Boat Traffic

[KBoater]

For all of you that have commented on the crowds over the 4th. Check out this site that is references in the photo forum. It should interest you about the boat traffic.

http://www.lakesregionaerials.com/boat_traffic.htm

[chase1]

I work in the boating industry and always like to see boats being used. Great Weekend.

[Lakegeezer]

Sunday, the third of July was indeed a zoo! Amazing number of boats - and surfing the wake on the kayaks was a blast. Monday, the 4'th, quite a few less boats, and on Tuesday, all was quiet again. The days are getting shorter now, and we've past the peaks of motorcycles at the weirs and boats on the water. Time to relax!!

[PROPELLER]

Great pictures & very interesting. Just be fair I would like to clarify & add some perspective. That first picture is of Governors island, Saunders Bay & alittle over toward Weirs. This area typically is always the busiest on the lake on any weekend.

I left my slip around 11am July 3rd, a little late for me & it was busy getting through Saunders Bay but once out on the Broads it was wide open. Very little boat traffic between 11-11:30 am on the broads. Most of the other pics I saw on that website were also in & around that same area. I would like to see more pics of different locations at different times of the day. That same area in 5, 10, 30 or 60 minutes later could look totally different.

If you look at the Timber Island photo, there are several boats anchored but there are very few boats operating in the open water areas around the island, granted the photo does not pan out that much.

[Dave R]

1604 boats, that's it? Huh. Would have guessed many more than that. If my math is right, that's 28 acres of water surface per boat, half of which were probably stationary. 28 acres of space would, in theory, allow 631 feet of space between each boat (in all directions). Of course, there are plenty of places on the lake where the spacing's just a smidge tighter...

[KonaChick]

Thanks for supplying that site FLboater..it was extremely interesting and educational as well.

[Coastal Laker]

Is it just me or did this year feel like there were a lot less boats out there than last year? I really felt like this year had fewer boats out there. A lot of people I know didn't make it to the lake due to other weekend activities elsewhere.

[B R]

having to go through the dreaded weir's channel all the time, i thought the same thing. i'm used to waiting in lines on weekends, especially on the weekend of the 4th. no more than a 5 boat line (out side the channel that is) this year.

even after the meredith fireworks, no line at all (i did wait 15 minutes before leaving, trying to aviod the big rush - was there one?).

i've talked to a lot of people who work the docks and ramps, and they echoed the same thing, there aren't as many boats out this year.

[Island Girl]

I saw a lot more boats on July 3rd than on the 4th.

[Rattlesnake Gal]

I agree with IG, there were plenty of boaters out on The Broads on Sunday. Monday it quieted down early in the day.

[Fun4us]

Island Girl you are right about the boats on the 3rd, Definitely more boats on Sunday than Monday. Monday didnt seem like a Holiday. It felt like a Normal Monday after everyone went home from the weekend.

[DRH]

Yes, we saw heavier boat traffic on Sunday than on Monday, and the West Alton sandbar had more boats anchored on Sunday.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Dave R

1604 boats, that's it? Huh. Would have guessed many more than that. If my math is right, that's 28 acres of water surface per boat, half of which were probably stationary. 28 acres of space would, in theory, allow 631 feet of space between each boat (in all directions). Of course, there are plenty of places on the lake where the spacing's just a smidge tighter...

1) I agree with our collective count assessment here for the weekend, but yesterday overlooked the link for the boat census in the thread-opening post. Don't miss that photo.

2) Because each moving boat must keep a mandatory 150-foot separation in every direction, he covers much more than an acre while moving.

When moving fast, he's moving that acre with him -- fast. There should be a suitable term for calculating the acres of lake water surface "being used" per moving boat.

3) What was the count on kayaks?

.

[Just Sold]

Mrs JS and I were up on Sunday and we both agree the boat traffic west of Rattlesnake was very busy. Mrs JS said Gilford as we came out of Smith Cove was like NYC traffic. We went by the West Alton sand bar and it was very crowded even before 10:30 AM.

We visited a childhood friend in Alton Bay where it was busy but not excessive and then off to Chestnut Cove to anchor a while. Very quiet for most of the time and then the waves from boat outside and inside the cove had us bouncing while we were on the swim platform. All and all a nice time there. Not very many boats anchored either.

Off to Toltec Point in Moultonboro where there was a lot of traffic getting there http://www.winnipesaukee.com/photopo...cat=500&page=1 and returning. Very busy at the Barber Pole area too. On the way there we honked as we passed RG's place and dropped a note off at another friends in Tuftonboro all the while seeing plenty of boat traffic. A few 150' violations and one right of way issue added to the navigation fun. We saw lots of MP but only with an adult on a jet ski getting written up for some infraction - they did not look too happy either.

So we saw a lot of the lake and for a July 4th weekend it was busy but I have seen it worse. The eastern end of the lake was far better than all other areas we went to. We never traveled to the Weirs or Merredith as those are areas I avoid on holiday weekends.

[Woodsy]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

1) I agree with our collective count assessment here for the weekend, but yesterday overlooked the link for the boat census in the thread-opening post. Don't miss that photo.

2) Because each moving boat must keep a mandatory 150-foot separation in every direction, he covers much more than an acre while moving.

When moving fast, he's moving that acre with him -- fast. There should be a suitable term for calculating the acres of lake water surface "being used" per moving boat.

3) What was the count on kayaks?

.

Hey APS...

You got your math wrong.... An acre is approximately 43,560 ft/sq. If you assume a boat has to sit in an approximately 150' x 150' box, a boat occupies approximately 22,500 ft/sq. Just a smidge over 1/2 acre per boat.

Woodsy

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Hey APS...

You got your math wrong.... An acre is approximately 43,560 ft/sq. If you assume a boat has to sit in an approximately 150' x 150' box, a boat occupies approximately 22,500 ft/sq. Just a smidge over 1/2 acre per boat.

Woodsy

Holy Cow!

If my math is wrong, I've been ignorant of New Hampshire's primary boating rule all my life!

...but still wondering if kayaks were counted as "boats".

.

[ITD]

Hmmm,

Did APS or Woodsy get the math wrong, difficult question. You see if a boat is passing a person in the water or a kayak he is responsible for staying 150 ft from that object. If he passes another boat he must stay 150 ft away while the other boat must stay 150 feet away. This, however, does not mean that you add both 150 foot zones to make 300 feet of separation. So in this case each boat only needs a 75 foot buffer (half of the 150 that they must maintain) so in this case it would appear that Woodsy is correct while in the case of a kayak or person or similar situation it would appear APS is right. But are they? Woodsy states a 150 ft box, which has an area of 22,500 sq. feet. A circle however is more appropriate, since a 150 foot box would have a distance longer than 150 ft across the diagonals. A 150 ft diameter circle would give an area of 17,671.5 sq.feet. So based on that alone it appears that Woodsy is wrong.

APS on the other hand is more difficult to nail down. He states in one sentence a boat needs more than an acre, then in the next he states that the boat moves "that acre with him" implying 1 acre per boat. So for sake of arguement we will assume APS number to be 1 acre per boat,( in reality based on what I see of APS statements a circle with a 150ft radius ( 70,685.8 sq ft) would be appropriate but 1 acre per boat is easier to type). He also states that another term for "calculating the acres of lake water surface "being used" per moving boat" is needed, "Acres per Second" perhaps?

You see, in my humble view, this whole line of thought is bogus. The only time the 150 ft rule comes into play is when a boat is near another object. If a boat is not near another object the 150ft rule doesn't apply and the boat only occupies the area of its waterline. Furthermore, when the rule does apply, it’s not like a 360 degree "shield" is turned on covering 70,000+ sq. ft of lake. Worst case for two boats is a parallelogram with two sides of 150 ft and the other two sides the lengths of the boats in question. (for two 36 ft GFBL boats that would be 5,400 sq ft of lake). So in REALITY both are WRONG.


As far the question, where kayaks counted as boats, I would have to say no. Since we take a snapshot of the lake and consider it gospel for all of our discussions we should apply that standard consistently. I carefully perused the photos and determined that I could not see any kayaks or canoes. Therefore we must assume that there are no kayaks or canoes on Winnipesaukee.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Coastal Laker

Is it just me or did this year feel like there were a lot less boats out there than last year? I really felt like this year had fewer boats out there. A lot of people I know didn't make it to the lake due to other weekend activities elsewhere.

I also agree and would say there have been less (compared to last few years) boats out and about in general, as well as for this week. Perhaps it's the gas prices or maybe the weather.

[Rattlesnake Gal]

Yesterday my son went for gas at West Alton Marina. The gas person said that last weekend was their busiest ever... I wonder if that means they have the best gas prices?

[upthesaukee]

We filled up at WAM last Mon (the 4th) and they were $2.66. Not the most expensive, but not the cheapest, I'm sure. And I can echo your son's report. They said it was the busiest time all year, and it had just slowed down (only one boat at dock when we pulled up.).

[lakershaker]

Originally Posted by Coastal Laker

Is it just me or did this year feel like there were a lot less boats out there than last year? I really felt like this year had fewer boats out there. A lot of people I know didn't make it to the lake due to other weekend activities elsewhere.

We had to be in NYC for a wedding on Sunday at 3:00! It really puts a crimp in the lake weekend plans. We didn't get up for the weekend, but did make it to the Wolfeboro fireworks, and then stayed for the week. Really surprised at the relatively small amount of boats for what I thought would be a very busy vacation week. Weather was mixed, but Thursday turned out to be a great day.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by ITD

Hmmm,
Did APS or Woodsy get the math wrong, difficult question...A 150 ft diameter circle would give an area of 17,671.5 sq.feet. So based on that alone it appears that Woodsy is wrong...You see, in my humble view, this whole line of thought is bogus. The only time the 150 ft rule comes into play is when a boat is near another object...it’s not like a 360 degree "shield" is turned on covering 70,000+ sq. ft of lake...So in REALITY both are WRONG...As far the question, where kayaks counted as boats, I would have to say no. Therefore we must assume that there are no kayaks or canoes on Winnipesaukee.

1) First, thank you ITD, for answering to what appears to be a difficult concept. While you're "righter" about the circle's radius (not diameter), the 150-foot RSA likewise appears to remain a vague concept, as implied by Woodsy's "diameter" reply.

2) As to "bogus":
Here's an example: If there are 1000 kayaks in Wolfeboro Bay - all operating at maximum speed -- how many violations of the 150-foot rule would there be?

Answer: Very few.

Replace those kayaks with 1000 Jet-Skis -- also operating at maximum speed -- and you'd have a violation every second. Acres/Second counts.

3) Are "Keeping a Proper Watch" and "wake-responsibility" exempt from the rules? With the sudden appearance of a fallen skier, debris, or diver's flag in the late-afternoon sun, one needs to consider all the safety implications of the 150-foot rule.

4) Jeepers...Who does count in the census? There were no kayaks or canoes? No sailboats either.

5) As to "shield":

How many of Winnipesaukee's 44,000 acres are left with the 150-foot "shield" afforded the shoreline, rafts, docks, and islands? Are we "down to" just 34,000 acres?

Winnipesaukee needs to be "opened up". Is boat traffic a good reason to do away with the 150-foot rule? (Just kidding).

[Mee-n-Mac]

Interesting line of discussion .... let me add more heat to the stew.

a) To whether it's a box or a circle, I guess it depends on what you're trying to define. Each boat is a travelling NWZ, the area of this NWZ could be calculated ala APS (300' square centered on the boat's center) or a 300' circle ala ITD's initial calculations. If I were to be hardnosed about it I might say rule is to keep 150' away from any part of the other boat and so I would most simply (if not 100% precisely) model a boat, canoe, kayak, etc as a rectangle with width B and length LOA. Thus the NWZ it imparts onto the lake is a rounded-off rectangle with length LOA+300', width B+300'. The area can be calculated most easily by thinking about it as 5 rectangles (the boat, 2 sides, front and back) and 4 quarter-circles of 150' radius. Given this you can arrive at the following areas ;
Waterbug = 1.62 acres
kayak (2x10) = 1.71 acres
skiff (4x12) = 1.73 acres
small family boat (8x18) = 1.81 acres
large family boat (8.5x24) = 1.85 acres
big bad Baja (8.5x35'7") = 1.93 acres
Carver 38SS (13'5"x39'11") = 1.98 acres

b) What's actually "used" - IMO ITD is correct here. It's not when the "bubbles touch" that matter. it's when the actual watercraft breaks the other's "bubble". So 2 boats on the lake don't "use" the 2X the areas above, it's more complicated as ITD properly shows. Moreover lets talk about the swept area, acres per second. This seems to be a relatively arbitrary measurement. Why not acres per minute, per hour, per ??? Moreover, as has been pointed out previously, for each foot the boat moves forward and "uses", it "releases for other's usage" 1 foot behind it. While I can grasp the concept of some boats "using more lake" than others, I'm unsure this is the best way to measure it.
Let's recall the original stated intent was to tax the boats that use the lake in a more proportional way, more usage gets taxed more. So APS gets you faster = more swept area per time unit = larger tax. But here's where I spoil the stew. Consider the following .... I make my usual Alton to Meredith trip, let's call it 20 miles, in my "1.85 acre" boat doing my average 30 mph. My English buddy B4 (Big Bad Baja Byron) does the same trip in his "1.93 acre" boat but does so at 2x the average speed. Since our boats are the same beam and the trip is the same length, we've both used (swept) the same area during the trip, but he did so in 1/2 the time. If I use the pay per hour method (like a rental) I should pay 2X what B4 pays. After all I tied up that part of the lake, "preventing" others from "using" it, for longer. Either that or there's perhaps a different way of looking at the issue.

c) Back to more serious matters - I thought the fly-over census was a great idea but as flyguy noted, because of the time it takes, there's bound to be some "crossover errors". Additionally as noted above it may be hard to detect the smaller watercraft out there. I wonder if collectively "we" could help out somehow here ? Multiple boats taking pictures simultaneously ... IG's Hawkeyes blimp cam ... ? It shouldn't surprise anyone I have some silly ideas re: this but let's hear yours first.

[ApS]

I especially enjoyed your boating parody of last year regarding poodles being more dangerous than pit bulls.

However, no attempt was made here to tax boats using the time and space that a boat "uses-up" of the lake.

A boat with a high Acre/Second coefficient actively denies a greater acreage in front (and behind) -- compared to lesser boats; hence my 1000-boat example of Jet-Skis vs kayaks in the microcosm of Wolfeboro Bay.

By "spoiling the stew", you've thrown the baby out with the bath water.
No, Wait...,

.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by APS

I especially enjoyed your boating parody of last year regarding poodles being more dangerous than pit bulls.

I'm always happy to be entertaining even when I'm being informative, though I'm not sure how last years retrievers became this years poodles. Will they be chihauhaus next year ? And to be precise I maintain (in analogy-speak) that all dogs have teeth, worrying excessively about a few breeds neglects the fact that the more commmon dogs bite people more often. It really comes down to the situation at hand and the individual dog's temperment.

Originally Posted by APS

However, no attempt was made here to tax boats using the time and space that a boat "uses-up" of the lake.

You're always extolling "us" to connect the dots so when I read the following ;

Originally Posted by APS

{snip} ...
Now add the required 150-foot buffer fore, aft, and to each side. (Remember that this buffer travels with the boat).

Even with scant wind velocity, my new trimaran will be using up nearly two acres of the Lake's precious boating acres: Even more area when really travelling.

A new fee-schedule needs to be derived: A formula that takes into account the surface area of the Lake that an individual boat "uses up" -- not simply boat length, which always remains static. ...{snip}

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ad.php?p=13105

... what am I to do ? So I call a registration fee a tax, you can call it a poodle if you wish.

Originally Posted by APS

A boat with a high Acre/Second coefficient actively denies a greater acreage in front (and behind) -- compared to lesser boats; hence my 1000-boat example of Jet-Skis vs kayaks in the microcosm of Wolfeboro Bay.

By "spoiling the stew", you've thrown the baby out with the bath water.
No, Wait...,

The only time I'm denied usage of the water is when "he" (a hypothetical other boater) has the Right of Way. When I have the RoW "he's" is denied, no matter what his A/S coefficient may be. Re: the moving NWZs discussed previously, do remember that it applies to the watercraft in motion as well to others. In your wording, if I want to maintain a high A/S coefficient it's incumbent upon me to stay clear of other watercraft and the shoreline, otherwise I have to slow to NWS. In this scenario I only get to use the "lake-space" that's available to me, not that in use by others. This is Asimov's "bathroom theory of freedom", applied to Winnipesaukee Should I come to Wolfeboro harbor and find 1000 PWCs or kayaks or sailboats (now wouldn't that be a sight, all taking differing tacks and maintaining 150' separation ) I would still get to the town docks, though I may be slowed or stopped along my route according to the RoW rules. Come to think of it, given the rules are preferential to kayaks and sailboats, I have a better chance of making it to the dock today with the 1000 PWCs. Now isn't that a thought ....