to depart from the rules as necessary to avoid the immediate danger of collision. This rule is often applied when the risk of collision between three or more vessels may occur. It is the mariner’s responsibility to take the necessary actions to avoid a collision.

Rule - 4 requires that every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout using sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the possible risk of collision.

Rule - 6 requires that every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions. In determining safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account: the visibility, traffic density, maneuverability of the vessel with special reference to stopping distance and turning ability, at night the presence of background light such as from shore lights, the state of the wind, sea, current, proximity of navigational hazards, and the draft in relation to the available depth of water. Additionally, vessels with operational radar must use that radar to its fullest extent to determine the risk of collision.

Rule - 7 Risk of Collision, states that every vessel shall use all available means to determine if risk of collision exists; if there is any doubt, assume that it does exist. Risk of collision shall be deemed to exist if the compass bearing from your vessel to an approaching vessel does not change. Constant bearing decreasing range (CBDR) is the term we use to describe this situation. Collision risk may sometimes exist even when appreciable bearing change is evident, particularly when approaching a very large vessel or a vessel towing or when approaching a vessel at very close ranges

Rule 8, Action to Avoid Collision, provides specific guidance on how to maneuver your vessel so as to avoid a collision. Changes in course and speed shall be large enough so as to be readily apparent to the other vessel. If there is sufficient sea room, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close quarters situation provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close quarters situation. If necessary to avoid collision or allow more time to assess the situation, a vessel shall slacken her speed or take all way off by stopping or reversing her propulsion. A vessel which is required not to impede the passage of another vessel shall take early and substantial action to allow sufficient sea room for the passage of the other vessel.

Rule 9, Narrow Channels, states that a vessel proceeding along the course of a narrow channel or fairway shall keep as near to the outer limit of the channel which lies on her starboard (right) side as is safe and practicable, A vessel less than 20 meters in length or sailing vessel shall not impede the passage of a vessel, which can safely navigate only within the narrow channel.

Rule 14, Head-On Situation, states that vessels which are approaching head-on shall alter course to starboard so each will pass port to port.

Rule 15, Crossing Situation, states that when two power driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other vessel on her starboard side shall keep out of the way, and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel.



Our waterways have been successfully shared by all that have the courtesy and respect to understand that they are not the only people on the water, and they must abide by certain rules of the road. These rules are for everyone, not just some boats or some people.

[VtSteve]

My memory is just fine APS. I was so harsh in my criticism of the NWZ speeder that I think even BI thought I was a little overboard, so to speak I would have him kicked off the lake and also spend a few days or more behind bars. Spin that.

I'm also very well aware of the alcohol problems on the waterways. I've repeatedly mentioned them, and have been repeatedly tromped on by some SL supporters for it. I mentioned many times that most of the accidents you speak of involve excessive alcohol consumption, but many boaters, not just in any one group. If anyone on this forum remembers otherwise, please chime in.

APS, you're a smart guy for sure. Is there any reason we can't have real adult conversations without you spinning and trying to paint people in a bad light? If you can't even address what I have actually said, it must not fit your ongoing agenda. This is the point where I will stand by what I have posted. There are thousands of views on these threads, so there must be thousands of folks that well know what I have stated, and what I stand for. I'll let your insinuations stand for what they are as well.

[RANGER CANOE CO]

Grey hair, probably been riding forever on Winni.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by RANGER CANOE CO

Grey hair, probably been riding forever on Winni.

That's a real big/fast boat to have on the lake. Doesn't it belong on the ocean?

[ApS]

...still...

Originally Posted by VtSteve

My memory is just fine APS. I was so harsh in my criticism of the NWZ speeder...I would have him kicked off the lake and also spend a few days or more behind bars.

Your primary objection was his "fleeing the NHMP". (An easy charge to beat, especially when your noisy boat is a 130-MPH Outer-Limits ocean-racer).

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Is there any reason we can't have real adult conversations without you spinning and trying to paint people in a bad light?...I mentioned many times that most of the accidents you speak of involve excessive alcohol consumption, but many boaters, not just in any one group.

There's one group that regards "risk" so dismissively that—in their own minds—alcohol doesn't increase their own personal risk at all.

Sadly, they only wake up after impacting the lives of others.

Who cares about all those lesser boats, going who-knows-where?

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I'll let your insinuations stand for what they are as well.

It's no insinuation to see you've "cherry-picked" USCG regulations, so we're not burdened here with having to review the dangers over-sized boats pose to so many others on this inland lake—with its 253 scattered islands.

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Completely false statement. Besides myself OCD has posted a few informative posts. But here we go with facts again those just don't seem to matter to you guys?

Your link didn't include OCD, who I consider one of your little, but noisy, group—anyway.

Originally Posted by RANGER CANOE CO

Grey hair, probably been riding forever on Winni.

I've built three wood boats—and owned four.

With every turn of a brass screw and the driving of every bronze boat nail, you watch as the curves come together and eventually you refer to your wood boat as "her" or "she".

Nobody respects life on the water more than someone who has blood, skin and sweat in the varnishing, inspecting, repair and painting of the wood boat they have built themselves.

But on the lake, there are too few who can say that today—with their boats and credit—in this "Age of Plastic".

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

Let them keep digging their own graves - they look more and more rediculous every day.

I think you meant to write ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

It's amazing how these "industry" supporters of the SL and WINFABS earn their millions in the hospitality industry, especially by selling alcohol. I can just see these businesspeople swallowing hard, thinking how much they hate the "THUNDER BOAT COWBOYS" while they're depositing all this money in the bank.

Sorry...

...We had no idea your group was so important.

[sunset on the dock]

From today's LDS:


Letters
Take a look at YouTube video of boat traffic in Barber Pole channel
Dec 08, 2010 12:00 am
To the editor,

I was pleased to read Michael Kitch's article in the December 3 edition covering the establishment of a No Wake Zone (NWZ) in the Barber Pole channel in Tuftonboro. As some of your readers may be aware, many of the Barber Pole residents were surprised and disappointed by the N.H. Department of Safety's reversal of its ruling last month, after citing safety and erosion concerns in their ruling earlier this summer. It was argued by our attorney at the October rehearing that the rules for legitimacy of signatures are vague, ambiguous, and confusing.

During the previous attempt to establish a NWZ in the summer of 2008, a video of some of the boating chaos in the 390' channel between buoy #17 and shore was recorded. The link to the video is: http://youtu.be/2F5Ljbskh_o

I urge your readers to view the footage for themselves to understand why the Department of Safety determined that "There is not sufficient availability and practicality of enforcement" to ensure safety in the channel absent no-wake limitations.

C. Clark

Tuftonboro

[steve c]

I qoute from the Decision and Order dated July 30 2010,

"The video, presented in support of an appeal of the
2008 denial was not persuasive"

http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/h...craft2010.html



Clearly the video was created for a desired effect. The green kayak was clearly part of the cast and who knows how many others were involved!
Any one can create a video to support any point being made. That is why the State deemed it "Inconclusive" Nice Try Christy Clark

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

...still...

Your primary objection was his "fleeing the NHMP". (An easy charge to beat, especially when your noisy boat is a 130-MPH Outer-Limits ocean-racer).


There's one group that regards "risk" so dismissively that—in their own minds—alcohol doesn't increase their own personal risk at all.

Sadly, they only wake up after impacting the lives of others.

Who cares about all those lesser boats, going who-knows-where?



It's no insinuation to see you've "cherry-picked" USCG regulations, so we're not burdened here with having to review the dangers over-sized boats pose to so many others on this inland lake—with its 253 scattered islands.


Your link didn't include OCD, who I consider one of your little, but noisy, group—anyway.


I've built three wood boats—and owned four.

With every turn of a brass screw and the driving of every bronze boat nail, you watch as the curves come together and eventually you refer to your wood boat as "her" or "she".

Nobody respects life on the water more than someone who has blood, skin and sweat in the varnishing, inspecting, repair and painting of the wood boat they have built themselves.

But on the lake, there are too few who can say that today—with their boats and credit—in this "Age of Plastic".


I think you meant to write ridiculous.


Sorry...

...We had no idea your group was so important.

Thank you for correcting my spelling error - quite nice of you! By the way, "KWI" (Kayaking While Intoxicated) is also against the law.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by steve c

I qoute from the Decision and Order dated July 30 2010,

"The video, presented in support of an appeal of the
2008 denial was not persuasive"

http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/h...craft2010.html



Clearly the video was created for a desired effect. The green kayak was clearly part of the cast and who knows how many others were involved!
Any one can create a video to support any point being made. That is why the State deemed it "Inconclusive" Nice Try Christy Clark

Interesting first post! Among the appellants I noticed quite a few SBONH people but interestingly enough one that looks like it could possibly be you...speaking of being able "to suppport any point being made"...not that anyone has any bias of their own here.
My point: Are you related to C. Clark ? It would be an ironic twist...I can see the headline now..."Barber Pole Couple to Divorce over Disagreement on NO Wake Zone".

[steve c]

We are still together...........I'm the one in the green kayak trying to create
unsafe conditions for the camera!

[Dave R]

I could not sit through the whole video, it was too shaky. Would have been much easier to watch and more informative if the zoom was backed way out. By zooming in so much it was impossible to see the big picture.

Looked busy, but I didn't see anything that looked truly unsafe. Might have been a few 150' violations, but it was really hard to tell with the zoom being changed too much.

I liked that motorboats were passing behind the sailboat.

Does anyone have any quality video of typical weekend traffic there?

[Yosemite Sam]

Originally Posted by Dave R

I could not sit through the whole video, it was too shaky. Would have been much easier to watch and more informative if the zoom was backed way out. By zooming in so much it was impossible to see the big picture.

Looked busy, but I didn't see anything that looked truly unsafe. Might have been a few 150' violations, but it was really hard to tell with the zoom being changed too much.

I liked that motorboats were passing behind the sailboat.

Does anyone have any quality video of typical weekend traffic there?

You are right Dave R,

All that time and effort to create a video and then to be done with such sloppy creativity....unbelievable...this video does not help their effort to show the conditions at the BP! IMHO it just creates more hard feelings between the two groups.

[ishoot308]

That video is a joke at best. It's like Darth Vader meets the Blair Witch Project!

It's zoomed in so much to make boats look closer and going faster than they really are. It is very apparent this video was made to falsely represent the issue.

Dan

[hazelnut]

Re-post from earlier


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNPvKdE3HHE

Kayaking and Canoeing on a Saturday Morning:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3CK7impBxM