...eeek.....it's back.....eek....oh-no! [Archive]

codeman671

02-09-2007, 03:53 PM

Yes, I think it is about quality of life, but safety is also a concern, and one that gets more attention. I can't count the number of times I've been awakened late at night by a GFBL, or couldn't be heard in a normal conversation over the roar of one of these in the distance. :( The owners of these boats have brought this upon themselves - and the issue would probably die down if they just put a decent muffler system on the engine(s)!

Safety and noise are two totally different issues not to be confused. How can you mention safety as a concern but go on to dwell on noise? When was the last time a boating accident was caused by a loud exhaust distracting someone?

There are already noise laws and Woodsy brought up the very point that I have thought of time and time again. Switchable exhaust not being allowed is ridiculous, as long as the louder setting still meets the current standard at which noise is measured.

Ever heard the saying "loud pipes save lives" in reference to bikes? If you can hear them coming you should have plenty of time to react to a situation. :laugh:

SeaBass

02-09-2007, 03:53 PM

Good Lord,

There is absolutely NO reason to have a speed limit, especially on the broads. Rarely has a boat been within 200 yards of myself when crossing. How 'bout instituting an on water boat test and getting rid of all these "boaters"? I know there are a 1/2 dozen people at our marina who won't even take their boat out because they don't know how it works or will handle in different conditions. Weight is the issue, not speed, small boats are scared because a 4 foot rollers coming off behind the titanic.

Haven't the people who keep bringing this issue up every year for the past 20 years, died already?

There are way too many important issues going on in this country. If the people who put their annoying talents of enacting rules and laws upon us, would do something useful during their lives they could actually serve a purpose. Maybe that politician you have been nudging up his/her behind could concentrate on some important issues. Instead of the possible boat fatality that MIGHT happen next year or the following year. How many people died driving a car/motorcyle to the lake last year? Maybe rte 93 north should have a special speed limit of 10mph and that would stop accidents.

I have been on that lake for 34 years. Sure, there are quite a bit more snotty jerks moving in this area than ever before. But, dammit, relax and enjoy. I am much more worried about some wealthy elderly man driving a 38 cruiser yacht through the channel than I am a 30 year old driving a Cobalt in the broads at 55mph.

Before you ask, I have a 1997 252 Cobalt that the speedo has hit 53mph once.

Republicans or Democrats. Can't we all get along? Must there be segregation still in this country?

See you on the lake concentrating on enjoying my family time.

Evenstar

02-09-2007, 04:19 PM

There is absolutely NO reason to have a speed limit, especially on the broads.
If people in smaller, slower boats are afraid to go out on lakes because of the high speeds that some of the boats are traveling – isn’t that a reason?

Weight is the issue, not speed, small boats are scared because a 4 foot rollers coming off behind the titanic.
My boat is a 50-pound sea kayak, which is definitely a small boat. And for me, speed is the issue, not weight. I can handle 4-foot rollers just fine.

This is an important issue. Just because you don’t personally see it as one, that doesn’t mean that others don’t. Boats traveling at high speeds on busy lakes do have a major negative impact on us paddlers.

lifeonthefarm

02-09-2007, 10:40 PM

"loud pipes" don't save lives on the lake. They are illegal because you wouldn't be able to hear a Sound Producing Device if one was being blown to get your attention...

Lakegeezer

02-10-2007, 09:28 AM

If people in smaller, slower boats are afraid to go out on lakes because of the high speeds that some of the boats are traveling – isn’t that a reason?

My boat is a 50-pound sea kayak, which is definitely a small boat. And for me, speed is the issue, not weight. I can handle 4-foot rollers just fine.

This is an important issue. Just because you don’t personally see it as one, that doesn’t mean that others don’t. Boats traveling at high speeds on busy lakes do have a major negative impact on us paddlers. If we start legislating against fear, where does it stop? I'm afraid of drivers under 18 and above 85. Can we pass a law to get them off the road? I'm afraid of big trucks on the highway when its raining, can we restrict them?

Fear is an emotion that can be controled by understanding the risks and addressing them. If someone can't control their fear, then they should stay away from the situation that triggers the emotion. I'm sure there are sea kayakers who could enjoy a hot busy day in July, without fear taking over.

Lawmakers should be careful that the fear of some does not become a common justification to restrict those who are not scared. Unfortunately, laws against causing fear are becoming more acceptable, as we recently saw in Boston. An innocent light box advertisement on a bridge scared up $1 million dollars worth of panic money and got someone arrested.

I think that I'm in the same category as many others (including fellow sailboat and kayak pilots). I'm fighting against the slippery slope of fear laws from creaping into the "live free or die" state. Let's use the power of law to make the lake safe and clean before we start worrying about a political action committee's definition of their "quality of life".

Evenstar

02-10-2007, 11:03 AM

If we start legislating against fear, where does it stop? I'm afraid of drivers under 18 and above 85. Can we pass a law to get them off the road? I'm afraid of big trucks on the highway when its raining, can we restrict them? Fear is an emotion that can be controled by understanding the risks and addressing them. If someone can't control their fear, then they should stay away from the situation that triggers the emotion. I'm sure there are sea kayakers who could enjoy a hot busy day in July, without fear taking over. ...

30 of our RSA’s contain the word “fear”, 246 RSA’s contain the word “harm”, and 236 more contain the word “danger”. So we have all sorts of laws with regards to the fear of injury, or to protect people from potentially dangerous or harmful acts or conditions. Protection of individuals or of groups of individuals from harm is one of the main reasons for passing laws in this state.

NH RSA TITLE XXII 270:1:II states that following: “In the interest of maintaining the residential, recreational and scenic values which New Hampshire public waters provide to residents of the state and to the promotion of our tourist industry, and in light of the fact that competing uses for the enjoyment of these waters, if not regulated for the benefit of all users, may diminish the value to be derived from them, it is hereby declared that the public waters of New Hampshire shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses, both from the shore and from water-borne conveyances. Such provisions shall take into consideration the following: the variety of special uses appropriate to our lakes, public safety, protection of environment and water quality, and the continued nurture of New Hampshire's threatened and endangered species.”

In my opinion, our public waters are not being regulated very well, if a small percentage of the boating population is causing a larger percentage of the public to avoid these same waters – for whatever reasons.

I happen to have a great deal of contact with other paddlers, so I know for a fact that many of these paddlers avoid paddling on many of New Hampshire’s larger lakes (and especially on Winnipesauke) because they are afraid of the high speed powerboats. And I don’t believe that this fear is unfounded – it is based on the actual risks of sharing the water with boats that are traveling at 15 to 30 times our speed – and the fact that the operators of these boats may not see us.

This same fear (concern, apprehension, uncomfortableness, or whatever you want to call it), which is keeping many paddlers off of these public waters, is (in my opinion) the very reason that we don’t have kayakers and canoeists being killed by powerboaters. The thing is, if paddlers weren’t so afraid to use these waters, there would be more of us out on them, and there would be more accidents – which would then certainly lead to a speed limit law.

Dave R

02-10-2007, 11:42 AM

Evenstar, please tell me you got out on Winnipesaukee in your kayak over the Summer. I was on the lake at least 25 full days, and due to last year's early season speed limit debates, I was especially vigilant about looking for paddlers and high speed boats. I saw huge numbers of paddlers who appeared to be having fun and enjoying the lake, and none that acted frightened. I also saw a very small number of fast moving boats, none of which did anything unsafe while I was watching. The worst offenders regarding safety were folks in "family" boats looking kinda clueless, and they were few and far between, compared to previous years. I think you and your friends are missing out on a good time due to irrational fears.

Evenstar

02-10-2007, 12:33 PM

Yes I got out on Winni a number of times last summer (during the week), but I always had to talk my kayaking friend into going there – as she’s just not comfortable on that lake, due to the speed of some of the powerboats (her words, not mine).

First of all, were you out in a kayak? Because it’s one thing to observe kayaks from the perspective of a powerboat, and it’s very different to be out there in one. I have personally enjoyed most of my time out on the lake, so I would also appear to be having fun to most of the passing powerboats. But there are definitely times when I felt less than safe. Some powerboats and jet skis came way too close to us last summer and many were traveling at fairly high speeds. Yes there is the 150’ law, but if someone is going to break it (which happens all the time), I’d much rather they were going 45 or less, as this can be a rather terrifying experience at higher speeds (and I’m talking from personal experience here). I would almost guarantee that several boaters didn’t even notice us until they were practically upon us (either that or they were just trying to scare us – which they very successfully did).

When I kayak on a lake, I do talk with other paddlers and many of their stories and safety concerns mirror mine. The only kayakers who don’t seem to have as many problems with powerboats are the ones that never venture from the coves or hug the shores – but most of those paddles still have strong safety concerns (which is why they stay off the main lake).

When I kayak, I don’t stay in the coves or hug the shores – I’m out there on the main lake – and I’m out there for hours – covering many miles of lake. And I have NEVER spent a day kayaking on Winni when I did not experience fear that an approaching high speed powerboat was not aware that I was there (based on their actions).

You can say my fears are irrational. But I’m a pretty rational person and I consider myself to be rather adventurous and therefore braver than most; so I feel that my fears are very rational – and that they are very valid.

GWC...

02-10-2007, 01:44 PM

... I consider myself to be rather adventurous and therefore braver than most; ...

Yeah, right...

It is one thing to state that you are brave; but to state that you are braver than most while using fear as a reason for mandating your lifestyle upon others is absurd.

WeirsBeachBoater

02-10-2007, 02:42 PM

Maybe kayaks don't belong in the broads. Same reasoning. Even if there were hypothetically a 45mph limit, Kayaks can not keep up with traffic. They certainly create a hazard to themselves and other boaters. Same reason mopeds aren't allowed on interstates, can not stay with the flow of traffic, and are putting themselves in harms way and hindering all others.

Island Life

02-10-2007, 03:27 PM

Maybe kayaks don't belong in the broads. Same reasoning. Even if there were hypothetically a 45mph limit, Kayaks can not keep up with traffic. They certainly create a hazard to themselves and other boaters.

Very revealing comment. :rolleye1: My boat probably can't keep up with yours. Am I a hazard, too?

Actually, people who kayak as a sport can use the same argument that people with oversized boats use. They need wide-open stretches of water so they can paddle at high speed (yes, it is fast - but not your kind of fast).

Most people don't paddle in the broads, but rather cross from island to island, which requires paddling across fairly large, open areas of water. It's unavoidable. And it's very frightening to see large boats moving toward you at very high speed - and coming from multiple directions. You have no idea whether they can see you or whether they are focusing instead on the more obvious (motor) boats they notice. When you are sitting a few inches deep into the water, with nothing but a small shell around you and a paddle to wave, there is nothing irrational about that, Dave R.

And I was not at the lake for 25 days - I was there for the whole summer. Sure, there were fewer boats this summer, I agree. The number of paddlers is down significantly from what it was many years ago. And that is not because there are fewer paddlers out there - instead the sport is growing fast. The few I saw came by mostly in the early morning or mid-week when the boat traffic was low.

Same reason mopeds aren't allowed on interstates, can not stay with the flow of traffic, and are putting themselves in harms way and hindering all others.

WBB, there is no "flow of traffic" on a lake. Boats go in any direction they wish.

No, I'm not a crazed kayaker. I kayak around the island, that's all, maybe now and then to an adjacent island. I used to kayak a lot, but now I'm too afraid to go much farther than that. And yes, I do like to go "fast" in my boat (it's top speed is probably 45 or 50).

Lakewinniboater

02-10-2007, 03:32 PM

Maybe kayaks don't belong in the broads. Same reasoning. Even if there were hypothetically a 45mph limit, Kayaks can not keep up with traffic. They certainly create a hazard to themselves and other boaters. Same reason mopeds aren't allowed on interstates, can not stay with the flow of traffic, and are putting themselves in harms way and hindering all others.

Not much to say except.... GOOD POINT!!!!! I can't tell you how many times I have seen Canoer's and Kayaker's in places that simply were not common sense and were visibly IRRITATED (not afraid or fearful) of the other boater's that WERE obeying the rules and laws! :D

Evenstar

02-10-2007, 06:36 PM

Yeah, right... It is one thing to state that you are brave; but to state that you are braver than most while using fear as a reason for mandating your lifestyle upon others is absurd.

Why can't you guys discuss this issue without making personal attacks on people who don't share your views?

First of all I did not "state" that I was braver than most - what I wrote was that "I consider myself to be rather adventurous and therefore braver than most" . . . which is my personal opinion (and one that you are in no position to judge, since you don't even know me).

Secondly I am not "mandating my lifestyle" on anyone. I was accused of having irrational fears, and I merely tried to explain my position in that area. In an earlier post I was just trying to point out that there are indeed reasons for having a speed limit - many here may not agree with those reasons, but they are still reasons.

secondcurve

02-10-2007, 06:47 PM

I'd vote for the speed limit if I thought it would make a difference. Unfortunately, it won't. So why bother? The lake doesn't work for many small kayaks and canoes these days due to heavy traffic. I have a 23 foot deep V boat (max speed 38 mph in perfect conditions) and I wouldn't think of boating in anything smaller on Winnipesaukee. I have been boating for 2-seasons on the lake, for a total of about 110 hours, and I can't recall an incident where speed was an issue. Perhaps it is because I have operated in a watercraft that is appropriate for the conditions?

The simple fact of the matter is that most parts of Winnipesaukee are unfit for small watercraft and this isn't going to change. Certainly, anyone who ventures into the broads on a small watercraft is taking a fair amount of personal risk. The good news is that there are many smaller lakes and ponds in the area that are perfect for small watercraft.

Finally, the only way I see to make the lake safer is to crack down on existing illegal activity and to get the booze out. How about a law that makes open containers illegal? Im not saying I'd be for it, but it would make a hell of a lot more difference than a speed limit.

Cal

02-10-2007, 08:00 PM

The smaller the vessel , the more danger is involved , regardless of speed.
I personally wouldn't kayak across the broads because it's a kayak , not because of speed. I would be more concerned with lake and/or weather conditions. A fast moving thunderstorm is a lot faster than any kayak. It doesn't matter how strong a swimmer you are or what type of flotation devices you have , battling 30 or 40 mph winds and 4 or 5 foot waves for a half hour could be just as fatal as a 40' boat doing 80 mph.
Maybe we could ban thunderstorms or limit wind speed and wave height too:rolleye2:
I'd like to say "If you can't keep up with the big dogs , get out of the game" , but I won't because you certainly have a right to be out there too. Just like you see people doing STUPID things on the highway(and they have speed limits) , you'll also see it on the water.
So get over it and get out there and enjoy it anyway;)

Silver Duck

02-10-2007, 09:31 PM

I think that Evenstar hit the nail on the head in her second post when she said "and the fact that the operators of those boats may not see us".

But, IMHO, the danger is caused more by Captain Bonehead not paying rnough attention to what's around him, or having had one too many "brewskis", or just plain running too fast for the visibility than by running above 45 mph. Sadly, I've seen Captain B at the helm of everything from PWCs to bowriders to cruisers.

There is nothing magical about 45 mph that makes it an intrinsically safe speed; many times and places it's much too fast for the visibility or the crowded conditions, while other times and places it's quite possible to go faster in perfect safety (so long as the operator is keeping a sharp watch).

Certainly 45 mph is not slow enough to make a collision safe. God forbid that it should ever happen, but if a canoe or a kayak gets run over because Captain Bonehead isn't watching where he's going, the results aren't going to be much different whether it happens at 25 mph, 45 mph, or 75 mph.

I'm not without sympathy for the folks that are intimidated by having a boat bearing down on them at high speed. Been there, done that in my younger days racing small sailboats, and I "gay-ron-tee" that having a boat bearing down on you at 45 is still going to produce a very high "pucker factor".

Heck, even in my 29 ft. cruiser I've had the "pucker factor" kick in wondering "does that idiot see me", especially at night. But, short of making the entire lake headway speed at all times, I don't think that we can make it completely safe to share the lake with Captain B when he's not paying attention. Certainly, a 45 mph speed limit will not do the trick, and 25 mph is way, way too fast on a dark, cloudy night.

Besides, as became apparent during the last go around, the root of this whole speed limit effort is really about driving performance boats off the lake!

Silver Duck

Chris Craft

02-10-2007, 09:31 PM

From a guy that has 36 years of sailing exp. including offshore racing and being involved in the US Olypic Sailing Team, and about 16 years of running high performance to include offshore power boat races (I did run in the races on the Lake). Ok great now you know I am not a 2 bit newbe hack...:)

The "GFBL" did bring this on themselves. We are the monority no doubt and in the past definatly made out presence felt. However, now we are REQUIRED to be under a certain DB limit.

I know of no accident that this would have stopped. Does anyone? I may be wrong? I have found that when people run their boats fast they are very focussed on what they do. There is really nothing that can distract you while driving fast.

I do not think that people going 45 is all of the sudden going to make being out in the middle of the lake in a Kayak safe.

I have heard two arguments from the pro side that seem to contradict one another. They say that the lake is over crowded and unsafe becaues of this. Then they say that people are afraid to go out. Well would that not make the lake more crowded and exaserbate the problem? :confused:

Over the last few years we have seen accident in NH be I believe it is cut in half. This is double what the national average is. The required licenses are working. They could be tougher to get and I am all for that. I got mine on line and I thought that was a bit of a joke. Lucky for everyone else I have as much experience as I do. I can see how people that do not would not benifiet from it.

Jon

Evenstar

02-10-2007, 10:31 PM

Just because a vessel is smaller does not make it more dangerous. There’s a whole bunch more than size to consider - such as the ability and knowledge of the operator, as well as the design of the vessel.

Ok, I explained all this last year in great detail (to the same people posting here now), but apparently you still don’t understand. A sea kayak is not the same type of boat as a recreational kayak. My kayak is made for large bodies of water, not small lakes and ponds. I cover 20 miles of lake in an afternoon and 4-foot waves and wind conditions aren’t usually that much of a problem – and I’ve never been out in what I would call dangerous weather conditions (I do check the weather reports – and I do keep a watch on the sky). On winni there are only a few spots where you can be more than a mile for some shoreline – which means that I can almost always reach a shore within 15 minutes. I’m also an experienced kayaker – not some beginner and I never go out without safety equipment - plus I’m in great shape – and I don’t paddle alone on the larger lakes.

A 45 mph speed is not a magical number, but it is (in my opinion) a reasonable speed (just like 65 is a reasonable speed for most sections of the Interstate). What a speed limit does do is that it gives something concrete for people to follow (and for officers to use). And if you don’t believe that a speed limit makes a difference, go visit Squam – and look at the number of kayaks and canoes out on that lake.

Cal

02-10-2007, 10:49 PM

Just because a vessel is smaller does not make it more dangerous.

OK , I guess that just about sez it all:emb:

It sounds like "Golden Pond" is a real nice place to kayak;)

codeman671

02-10-2007, 10:50 PM

"loud pipes" don't save lives on the lake. They are illegal because you wouldn't be able to hear a Sound Producing Device if one was being blown to get your attention...

Thus the smiley face, a simple joke... Chill.

codeman671

02-10-2007, 11:06 PM

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Yes I got out on Winni a number of times last summer (during the week), but I always had to talk my kayaking friend into going there – as she’s just not comfortable on that lake, due to the speed of some of the powerboats (her words, not mine).

During the week the place is a ghost town, I am not sure what Winnipesaukee you are talking about...I am sure the few boats that are out and about are always coming close to running you down. Gimme a break. And the fact that these so called close calls are always performance boats traveling at high speeds sounds like an even bigger load...

While we are on the subject, you don't find it dangerous to be out in the middle of the broads in 4-5' waves on "busy" days? With 4-5' waves you will be out of sight as much as you will be in sight unless you are as tall as big bird, and as bright yellow. Take into account other factors such as glare/visibility, wind, etc and you are endangering youself and people in other vessels, including power boats.

Evenstar

02-10-2007, 11:59 PM

During the week the place is a ghost town, I am not sure what Winnipesaukee you are talking about...I am sure the few boats that are out and about are always coming close to running you down. Gimme a break. And the fact that these so called close calls are always performance boats traveling at high speeds sounds like an even bigger load...
First of all I don’t lie – and I’m not exaggerating anything that I’ve written here. I’m being 100% truthful, and I haven’t attacked anyone – yet you guys can’t seem to make a point without getting all personal about it.

Have I have written anything that personally offended you?
If so . . . I really didn't mean to and I'm sorry.
If not, then what is it that you don't like about me? Most people who actually know me seem to think that I'm a pretty nice person.

And please don't misquote me - I wrote "Some powerboats and jet skis came way too close to us last summer and many were traveling at fairly high speeds. I never wrote "always".

Now to address your other comments:

The truth is that I’ve only been on winni during the week, and it’s always been really far from a “ghost town” – but I’m talking about nice days in mid summer (just in case that wasn’t clear). Just getting around Governors Island can be a real challenge on any day of the week, due to the number of boats coming and going.

While we are on the subject, you don't find it dangerous to be out in the middle of the broads in 4-5' waves on "busy" days? With 4-5' waves you will be out of sight as much as you will be in sight unless you are as tall as big bird, and as bright yellow. Take into account other factors such as glare/visibility, wind, etc and you are endangering youself and people in other vessels, including power boats.
When did I write that I go out in the middle of the broads in 4 to 5 foot waves on busy days? All I wrote was that I have been out in 4 foot waves and that they weren’t usually that much of a problem. My point was that my kayak is made for those conditions and I happen to know through experience that I can handle most weather conditions . . . if I have to. I don’t venture out in 4-foot waves – but conditions can change in a hurry so I might have to (and have had to) deal with rough weather from time to time, just like anyone who spends time out on large lakes.

When I am in big waves 50% of the time I’m extremely visible – because I’m up there on top of the wave – and my kayak is bright red on top, with a white hull – my PFD is bright red – my drytop is bright orange, and my paddles are bright orange – my friend has the bright yellow (Big Bird) kayak. So any operator in a powerboat that is traveling at a reasonable speed in those conditions would have to be blind or just not paying attention to not see us (especially since powerboats aren't traveling at high speeds in 4-foot waves).

So exactly how am I endangering people in other vessels?

JDeere

02-11-2007, 09:06 AM

Hmmmmmm I wonder why real-estate on Squam is valued almost 2x what Winni is. Could it be that peace and safety have a value added component to it?

The argument against the speed limit is based on ignorance of boating in other parts of the country. Any one boated in the ICW and dealt with speed limits, and long, long, long no wakes to protect the manatees?

Dave R

02-11-2007, 09:30 AM

Evenstar, I'm glad you got out on the lake. Sorry it lived up to your expectations. Were any of the boats or PWCs that frightened you actually going more than 45? That's at or near wide open throttle for most power boats. Most folks don't typically operate at or near WOT much.

You wrote of difficulty getting around Governer's Island. That's generally the most crowded part of the entire lake. I only go near there when necessary. One would be hard pressed to maintain more than 45 MPH around that island due to the crowding. You sure it's not the crowds that make paddling on Winnipesaukee no fun? I imagine Squam is substantially less crowded and therefore more fun for paddling. Considering most power boats top out under 50, I seriously doubt the speed limit on that lake is the reason for its reduced popularity, I imagine its proximity to Winnipesuakee has much more to do with it.

Evenstar

02-11-2007, 10:43 AM

Chris Craft

02-11-2007, 11:38 AM

Dave:

\It is impossible to tell exactly how fast someone is going on the water, but I spend so much time on Squam, where the 40mph speed limit gives me a pretty good idea of what that speed looks like, that it’s pretty easy to tell if a boat is going way faster than that.
(at full throttle).

I respectfully agree with your first part of the paragraph and disagree with the last part.

I was in my ski boat in MA in a small lake. We like to go there because we are usually the only boat on the lake and it makes for perfect water skiing. There is a speed limit on all inland lakes in MA (45mph). I never went over 40mph all day as I knew that there were police watching us all day. When I went to pull my boat out of the water the police came and paid me a visit. They said that I was traveling in excess of 60 mph. They said that they knew that based on the rooster tail that my boat was putting up. The problem with their observation is that when this boat goes slower it puts out a larger rooster tail. Something that they did not understand. They after a nice discussion with them asked me to prove it. So I made a pass at 45 and another at 80. They thanked me after the demonstration and said that they were truly deceived. Now these are trained officers that do this for a living not just the summer. As has been said most boats are not capable of the speeds that you think that they are. Most on GPS will top out at about 40mph. Keck my Formula speed boat tops out at 55:( :( . I am sure that it looks like it is going a lot faster but it is not.

My other issue is that my windsurfers travel well in excess of 45 mph. I have been clocked on one at 64mph. So I risk getting a ticket on one. :( Kind of takes the fun out of it if ya know what I mean....

I wish that I could agree with your assertion that you will be safer with people traveling a little slower but I can't. The accident rate has dropped faster in NH that any other state and that includes states that have implemented speed limits. The facts just do not seem to point towards your point except for the noise issue. As for that the manufacturers have made a HUGE effort to quite their boats. I think that you would be surprised at how well you can see in front of you at speed.

Hang in there everyone it is going to be a LONG winter :eek: ;) :D

codeman671

02-11-2007, 01:07 PM

Dave:

Some of the boats that we were very concerned about were traveling well in excess of 45mph, including one that came within 50 or 60 feet of us, as we were heading out of Center Harbor – at least we know that the operator saw us, because he was staring at us and grinning. When we crossed large stretches of open water (between islands), we often saw boats that were going faster than 45, some never got very close, some got closer than we liked, and some slowed way down as soon as they got anywhere near us.

A couple of the jet skis in Center Harbor were going pretty fast, but maybe not over 45 – mostly they were annoying, because they kept circling us – trying to get a better look as they showed off (we weren’t impressed). That was my partially own fault – it was a very hot day and I wearing a bikini.

It is impossible to tell exactly how fast someone is going on the water, but I spend so much time on Squam, where the 40mph speed limit gives me a pretty good idea of what that speed looks like, that it’s pretty easy to tell if a boat is going way faster than that.

My point about Governor’s Island was in response to the comment that the lake was a “ghost town” during the week. We didn’t encounter any boats traveling at high speed until we were well away from that traffic.

Squam has a lot of powerboats on it on weekends – it can be a real pain at times just to get to the river connecting Squam with Little Squam. In my opinion the 40 mph speed limit is what makes Squam feel safe to paddle, not the number of powerboats. Crossing large stretches of open water is not nearly as intimidating when powerboats are approaching you at slower speeds.

I live near a 10 mile lake and that can be a scary place to paddle on some weekends, not because there are so many boats (because the lake is not crowded), but because so many of the operators seem to think that their boats only have two speeds – stop and go (at full throttle).

Your post above makes a few great points that bolster the fact that a speed limit is not necessary. If a boat is traveling 50-60 feet from you at running speed, close enough that you can pick out a grin on the idiot drivers face then they have already broken an important, existing law, the 150' limit. If the driver never breaches the 150' rule you will never get hit. Period.

The people on the PWC had the right to circle around at speed as long as they are not breaching the rule as well. It may be annoying but unless they were within 150' of each other or you they were not breaking the law. No speed issue here.

I do have to beg to differ about estimating speed on water, it is no as easy as one would think. How do you truly know that those boats on Squam are doing 40mph just because there is a speed limit? The difference between 45mph and 55mph on water of an object that is a good distance away cannot be pinpointed by just looking at it...Unless that kayak of yours has a radar gun built in I would not make guesses, because without one they are just guesses.

I will say however that bikinis look better at distances closer than 150' and at slower speeds, so maybe some pictures would help the arguement. :D

Maybe a lake-wide dress code?

secondcurve

02-11-2007, 06:53 PM

Codeman:

Sometimes bikinis look better at distances of further than 150 feet, which quite possibly applies here.

Evenstar

02-11-2007, 07:26 PM

Your post above makes a few great points that bolster the fact that a speed limit is not necessary. If a boat is traveling 50-60 feet from you at running speed, close enough that you can pick out a grin on the idiot drivers face then they have already broken an important, existing law, the 150' limit. If the driver never breaches the 150' rule you will never get hit. Period.

How does the fact that some boaters are breaking one law negate the need for a totally different law? The way that I see it, the very fact that the 150' rule is being broken is a strong point for the need of a speed limit. Since powerboats are coming closer than 150' to me, my chances of being hit increases as their speed increases, since higher speeds = less time to avoid me.

I have spent enough time out on the water to know when a boat is going way faster than 40 or 45 mph.

Evenstar

02-11-2007, 07:33 PM

Codeman:

Sometimes bikinis look better at distances of further than 150 feet, which quite possibly applies here.

Ok, so what did I do to deserve that comment?????

For the record I'm a 6-foot tall strawberry-blonde - who played on my college's woman's volleyball team last year - and I'm in great shape - and I do fill out my bikini top.

codeman671

02-11-2007, 08:06 PM

Codeman:

Sometimes bikinis look better at distances of further than 150 feet, which quite possibly applies here.

Hilarious!!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Dave R

02-11-2007, 08:23 PM

Some folks just want a speed limit, regardless of the need. There's no statistics to back up a speed limit, it's all about feelings for these folks and there's nothing wrong with that. I would not expect to change any minds.

I'd be for a speed limit if I could see a need.

Regarding the fear of boats being irrational, post an accurate statistic showing high speed (45+ MPH) boat collisions with Kayaks on NH lakes and you'll change my mind. It just does not happen. Fear of something that does not occur is rational? Statistically, you're vastly more likely to drown in a kayak from your own mistakes.

codeman671

02-11-2007, 08:28 PM

Ok, so what did I do to deserve that comment?????

For the record I'm a 6-foot tall strawberry-blonde - who played on my college's woman's volleyball team last year - and I'm in great shape - and I do fill out my bikini top.

I guess the proof is in the picture...

codeman671

02-11-2007, 08:40 PM

How does the fact that some boaters are breaking one law negate the need for a totally different law? The way that I see it, the very fact that the 150' rule is being broken is a strong point for the need of a speed limit. Since powerboats are coming closer than 150' to me, my chances of being hit increases as their speed increases, since higher speeds = less time to avoid me.

I have spent enough time out on the water to know when a boat is going way faster than 40 or 45 mph.

Do you think that if someone is breaking a 150' law that they will obey the speed limit? If they obey the law that is on the books there is no issue, you will not get hit. While on topic before I start thinking of springtime and bikinis do you have any data to show the number of accidents in NH where a paddler was run down by a powerboat? I would be wiling to bet that more paddlers (canoe, kayak, rowboat, etc) die each year on their own than by being run down.

Enforcement of current laws is the answer. There was countless times last year that I witnessed 150' infringements, honestly dozens per day spent on the water. I sit on my dock and watch them right in front of the house, I don't even have to travel to witness it

I would have to guess that no more than 10-15% of the boats on the lake do over 50mph. Based on the dealers on the lake and what they are selling, most lines sold build boats that do 50mph or less.

So do you really think that adding a speed limit is really going to make a difference in your safety? Just another useless law targeting a very small percentage of boaters that I do not believe are the majority of the offenders. Only once last summer did I witness a performance boat (2 actually, racing by) that were pushing the realm of reasonable speed and distance. The average offender was the 21'-25' family boat that makes up the bulk of the boats on the lake.

Evenstar

02-11-2007, 08:41 PM

Regarding the fear of boats being irrational, post an accurate statistic showing high speed (45+ MPH) boat collisions with Kayaks on NH lakes and you'll change my mind. It just does not happen. Fear of something that does not occur is rational? Statistically, you're vastly more likely to drown in a kayak from your own mistakes.

I've already explained the main reason why kayakers are not getting getting hit by powerboats - it's because most are staying off the main lake - because they don't feel safe out there with boats traveling at high speeds. Basically padders have been pushed off the larger bodies of water in NH.

Island Life brought up a good point: The number of paddlers is down significantly from what it was many years ago. And that is not because there are fewer paddlers out there - instead the sport is growing fast. The few I saw came by mostly in the early morning or mid-week when the boat traffic was low.

I tried to explain this last year on this same forum - compared with other lakes, winni has a very small percentage of kayakers. And, from my own personal experience very few ever venture out of the coves or away from the shore very far - hardly any go on out on the main lake.

Evenstar

02-11-2007, 08:56 PM

...Enforcement of current laws is the answer.
I've personally talked with a number of marine patrol officers, and guess what? The all were in favor of having a speed limit. And guess why? So that they would have something concrete to enforce. I was told that it's really hard to prove reckless operation, and it's not that easy to catch someome breaking the 150' rule (and even harder to prove).

I would have to guess that no more than 10-15% of the boats on the lake do over 50mph. Based on the dealers on the lake and what they are selling, most lines sold build boats that do 50mph or less.
Ok, so why are we letting 10-15% of the boaters keep others from feeling safe on our lakes?

I've brought this up many times: From the perspective of a kayaker, who has spent time out on both lakes in the middle of the summer - Squam, NH's 2nd largest lake, feels much safer than Wnnipesaukee. And the proof is in the number of paddlers out on Squam. If a speed limit has no effect, then why does Squam have so many more paddlers?

codeman671

02-11-2007, 09:17 PM

I've personally talked with a number of marine patrol officers, and guess what? The all were in favor of having a speed limit. And guess why? So that they would have something concrete to enforce. I was told that it's really hard to prove reckless operation, and it's not that easy to catch someome breaking the 150' rule (and even harder to prove).

Funny, the many that I have talked to are against it. Guess what? Even the director of Marine Patrol has publicly stated that it is not the answer.

Guess what? Marine Patrol who is already spread thin can go in search of the small percentage of speeders who probably aren't endangering anyone, but when needed for an emergency non-speed related situation they will take longer to respond, putting others at risk.

Let's put a registration law in place for all kayaks, canoes, etc to help fund this resource sucking monster which you are trying to create. I am sure the complaints will fly then... I have always found it ridiculous that power boaters end up footing the bill for all while the paddlers get a free ride.

Evenstar

02-11-2007, 09:33 PM

Let's put a registration law in place for all kayaks, canoes, etc to help fund this resource sucking monster which you are trying to create. I am sure the complaints will fly then... I have always found it ridiculous that power boaters end up footing the bill for all while the paddlers get a free ride.

What free ride? Paddling happens to be a real work out - rent a kayak sometime and I'll take you out on a lake and show you how much of free ride it is.

There's a couple of pretty good reasons: The marine patrol doesn't spend much time chasing down kayakers who are breaking laws. And kayakers are not polluting our public waters.

But I personally would have no problem with a reasonable registration fee for my kayak (and I've stated that before) - but I would then expect to be able to park in public boat launch areas, that are currently only open to trailers.

codeman671

02-11-2007, 09:49 PM

What free ride? Paddling happens to be a real work out - try it some time and see how much of free ride it is.

I was clearly talking about money. Registrations.

And I have tried it. I prefer my boats to have engines. Not because I am lazy or opposed to exercise, because I do not get enjoyment from paddling around. I am not downing it, or downing those that do it, its just not my taste. I prefer grabbing a dozen or so friends and family and heading out for an afternoon or evening cruise.

As are you I am passionate about boating, just a different type. I grew up on the water, my family is well tied into the boating industry. I own 4 boats + 2 pwc and spend countless hours on the lake. I am on the lake before ice out is declared in the spring and boat until the week of ice-in in the winter. Call me crazy but it was quite fun to see the looks on peoples faces Saturday when I boated down the Weirs Channel during the Derby.

Chris Craft

02-11-2007, 10:08 PM

What free ride? Paddling happens to be a real work out - rent a kayak sometime and I'll take you out on a lake and show you how much of free ride it is.

There's a couple of pretty good reasons: The marine patrol doesn't spend much time chasing down kayakers who are breaking laws. And kayakers are not polluting our public waters.

But I personally would have no problem with a reasonable registration fee for my kayak (and I've stated that before) - but I would then expect to be able to park in public boat launch areas, that are currently only open to trailers.

Unfortunately hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent each year trying to find people that die in Canoe and Kayak related accidents. Usually caused by their own doing not speed of other boats.

One such accident caused the start of this bill in MA. http://www.vse.cape.com/~harborm/ciha/kayakersmissing2.html

A quote from this bill:

The Firestone tires on Ford Explorers killed 200 people in rollovers between 1993 and 2002. During that same period, canoes and kayaks took a thousand US victims.**

Evenstar

02-11-2007, 10:35 PM

I was only trying to make a joke (which is not something that I am very good at - sorry).

I do respect your type of preferred boating - and I have nothing at all against most powerboaters (just the ones that scare me). I just prefer kayaking, and I love the workout (I'm a bit hyper). I'm on the water in April just as soon as the ice is off in my area and I have kayaked well into November. I paddled over 500 miles over the past two years - so I also spend a great deal of time on the water.

I did address the registration idea in my last post - in all fairness a registration fee for non motorized boats should be a very small fee, since we have a much smaller impact, as far as any costs go.

Island Life

02-12-2007, 12:28 AM

I have to hand it to you for staying in the fight, Evenstar, but I don't know why you bother. I get what you're saying and completely agree - really fast boats are scary to kayakers because you don't know if there will be enough time for them to react once they finally see you. But you're never going to change the minds of most of these people.

Everyone enjoys the Lake in their own way. Personally, I do enjoy speeding around in my boat once in a while (it's an old beater and probably can't top 45 or so on a good day). When I'm doing that, though, my experience is more about going fast and being outdoors with the wind through my hair; the fact that I'm on the lake is - for me - almost secondary at these times. But the Lake . . . the Lake I soak into my soul every day when I paddle quietly around the island, sit on my dock at night, listen to the loon, fish. These are the experiences I couldn't live without. I was a more serious paddler a few years back and I know how important it can be to your entire being to be out there, powering yourself through the water swiftly and gracefully. It's addictive. And people who don't do it, don't get it. And they have little idea of what the Lake looks like from that perspective - and what might be a rational or irrational fear.

I've spent part of every summer of my life on the Lake. So did my dad, and his dad, and his dad. And oh yeah, his dad too. Same place. 120 years. Call me old-fashioned, but I just don't get the whole performance boat thing. But, obviously, some people do - that's okay. We have to put up with them, and they have to put up with us. Don't let them bully you, tell you you're a hazard or try to drive you away to another lake. And for godsake, don't give them any more fodder for their rude comments about your body. Grow up boys, those comments say a lot about you as people.

Keep on paddling, Evenstar. We'll be watching out for you.

SteveA

02-12-2007, 09:14 AM

But, IMHO, the danger is caused more by Captain Bonehead not paying rnough attention to what's around him, or having had one too many "brewskis", or just plain running too fast for the visibility than by running above 45 mph. Sadly, I've seen Captain B at the helm of everything from PWCs to bowriders to cruisers.

Silver Duck

Island Life has it almost right.... but the real winner IMHO is Silver Duck. The problem is not with "fast boats" or "slow boats". It's with the people that own and drive either. The real problem is Captain Bonehead.

How many times have we all looked at posts here that showed some drunk landing his boat on an island?

How many times have we all seen a boat load of people more intent on having a floating "party" rather than having any concern for the other boaters on the lake?

How many times have we all seen someone towing a tube or skier that is not looking forward.. but instead watching at the "towie'?

I'm not for the speed limit...I've seen many a "Fast Boat" acting perfectly respectful of other boats. Admit it.. we all have. I am very much in favor of VERY STRICT enforcement for the rules that exist. I would also like to see a massive increase in the fines.. including revocations for violaters.

The lake is a wonderful awe inspiring place. We are all very blessed to have a chance to use it. Those who make the choice to abuse the rules that are in place to protect fellow users, and protect the lake need to be thrown off the lake.

Evenstar has as much right to be on the lake as the anyone else.. as long as she follows the rules. Fast Boats have as much right to be on the lake.. as long as they follow the rules.

We don't need to get rid of either slow boats or fast boats... we need to rid the lake of Captain Bonehead!

Acres per Second

02-12-2007, 09:57 AM

"...There's no statistics to back up a speed limit..."
True enough: nobody's seen any statistics on breaking Winnipesaukee's speed limit. :rolleye2:

"...Call me old-fashioned, but I just don't get the whole performance boat thing.
OK: You're old-fashioned. :)

Looks like you missed the GFBL with the name "Crowd Pleezah" on its flanks blasting by. Whom were they kidding?

"...My other issue is that my windsurfers travel well in excess of 45 mph. I have been clocked on one at 64mph..."
:eek: Beware the Winnipesaukee sailor setting the World's Record for windsurfers! :eek:

"...most parts of Winnipesaukee are unfit for small watercraft and this isn't going to change...The good news is that there are many smaller lakes and ponds in the area that are perfect for small watercraft.
Boating-to-excess' answer to Lake Winnipesaukee's smaller boaters is eminent domain?.

Thanks, but no thanks.

"...I have to hand it to you for staying in the fight, Evenstar, but I don't know why you bother. I get what you're saying and completely agree - really fast boats are scary to kayakers because you don't know if there will be enough time for them to react once they finally see you. But you're never going to change the minds of most of these people..."
Evenstar, let the State proceed with the will of the voters—many of whom won't accept the risks imposed by boating's status quo on Lake Winnipesaukee.

Dave R

02-12-2007, 10:03 AM

Call me old-fashioned, but I just don't get the whole performance boat thing. But, obviously, some people do - that's okay. We have to put up with them, and they have to put up with us.

Nor I. My boat has never been over 50 in Winnipesaukee (not enough power) and we typically cruise at 28 to 32 MPH. I find high performance boats a bit too one dimensional for my needs and too expensive for my budget.

I've spent countless hours in human powered boats and have never once feared power boats. The worst I've dealt with is excessive wakes from boats going too slowly. Winnipesaukee is wonderful for boating of all types. There's far more courtesy there than in many other places I've been.

Being a part-time paddler, I cannot imagine why anyone would ever want to paddle in big open areas of lake, even if there's not a single power boat in sight. It's much more fun to meander along the shore in areas where propeller driven craft hit rocks. That said, I'm not slamming people for wanting to paddle out in the open; like high performance boats, I just don't get it.

Woodsy

02-12-2007, 10:17 AM

The lake is for EVERYBODY.... But like any resource there are certain times its easier for some to enjoy than others.

I can understand Evenstar's position, when your the small guy, you gotta wonder if the big guys see you bobbing in the water. The reality is, although you have the right to be on the lake whenever and wherever you want, safety and prudence should dictate when/where you go. I have the RIGHT to ride a bike in downtown Boston during rush hour, but it probably isn't the smartest thing to do. Paddling around Govenors Is. mid-week isn't all that bad, although certainly there is more boat traffic mid-week near Govenor's Is. due to the proximity to the Weirs. Go up to Winter Harbor or Moultonborough Bay and there is very little boat traffic! Paddling around Govenor's Is. on a busy summer saturday is absolutely NUTS! Its not because the boats are going too fast... thats pretty much not possible because there are just too many boats.

Even though the 12-16 weekends a year are very busy, statistically speaking the lake is VERY SAFE for ALL! There have been ZIP/ZERO/NADA accidents involving a collision between two watercraft since August 2002 (We all know that accident). There have been ZIP/ZERO/NADA accidents since 2002 that have occured at a speed GREATER THAN 45MPH! In fact most personal injury accidents were the result of falling within the boat. A stronger argument could be made for banning waterskiing and wakeboarding... (there was a wakeboarding fatality) and canoes and kayaks (numerous drownings).

Woodsy

Lakewinniboater

02-12-2007, 10:21 AM

but the real winner IMHO is Silver Duck. The problem is not with "fast boats" or "slow boats". It's with the people that own and drive either. The real problem is Captain Bonehead................

We don't need to get rid of either slow boats or fast boats... we need to rid the lake of Captain Bonehead!

ABSOLUTELY!!!! I would be all for more DUI boating laws.... open container while underway and such!

Keep any and all types of people, boats and personal freedoms. Crack down on Education and Alcohol consumption while driving!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

fatlazyless

02-12-2007, 10:25 AM

"Men like to step on the gas, and women like to step on the brakes," according to Woody Harrelson's character, Roy Munson, in the 1996 movie KINGPIN.
Last year, HB62 was passed by the NH house but lost in the senate by four votes and this year it will probably become law due to the november election changes. Five Republican gentlemen senators were beat out by five lady Democratic senator candidates.
All the proponents in the Citizen article above, Sandy Helve from WinnFabs, as well as Senator Katherin Sgambati and Senator Deborah Reynolds are all women.
So, do you think there's any truth to Roy Munson, that broken thumbed former bowlng champion from KINGPIN when he say's "men like to step on the gas, and women like to step on the brakes"?

da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da (theme from 1975 movie JAWS here) da-a-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da!

Dave R

02-12-2007, 10:58 AM

"
So, do you think there's any truth to what Roy Munson, that broken thumbed former bowlng champion from KINGPIN when he say's "men like to step on the gas, and women like to step on the brakes"?

You know, I never thought I'd ever see any wisdom coming from that (hilarious) movie, but yeah, it's true for the most part. There are notable exceptions though...

I have little faith in common sense, voters, and law makers and fully expect to see a speed limit on the lake, eventually. Fortunately, it really won't affect most folks, surely not me. I hope those that have fast boats let common sense prevail and continue to adhere to the safe passage law, but safely ignore a new speed law. That said, I would expect widespread contempt for all boating laws if the MP really focuses on enforcing speed limits. Wouldn't that be ironic?

fatlazyless

02-12-2007, 11:56 AM

Last year's bill had a boat speeding ticket linked to one's NH Dept Motor Vehicles driving record. So, get one ticket and you lose your insurance, good driver, discount. Get two tickets, and the big companies like Progressive, Allstate, Geico, & State Farm shove you off to an affiliated high risk pool company. All way more expensive than the original $88.(?) ticket itself, and hang around for three years. I know, I found out the hard way.

GWC...

02-12-2007, 01:16 PM

:eek: Beware the Winnipesaukee sailor setting the World's Record for windsurfers! :eek:
Have seen two that definitely were traveling faster than 45 mph - they tend to prefer venturing out when the wind is really blowing - not exactly fair-weather sailors.

Evenstar, let the State proceed with the will of the voters—many of whom won't accept the risks imposed by boating's status quo on Lake Winnipesaukee.
The will of the voters or the will of the political elite?

KonaChick

02-12-2007, 03:30 PM

I guess the proof is in the picture...

Codeman this is bordering on creepy...with all due respect..stop please...you're turning this "forum" into another kind of "forum" and enough is enough. Thank-You.

KonaChick

02-12-2007, 03:35 PM

codeman671

02-12-2007, 03:43 PM

Codeman this is bordering on creepy...with all due respect..stop please...you're turning this "forum" into another kind of "forum" and enough is enough. Thank-You.

Do people have no sense of humor? Obviously not you...

Why don't you comment on the topic at hand instead of harrassing me for making a lighthearted comment in line with a joke that was already running with a few other posters. I am sure you must be able to come up with something better than "Wow...Bravo!"

jrc

02-12-2007, 03:51 PM

After a little vacation the speed limit debate is back. Seems like everyone is taking their same old positions. A few of the "speed limit only" posters are beginning to file back in. There may even be a few newbies, who haven't heard all the arguements before.

Does it make sense to hash all this over again? Too bad there isn't a short FAQ or primer to help out the newbies. I can't imagine anyone from the previous debates will be turned around by any of the old arguements.

The big difference this year is that the Democrats control the state goverment. So a different outcome is possible and I hate to say it, but probable.

Luckly, I've never owned a boat that could exceed 45 MPH, I don't even think I've been on a boat capable of that speed. Hopefully, my luck will continue and they'll come after someone else next and not me.

Island Life

02-12-2007, 05:05 PM

I am sure you must be able to come up with something better than "Wow...Bravo!"

I thought Codeman was a lecherous old man . . . now I realize he's 9.:rolleye2: :rolleye2: :rolleye2:

Woodsy

02-12-2007, 05:19 PM

There's a couple of pretty good reasons: The marine patrol doesn't spend much time chasing down kayakers who are breaking laws. And kayakers are not polluting our public waters.

But Fish & Game expends lots of time, money and resources trying to find missing or drowned kayakers and canoeists.... I would love to know what the bill was for the search for the kayaker that drowned during the Alstead flood....

Woodsy

codeman671

02-12-2007, 05:37 PM

I thought Codeman was a lecherous old man . . . now I realize he's 9.:rolleye2: :rolleye2: :rolleye2:

Your post probably doesn't warrant a response but I will do so anyway. No, I am not a lecherous old man, nor am I 9. I made a joke which did not seem to bother Evenstar anywhere as much as it did unrelated posters. If it did she is welcome to PM me and I will apologize however I will not apologize publicly for injecting a bit of humor into a serious discussion. Judging by other responses some people were able to comprehend a bit of humor and rolled with it. Judging by the responses of Evenstar I think it rolled off just fine, in fact she answered with a bit of humor back at me.

This is a serious matter and should be taken so as it will affect many people, boaters, paddlers, businesses, etc.. But let's keep it real, we all share this wonderful body of water together and need to find a solution to get along. Hopefully we all will have something to smile about at the end of this.

Back to the topic at hand:

As much as I hate the thought of it and am opposed to it I do believe that this time around the Winnfabbs crew may get what they asked for. What will be funny though is a year from the decision and implementation of it the "I told ya so" 's that will be flying when things do not change. There will still be close calls, there will still be BWI, there will still be many unexperienced uneducated boaters roaming the lakes, and there still be overcrowding. Other than a few speeding tickets issued which will not offset the costs involved what will really change?

DoTheMath

02-12-2007, 05:46 PM

So, with all the back and fourth of speed limit, no speed limit - kayak vs. "GFBL", blah blah... think about this. Have you ever watched, say a 38' performance boat at 60 mph drive past and a 38' floating condo (cruiser) drive past at 20mph? Can someone describe the difference in the resulting wake? Don't bother - I will! Performance boat, 'bout the same as a ski / wakeboard boat. Cruiser -'bout the same as what hits Oahu's north shore in season - huge!! Wreaks havoc on boats tied to docks, sea walls (or if you prefer lake / retaining walls), and is a sand castle killer for the kids on the beach, my little guy will testify to that! ;) Now, same scenario when you are out and about in, say a kayak - Performance boat wake from a few hundred feet away, 'bout 12" - 15" (inches). Cruiser wake from same distance, 'bout 3' - 4' (feet) plus - better hang on! You have a statistically better chance of getting run down in your canoe or kayak by something OTHER than a performance boat on our lake for several reasons. Mostly for the simple fact it is just a law of averages... there are way more of all the other kinds out there and less of the GFBL type! Additionally, most of those "other" boats are (typically) less expensive, thus more accessible to the masses and thus more of them on the water, case-in-point - lake lice, or PWC's if you will. Cheap to buy, nothing to regulate their operation, lots of them out there! Now, take into consideration the cost to purchase and run a high performance boat - not going to find one of these tied to every other dock. It takes a decent amount of experience and skill just to run these at an "average" speed of say 35 mph, never mind a higher speed - as well as deep pockets! I know LOTS of owners of these types of boats, and all started behind the wheel of a boat when they were young and grew into the big performance boat, none have just bought one to get into boating for the first time. With the responsibility of ownership comes the forethought of "water on the water, beer on the pier" (thanks to PRA mag's Mr. Taylor for that one ;o). So, you will typically not find the "Dude, where are all the beers" guy driving the performance boat - he (or she as I know a couple of them too) has too much to loose, and enjoys the sport way too much to do something stupid - like that. They are into the fun of it and vested heavily, they love what they have the freedom to do and appreciate it very much! They respect the machine and all it can do, and in return are typically VERY conscientious and safe boaters. Are they ALL like this, no - of course not - but every bushel has a bad apple or two, but again - just the law of averages. And to be blunt and honest - lets face it, there is a socioeconomic factor that comes into play here, with expensive toys typically comes higher incomes - so save for the occasional yahoo that hits the lotto, there is a very good chance that whom ever is behind the wheel of that "GFBL" worked hard to get there, and is not out to throw it all away by making some sophomoric mistake. I bet of you did a survey of the "rules of the lake" you'd get 99% of the GFBL guys to nail 'em, and about 50% - if you're lucky - of the rest of the boaters to get about 50% right.

Listen, at the end of the day - I love to go out in a Kayak, they are a blast - but before 9:00 am and NOT in the main areas of the lake, let's be realistic here. I also own a "GFBL" too - and have owned several while on this lake, (been on here since I was 10 mo. old) and consider myself a very alert and responsible boater! Face it, things change, times change we are not watching B&W TV's, driving Pinto's and a 16' boat is no longer "the average". Technology has changed, incomes have grown and people work hard for their money these days, and like to play hard (and smart ;o) - it is up to them what type of boat they want to buy, and it is also up to them to operate it in a responsible manner for the benefit of everyone around them. The lake is here for EVERYONE to enjoy - I don't care of you own a canoe or a 40' GFBL that does (over 45 mph). It is all about boating smarter NOT slower - common courtesy and common sense need to prevail along with boater ed. (and certification, yeah I got mine...) and we'll ALL have a better, safer and happier lake to enjoy with our families! :cool:

DoTheMath

02-12-2007, 05:50 PM

And we own a house ON the water, pay our taxes and totally respect what is our favorite place to spend our free time - along with our 22 mo. old son, the lake! :)

Dave R

02-12-2007, 06:44 PM

DoTheMath, Interesting post. I agree with most of it. I think kayakers would probably prefer the big wake. Canoeists may have a different POV though. I know I prefer fast boats when I'm in my canoe. I suspect big cruisers will be the next target after GFBLs are outlawed. There are already lakes down south where big cruisers and GFBL boats are not allowed now.

Waiting for the speed limit crowd to jump all over the Littlefield exception... Ought to be entertaining since his actions contrast perfectly with your thoughts and observations of typical GFBL operators. I suspect the "bad apple" statement won't be enough to hold 'em back.

Dave R

02-12-2007, 06:49 PM

I spent a weekend on the CT River last Summer. There IS A 45 MPH SPEED LIMIT on that river so you know it's got to be a haven for paddlers... WRONG! Other than the ICW in NJ, it was the most unsafe boating I have ever experienced. Still had a great time though, just had to be vigilant about other boaters who seemed clueless about proper operation.

Cal

02-12-2007, 10:29 PM

Other than the ICW in NJ, .

Coming from NJ , I can honestly say you people have no problem at all:cool:
And as crazy and insane as it is on the weekends (in Jersey) , our safety record is VERY good.

Island Life

02-13-2007, 08:58 AM

Your post probably doesn't warrant a response but I will do so anyway.

Just having a little joke with KonaChick and hoping she's one-tough-New-Hampshire-woman who is not deterred by your rude and "off-topic" response to her post:

Do people have no sense of humor? Obviously not you...

Why don't you comment on the topic at hand instead of harrassing me for making a lighthearted comment in line with a joke that was already running with a few other posters. I am sure you must be able to come up with something better than "Wow...Bravo!"

By the way, KonaChick, thanks.

secondcurve

02-13-2007, 09:35 PM

Island Life

02-14-2007, 09:32 AM

Island Life & Konachic:

I am sorry that each of you were apparently offended by some of the comments in this thread. Codeman, myself and Evenstar were simply enjoying a little good natured banter. I don't think anyone crossed the line, so please don't take our comments too seriously. Remember, we are talking about recreational boating, not bypass surgery! Life is short and I for one don't want to die with a scowl on my face and you ladies shouldn't either.:liplick: :liplick: :liplick:

SC: I was not offended by the borish bikini jokes. But notice, Evenstar has not been back.

A more careful read of my last post shows, rather, that I didn't like the way one forum member made fun of another forum member's positive and appreciative comment. It reminded me of something a little kid would do; the only thing missing was the word "duh.":laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I am sure you must be able to come up with something better than "Wow...Bravo!"

If I were a thin-skinned person, such a judgmental response to one of my posts might keep me from posting again. I was merely lending my support to KC and hoping she's not a thin-skinned person and we'll keep hearing from her.

No scowl on this face.;)

codeman671

02-14-2007, 10:13 AM

SC: I was not offended by the borish bikini jokes. But notice, Evenstar has not been back.

A more careful read of my last post shows, rather, that I didn't like the way one forum member made fun of another forum member's positive and appreciative comment. It reminded me of something a little kid would do; the only thing missing was the word "duh.":laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

If I were a thin-skinned person, such a judgmental response to one of my posts might keep me from posting again. I was merely lending my support to KC and hoping she's not a thin-skinned person and we'll keep hearing from her.

No scowl on this face.;)

My response was to two back to back posts by KC, one which was directly slamming me. Can we all just move on? This is getting a bit too melodramatic for my taste. Bravo to SC for trying to put this behind us, can we PLEASE move on now before the real topic gets shut down?

Damn this is going to be a long winter...Any signs of ice out?:rolleye2:

Acres per Second

02-14-2007, 10:57 AM

"...Have seen two that definitely were traveling faster than 45 mph - they tend to prefer venturing out when the wind is really blowing - not exactly fair-weather sailors..."
Agreed that windsurfers pick the windiest days, but it's odd that you think that windsurfers are traveling as fast as 45 mph. The world's record is 46 knots, and is regularly attempted at one of only two sites: Australia and Port St. Louis, France.

The waves at both locations are minimal due to a low, protective, berm of sand. The waves that slow these craft are kept down, whereas the wind remains the same.

You'll appreciate this French invitation to windsurf in 75 knot hurricane winds :eek: : http://www.internationalwindsurfing.com/default.asp?menu=170&parent=165&grandparent=29&newsid=1026

"...There have been ZIP/ZERO/NADA accidents since 2002 that have occured at a speed GREATER THAN 45MPH...!

What speed was the 4-ton Formula going that flipped and sank in Tuftonboro waters in 2005?
What speed was the 4-ton Cigarette going that flipped and sank in 2004?
What speed was the 5-ton Fountain going that flipped and sank in Chestnut Cove in 2003?
What speed was the 5-ton boat going that flipped and sank in 1998?

Hmmmmmmmmmmm? :confused:

KonaChick

02-14-2007, 12:18 PM

But Fish & Game expends lots of time, money and resources trying to find missing or drowned kayakers and canoeists.... I would love to know what the bill was for the search for the kayaker that drowned during the Alstead flood....

Woodsy

Who knows...perhaps comparable to the investigation into that boat (that must have been going at pretty high speed) that crashed into I think it was Eagle Island last year? The one driven by teenagers if i recall correctly. :)

Mee-n-Mac

02-14-2007, 02:13 PM

Who knows...perhaps comparable to the investigation into that boat (that must have been going at pretty high speed) that crashed into I think it was Eagle Island last year? The one driven by teenagers if i recall correctly. :)

How "high" is pretty high ? The boat was a Crownline cruiser whose top speed is about 48 mph. Too high for drunk teenagers but do we want drunk teenagers setting the standard for what the rest of us can and can't do ?

WeirsBeachBoater

02-14-2007, 02:34 PM

Who knows...perhaps comparable to the investigation into that boat (that must have been going at pretty high speed) that crashed into I think it was Eagle Island last year? The one driven by teenagers if i recall correctly. :)

Sorry KC, got to call you on this one. Not much of an investigation in that incident. The primary factor in that accident was alcohol. Speed was not a factor. If you are trying to fan the fire on the speed limit issue, use facts not assumptions or embellishments.

overlook

02-14-2007, 06:16 PM

Sorry KC, got to call you on this one. Not much of an investigation in that incident. The primary factor in that accident was alcohol. Speed was not a factor. If you are trying to fan the fire on the speed limit issue, use facts not assumptions or embellishments.

Speed was a factor, he should have been under 6 mph when he crashed.

GWC...

02-14-2007, 06:23 PM

Speed was a factor, he should have been under 6 mph when he crashed.
What he should have been, quite simply, was not drunk. :eek:

Seems to me that there already is a law to cover that situation.

Perhaps you overlooked that minor detail... :laugh:

WeirsBeachBoater

02-14-2007, 07:00 PM

Speed was a factor, he should have been under 6 mph when he crashed.

Why was he supposed to be at 6 mph? Because he was within 150 ft of shore? That is correct, however he was Supposed to be SOBER, and he wasn't supposed to be out in mom and dads boat with out permission. Try all you want to make that accident about speed. Its not, its about sobriety and lack of respect for all laws. I would like to see a report from MP that attributes the incident to speed. Then I will recant my position.

KonaChick

02-14-2007, 07:50 PM

I think the original question was about cost...you know the exact dollar amount spent on the investigation WiersBeachBoater?? Is this information public? I'd love to read up on it....oh i see you haven't seen a report about the incident as you stated you'd like to see one that attributes the accident to speed. I guess we are back where we started then..perhaps the investigation into the drowing in Alstead could equal this one. :)

ITD

02-14-2007, 07:52 PM

KonaChick

02-14-2007, 08:04 PM

My response was to two back to back posts by KC, one which was directly slamming me. Can we all just move on? This is getting a bit too melodramatic for my taste. Bravo to SC for trying to put this behind us, can we PLEASE move on now before the real topic gets shut down?

Damn this is going to be a long winter...Any signs of ice out?:rolleye2:

He's like the energizer bunny...he goes on and on and on and on and on :laugh:

Dave R

02-14-2007, 08:09 PM

do we want drunk teenagers setting the standard for what the rest of us can and can't do ?

They would probably be about as equally unqualified to decide what's safe on the lake, and what's not, as the sponsors of the latest speed limit bill (is it a bill yet?)

WeirsBeachBoater

02-14-2007, 08:27 PM

KC, you are missing my point. Pro speed limit people bring out these stories about terror, and fear. Well I hate to break it to everyone. The public has caught on. The sky is not falling! There are no hard facts to prove that speed is directly related to issues on the lakes. The only facts are that boat registrations are up and accidents are down. The education is working.

Chris Craft

02-14-2007, 09:25 PM

Agreed that windsurfers pick the windiest days, but it's odd that you think that windsurfers are traveling as fast as 45 mph. The world's record is 46 knots, and is regularly attempted at one of only two sites: Australia and Port St. Louis, France.

The waves at both locations are minimal due to a low, protective, berm of sand. The waves that slow these craft are kept down, whereas the wind remains the same.

You'll appreciate this French invitation to windsurf in 75 knot hurricane winds :eek: : http://www.internationalwindsurfing.com/default.asp?menu=170&parent=165&grandparent=29&newsid=1026

:confused:

World Record runs are your average run over 500 meters. There are times of speeds WELL in excess of record speeds and then well below and the average is...... My run was a instantanious burst radared by a State Policeman in very similiar contitions to what you listed behind the Seabrook Power Plant :eek: :eek:

Chris Craft

02-14-2007, 09:30 PM

What speed was the 4-ton Formula going that flipped and sank in Tuftonboro waters in 2005?
What speed was the 4-ton Cigarette going that flipped and sank in 2004?
What speed was the 5-ton Fountain going that flipped and sank in Chestnut Cove in 2003?
What speed was the 5-ton boat going that flipped and sank in 1998?

Hmmmmmmmmmmm? :confused:

I can not speek for the other accidents but I am very familiar with the Cigarette accident as a friend of mine purchased that boat after it rolled over. The boat was traveling WELL below 45 miles per hour. The operator made a mistake while driving. The boat had very little damage to it proving this. The boat weights 7200 pounds.

KonaChick

02-14-2007, 10:56 PM

Acres per Second

02-15-2007, 09:30 AM

Why, I don't know, but I'm sure you will tell us, even if you don't know.
Nobody truly knows at what speeds those "flipped-and-sank" accidents occurred. NHRBA posted that they had acquired the NH Marine Patrol's 2002-2006 Accident Reports—wouldn't it be edifying to this discussion to disclose the factual speeds here?

http://wolfeboro.net/option,com_joomlaboard/Itemid,53/func,view/id,8835/catid,3/limit,20/limitstart,60/

"...I can not speek for the other accidents but I am very familiar with the Cigarette accident as a friend of mine purchased that boat after it rolled over. The boat was traveling WELL below 45 miles per hour. The operator made a mistake while driving..."
Sorry, Jon, but an anecdote is not a FACT.

(I'd very much like to read, "it rolled over" in an official MP report, too!) http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/8919/smilielolbd4.gif

World Record runs are your average run over 500 meters. There are times of speeds WELL in excess of record speeds and then well below and the average is...... My run was a instantanious burst radared by a State Policeman in very similiar contitions to what you listed behind the Seabrook Power Plant.
Radar? Reading a windsurfer?

Jon, are you speaking to the same effectiveness of radar over water as this post? :confused:

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12194&postcount=101

We ran a radar trap for a Poker run in upstate NY. They were unable to get a read off ANY of our boats. That included one run that they asked us to go with in 30 feet of their boat. The radar was run by a certified officer and he could not make it work. So how do you measure speed on the water?

Jon

LIforrelaxin

02-15-2007, 12:00 PM

I can not speek for the other accidents but I am very familiar with the Cigarette accident as a friend of mine purchased that boat after it rolled over. The boat was traveling WELL below 45 miles per hour. The operator made a mistake while driving. The boat had very little damage to it proving this. The boat weights 7200 pounds.

I see both sides of the speed limit issue, which is why I have stayed quiet for the most part.... But um you are judging speed by the amount of damage.... that is not a fair assumption.... just because the boat didn't sustain what you would call major damage, doesn't mean it wasn't going fast....watch offshore racing sometime, I have seen some boats go through some pretty wild accidents and be ok on the other end. Well others have sank when you didn't see anything wrong........

There are two sides to this, and people have choosen their sides, and we will never all agree.... so lets admit to that....

Mee-n-Mac

02-15-2007, 01:59 PM

Silly me...I thought we were talking about dollars and sense. :laugh:

True enough, the topic was cost and then did revert back to the OP. But based on last year, are we now going to start discussing the cost of swimming in the lake ?

Weirs guy

02-15-2007, 02:09 PM

I see a lot of people posting about various accidents around the lake and wondering if they were caused by excessive speed, even going so far as to inferring that a speed limit could have prevented them.

I assume we will need to buy radar guns and train the MP on how to use them? Since I've seen radar guns clock pine tree's at 7 MPH (the tree later failed a field sobriety test as well), and anyone who's ever fought a speeding ticket knows that the police will admit they are inaccurate, then your 45 MPH speed limit becomes more like a 50 - 55 MPH enforceable limit. Is there a study or other FACTUAL information that shows a 50 - 55 MPH limit on Winni will prevent accidents?

Before my hard earned tax dollars are spent on enforcing a speed limit, wouldn't it make sense to determine if a speed limit will prevent accidents?

Gavia immer

02-15-2007, 02:55 PM

Is there a study or other FACTUAL information that shows a 50 - 55 MPH limit on Winni will prevent accidents?
My guess would be, that is pocket-change stuff to be overlooked. Doubling or tripling your numbers would put speeds into some awful serious territory.

Woodsy

02-15-2007, 03:32 PM

The debate rages on!! Oh joy.....

WinnFabs picked 45MPH because thats what they have for a speed limit in MA and over on Lake George NY. There isn't ANY statistical data to support that 45 is a good number, its just an arbitrary number. One also has to remember that Lake George is a State park and you have to pay a fee to boat there. Niether Lake George nor MA has a 150' Safe Passage Rule... I can LEGALLY go by you 1 foot from your gunwale as long as I don't exceed 45MPH. Talk about not safe for canoeist & kayakers!!! Evenstar care to chime in on this??

FACTS we need to remember...

1. Boating registrations are UP while the accident rate is down! Safe Boater Education is WORKING!

2. There have been less than 180 reportable boating accidents that resulted in personal injury between 2002 and 2006. The primary source of these personal injuries is a result of individuals being pulled behind a vessel, such as water skis, wakeboards and/or tubes along with PWC’s. The State of New Hampshire has not had a boating fatality as the result of a collision in the last four years!!

3. NH has an average of 44 boating accidents that result in personal injury every year. Not too bad considering the 100,000+ boats we have registered in the state and god only knows how many day trippers from out-of-state!

Speed is not the issue here, and really it never was. The issues here are reckless operation or ignorance of the 150' Safe Passage Rule, and noise. Both problems we already have laws on the books for!

Woodsy

Dave R

02-15-2007, 03:43 PM

Before my hard earned tax dollars are spent on enforcing a speed limit, wouldn't it make sense to determine if a speed limit will prevent accidents?

This argument didn't work last year, can't imagine it will this year either. The State Senate voted down HB162 because it was "unenforceable", if memory serves, not because it was a bad idea.

Dave R

02-15-2007, 03:51 PM

My guess would be, that is pocket-change stuff to be overlooked. Doubling or tripling your numbers would put speeds into some awful serious territory.

If one was going double the limit, there'd be no point stopping. The MP has no boats that can catch a boat that fast, the roostertail will obscure the name on the transom, and there's no way anyone's gonna be able to read 3" high bow numbers at that speed. Custom paint, like a big "look at me" name on the side of the boat, might be a problem though...

JDeere

02-15-2007, 06:53 PM

.

Let's put a registration law in place for all kayaks, canoes, etc to help fund this resource sucking monster which you are trying to create. I am sure the complaints will fly then... I have always found it ridiculous that power boaters end up footing the bill for all while the paddlers get a free ride.

Gosh not only people in canoes etc. but what about people who use our roads to bicycles or even tricycles on no reason they should get off free either. I think you should contact your rep. and demand they introduce a bill to stop this flagrant abuse. Maybe a smaller fee for a canoe since the only use one paddle but a kayaker with the double paddle should pay more!!! We must stop this type of abuse!

I think someone needs to chill.
<O:p></O:p>
Oh…………I forgot to mention.
<O:p></O:p>
The speed limit is coming!!! Hip Hip Hoooooraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy.
<O:p></O:p>

Chris Craft

02-15-2007, 07:36 PM

APS: To get a read with my windsurfer I had to strap TWO licence plates to my boddy to make it work. Prior to that we were getting VERY erratic readings. So should I brace for a licence plate bracket requirement on my boat now :D

APS I think that you and I will have to agree that we will not see the same side of this issue. While I love a good debate I know that the owner of the site does not want these wars to go on so I am going to respectuflly bow out of any debate with you. It has been fun ;)

Woodsy

02-15-2007, 07:52 PM

If the speed limit comes, and nothing changes, then what?? What will the new complaint be?? Call the MP, that boat was going faster than 45MPH!

We will still have congested areas, we will still have 150' violations, we will still have noisy boats, we will still have reckless operators... we can just add one more complaint to the list, we will still have speeding boats...

It is truly amazing to me the complete willingness of some to take away somebody's civil liberty just because you don't like them.

Woodsy

Island Life

02-15-2007, 08:43 PM

codeman671

02-15-2007, 09:37 PM

Gosh not only people in canoes etc. but what about people who use our roads to bicycles or even tricycles on no reason they should get off free either. I think you should contact your rep. and demand they introduce a bill to stop this flagrant abuse. Maybe a smaller fee for a canoe since the only use one paddle but a kayaker with the double paddle should pay more!!! We must stop this type of abuse!

I think someone needs to chill.
<O:p></O:p>
Oh…………I forgot to mention.
<O:p></O:p>
The speed limit is coming!!! Hip Hip Hoooooraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy.
<O:p></O:p>

Chill? :yawn: Honestly I am more upset about my tax bill than a speed limit coming. It will really not have much if any effect on me, my boats barely break 50mph. Do I want one? Hell no. It is a useless, unwarranted law that has yet to be proven necessary, started by a group with what I believe to be hidden agendas hiding behind a pitch of fear and claims of safety issues on the lake.

Let it come, we shall be hearing a lot more from WINNFABS when nothing changes. What's next?

As far as registrations for non-powered vessels my intent was to touch in the fact that this new law will cost $$$, extra equipment, more manpower, etc to attempt to enforce. Looking at how MP is funded the people asking for this should also consider the costs involved to put it in place, and should have a plan to help fund it. Spreading it out a bit so that not only the power boaters are sucking up the cost would be good. If this is truly about safety then I would think that users of non-powered vessels who "will benefit" :laugh: from this should help fund it.

Maybe those big, fast moving cars should slow down. There are speed limits ya know...:D

the lecherous energizer bunny:liplick:

Mee-n-Mac

02-15-2007, 09:58 PM

WinnFabs picked 45MPH because thats what they have for a speed limit in MA and over on Lake George NY. There isn't ANY statistical data to support that 45 is a good number, its just an arbitrary number. {snip}

As Gavia Immer said above, double and triple the 45 mph and you're into serious territory. The question is when are you into dangerous territory. There is no single number that's applicable to all places, all times and all situations. A speed that's perfectly appropriate for the Broads on a Wednesday afternoon is not likely to be a safe speed to use just outside of the Weirs on a July 4'th weekend with the sun in your eyes. Seems to me that 45 mph is neither fish nor fowl. It's too restrictive in a lot of times and places and not safe in others. I understand that such things are compromises but this one is just wrong. I would urge people to think about how they would encode what they think is speed proper for the circumstances into a rule. I would ask to people not what they feel is safe but what they know is unsafe (and how they know it).

Acres per Second

02-16-2007, 12:39 PM

To get a read with my windsurfer I had to strap TWO licence plates to my boddy to make it work. Prior to that we were getting VERY erratic readings.
'Happy that only two license plates were needed to get a likeable radar reading.
:rolleye2:
Marine radar in other states (as posed below) doesn't require any license plate:
http://ocean.floridamarine.org/blueways_mgt/images/pics/manatee_radar.jpg

"...If the speed limit comes, and nothing changes, then what?? What will the new complaint be?? Call the MP, that boat was going faster than 45MPH...!"
As Dave R points out, speeds over 45 will produce rooster tails (plus a huge spray plume) that will identify it as excessive to the MPs.

Any news event on the lake will collect as many as seven MPs at one time: evasion is futile.

"...It is truly amazing to me the complete willingness of some to take away somebody's civil liberty..."
From Wikipedia:
"...Basic civil liberties include freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech. There are also the rights to due process, to a fair trial and to privacy..."

Form a line at the rear to get that essential civil liberty for speedboating.

"...The State of New Hampshire has not had a boating fatality as the result of a collision in the last four years!! ..."
Last I checked, that's the way it's supposed to work. :(

Cal

02-17-2007, 11:13 PM

"...Basic civil liberties include freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech. There are also the rights to due process, to a fair trial and to privacy..."

In case you haven't noticed.....we've already lost most of these:(

Mee-n-Mac

02-17-2007, 11:42 PM

The State of New Hampshire has not had a boating fatality as the result of a collision in the last four years!!

{snip} Last I checked, that's the way it's supposed to work. :(

Amazing, how did that happen ? I mean with no speed limits and all them dangerous boats out there creating all that anarchy, I'd have thought we'd have dozens of collisons each and every year. That not being the case it seems it's not quite so bad out there after all. That would seem to be a case for :) and not your :( .

Island Life

02-18-2007, 09:44 AM

Amazing, how did that happen ? I mean with no speed limits and all them dangerous boats out there creating all that anarchy, I'd have thought we'd have dozens of collisons each and every year. That not being the case it seems it's not quite so bad out there after all. That would seem to be a case for :) and not your :( .

Hmmmm . . . could it perhaps be, just perhaps of course, that the rest of us are being hyper-vigilant in our attempts to avoid potential collisions because it's sometimes such a mess out there. I know of many boaters who give way or change course when there are fast boats around because of bad experiences they've had with high-performance boats not giving way.

Now, that could happen with any size boat, of course (not giving way). My point is that some people are driving more defensively and this could contribute to fewer accidents.

Chris Craft

02-18-2007, 10:26 AM

Hmmmm . . . could it perhaps be, just perhaps of course, that the rest of us are being hyper-vigilant in our attempts to avoid potential collisions because it's sometimes such a mess out there. I know of many boaters who give way or change course when there are fast boats around because of bad experiences they've had with high-performance boats not giving way.

Now, that could happen with any size boat, of course (not giving way). My point is that some people are driving more defensively and this could contribute to fewer accidents.

I agree I think that we are all being SUPER aware of our surroundings now. You have to be. I have had to alter my course for ALL kinds of boats. I have never had to alter my course for a boat going very fast. Not saying it does not happen it just has not happened to me. I think that people being aware that boating while fun is also needs to be taken seriously is helping. I for one am very happy that we have not had another collision and hope that we never have another.;) ;)

Dave R

02-18-2007, 11:08 AM

Hmmmm . . . could it perhaps be, just perhaps of course, that the rest of us are being hyper-vigilant in our attempts to avoid potential collisions because it's sometimes such a mess out there. I know of many boaters who give way or change course when there are fast boats around because of bad experiences they've had with high-performance boats not giving way.

Now, that could happen with any size boat, of course (not giving way). My point is that some people are driving more defensively and this could contribute to fewer accidents.

So your solution to the "mess" would be to institute speed limit and do away with defensive "driving"? I LIKE that other boaters operate in a "hyper-vigilant" manner, that's how anyone operating a boat should be; keeps us from hitting kayaks and such. I don't think a speed limit should stop us from being hyper-vigilant, boats are dangerous machine when operated carelessly.

Other than in a collision avoidance move, if a boater gives way when they are the stand on vessel, they are breaking the law. Perhaps it's these boaters who give way when they should stand on, solely due to the type of boats around them, that are the cause of the "mess".

If by "mess", you mean congestion, a speed limit will do nothing to relieve it.

Island Life

02-18-2007, 12:58 PM

No, Dave, you know I don't mean to do away with defensive driving. Don't twist words into ridiculous conclusions to serve your own point.

What I'm saying is that sometimes we have to slow down and give way to high-performance boats because they are going to cross in front of our bow whether they have the right of way or not, simply because they have the horse-power to do it. That is what I mean by driving-defensively: collision avoidance. I've seen several boats slow down to a near stop to avoid colliding with a fast, give-way that had gunned it across their bow. If they hadn't done so, they would have passed within feet of the other boat (at best). And what if the faster boat had slowed down as it was crossing the slower boat's bow? Collision.

These boaters were not causing the problems, they were avoiding otherwise inevitable accidents - and, I believe, this is what we were discussing: why there are fewer accidents even though it sometimes like the Wild West out there.

jeffk

02-18-2007, 05:10 PM

Boating is, by nature, significantly more complicated than driving a car because it involves operating on a largely unrestricted 360 degree surface. Even though the rules say you are primarily responsible for a smaller range where you are the give way vessel, it would be foolish not to be aware of all vessels anywhere around you. As pointed out, it would be foolish, and illegal, not to take action to avoid an anticipated collision. Defensive boating undoubtedly contributes to keeping the accident numbers down in the state.

That said, in the case where a vessel is operating as described, they have already violated the right-of-way regulations and also safe passage if they had come within a few feet of another boat. Since the operator is clearly a law breaking bonehead, what difference would the existence of a speed limit make? Would the "slower" boat have felt so secure that a speed limit would protect him that he would take no defensive action? I hope not. Would the bonehead realize that he was violating the speed limit although he is oblivious and unconcerned about the other laws he was breaking? I doubt it. Would the marine patrol, now armed with the mother of all laws, the speed limit, magically arrive to pull the scofflaw over. It would shock the heck out of me.

I have been boating on Winni for 12 years, longer than some, far less than others. I would note that the scenario described has indeed happened to me, multiple times every year, with one difference. I have never had it happen with a performance boat. All sorts of other boats, yes, even some unpowered ones. I don't deny that some performance boat operators might fall victim to the same lack of judgment that obviously infects so many boat operators on the lake, however it's not the type of boat that causes the problem, its the ignorance of the operator.

We have all the regulations we need to maintain safe boating. We need to continue to educate boaters, try to instill a sense of responsibility and boating courtesy, and enforce the laws we have. I'm not saying it's an easy or quick fix but in the long run it's the only thing that will really make a difference.

Woodsy

02-18-2007, 07:00 PM

Regardless of who is the stand on boat or the give way boat, the captains of both boats are ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE for the safety of thier boat and are REQUIRED to do everything possible to avoid a collison. This means that on occasion, the stand on boat will need to give way. When in doubt of the other boats intentions, assess the situation, and if neccesary slow down or stop.

As far as some of the arguments presented by the pro-speed limit folks, the reality is we have more boats using the lake than ever, yet our accident rate is down. There have been no fatalities since 2002 as the result of a collision between boats. We can argue if its because of boater education or just better vigilance, but the fact remains... more boats, less accidents!

Woodsy

Acres per Second

02-19-2007, 09:08 AM

I don't think a speed limit should stop us from being hyper-vigilant, boats are dangerous machine when operated carelessly. I LIKE that other boaters operate in a "hyper-vigilant" manner, that's how anyone operating a boat should be; keeps us from hitting kayaks and such.
1) Psychologists say hyper-vigilance is exhausting (http://www.dementia.com/news/detail.jhtml;jsessionid=CYMSO2NN0K1V2CUCERDRXCQ?it emname=t1227007.8ke0&parentSite=www.psychiatry24x7.com): add sun, waves, wakes, alcohol, and inadequate hydration, and you have a recipe for tragedy.

2) Powerboating, at least, shouldn't be physically draining. Describing your own boat as "twitchy" (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=28645&postcount=69) at 50 mph, I'd sure hope the operator—and any boaters nearby—would be hydrated, sober, and attentive to those on the edge of control.

Amazing, how did that happen ? I mean with no speed limits and all them dangerous boats out there creating all that anarchy, I'd have thought we'd have dozens of collisons each and every year.
1) The boating public has no access here to Marine Patrol report Boating Accidents 2002-2006.

Opponents credit education with the sudden accident downturn; however, on-line testing has been discontinued by the NHMP, citing their own poor administration of the test.

We see only what NHRBA opponents want us to see. (As previously cited, NHRBA has that report in hand).

2) IMHO, any reduction in accidents can be credited to Mother Nature:

For 2006, more rained-out weekends than I can ever remember.
For 2005, Mee'n'Mac opines (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18976&postcount=18)fewer Winni boaters than in 2004. Or here (http://lexandjoe.com/2005_07_10_joesax_archive.html).
For 2004, Fish & Game reported a "rainy and cool" summer (http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Hunting/Hunting_Reports/Hunt_report_2004-2005/Hunt_report_091704.htm).
For 2003, The state experienced a "rainy" summer (http://www.thatscamping.com/reviews/index.php/camping/single2/whits-end-campground2/).
For 2002, Our wakeup call (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=44776). And dry summer. (http://www.unh.edu/news/news_releases/2002/august/as_20020814drought.html)An extremely dry summer (http://www.weirsonline.com/pastshows.htm).
For 2001, FLL opined that attitude-change WILL take place (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=29835):

365 days after FLL's post, letters appeared in print saying a fatality was inevitable—IF the Marine Patrol continues to allow lake anarchy. Two subsequent (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=45951) letters agreed—written even while unaware that a 4½-ton boat had crushed a Winnipesaukee retiree (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=44776) on his "small" 22-foot boat. It was not a good weekend (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=44820).

"...As far as some of the arguments presented by the pro-speed limit folks, the reality is we have more boats using the lake than ever..."
Citation needed. (Citations always needed at Woodsypedia.) :)

"...We can argue if its because of boater education or just better vigilance..."
The best vigilance has been by NH on their own on-line Boater Education. Even though initiated and authorized by NH, they discounted their real value last year.

...more boats, less accidents...
Woodsypedia again: citation needed.

If fewer accidents have resulted, inclement weather is a greater factor in fewer boats on the lake.

Higher gas prices would produce fewer miles traveled per boat.

"...Does it make sense to hash all this over again? Too bad there isn't a short FAQ or primer to help out the newbies..."

Primer for 2002:

Angry boater: http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=44802
Blame MP: http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=44788
Blind MPs: http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=44792
Get serious: http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=44838
Out of Control: http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforum/archive1.cgi?noframes;read=44854

Phew!

Dave R

02-19-2007, 05:24 PM

1) Psychologists say hyper-vigilance is exhausting (http://www.dementia.com/news/detail.jhtml;jsessionid=CYMSO2NN0K1V2CUCERDRXCQ?it emname=t1227007.8ke0&parentSite=www.psychiatry24x7.com): add sun, waves, wakes, alcohol, and inadequate hydration, and you have a recipe for tragedy.

2) Powerboating, at least, shouldn't be physically draining. When you describe your own boat as "twitchy" (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=28645&postcount=69) at 50 mph, I'd sure hope the operator—and any boaters nearby—would be hydrated, sober, and attentive to those on the edge of control.

Your ability to correlate the mental illnesses of war veterans with operating a boat on Winnipesaukee is a bigger stretch than inferring "twitchy" means "on the edge of control".

Quoting sources from a site called "Dementia.com" explains it perfectly though...:rolleye2:

jrc

02-20-2007, 12:12 AM

APS

Reading the tragic story of that night as it unfolds is a good reminder of what the number one problem was and still is, booze.

Cow Man

02-21-2007, 10:48 AM

Is there anyone who would seriously argue that passing a 45 MPH speed limit makes it OK to go that fast in the fog on a fourth of July weekend on Meredith bay?
Safe operation of a boat has nothing to do with lake wide speed limits and everything to do with boater education and common courtesy. A capable boat and skipper are perfectly able to navigate the broads safely at 90 MPH on a typical weekday with light traffic.
On the other hand, a poorly designed, overpowered boat in the hands of an inexperienced, incapable operator has no business leaving the dock.
Noise is not a function of speed; there are laws on the books regarding acceptable noise levels. Existing laws should be enforced and enforceable.
Passing speed limit legislation may make some feel good, but would be difficult to enforce. Furthermore, most boat’s speedometers and even gps units don’t accurately measure speed over water. Many of the classic wooden boats from years past we romanticize are incapable of obeying the current definition of “headway speed,” and maintaining steering control. Speed limits are for automobiles not boats.
What is “safe” is best left to the judgment of a capable captain. For the record, I don’t own a go fast boat and like the peace and quiet of island living, but I respect that others who enjoy the adrenalin rush of a fast boat have a right to the lake as well. If they are courteous, safe and sober operators, more power to them.

John A. Birdsall

02-23-2007, 05:18 PM

While I am in favor of a speed limit, I am more in favor of people abiding by the existing laws. It has been proven that in the most part the faster a boat goes the smaller the wake, but that also depends on the hull of a boat.

I think Kayakers, canoeist have their place and their rights, But one thing I did not see on here and it is their responsibility. They are low in the water and sometimes in different water conditions are hard to see. I think they need to have some type of flag pole (fishing pole) with a colored triangled flag. or something like a divers flag. Attached to the kayak or canoe. Can't stay 150' away if I cannot see them.

Speed limit in the harbors/bays near islands I think is important, but not in the middle of the broads.

Evenstar

02-23-2007, 11:25 PM

While I am in favor of a speed limit, I am more infavor of people abiding by the exsisting laws. It has been proven that in the most part the faster a boat goes the smaller the wake, but that also depends on the hull of a boat.
And the faster the boat goes, the less time the operator has to avoid hitting anything in its path.<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p

I think Kayakers, canoeist haave their place and their rights, But one thing I did not see on here and it is their responsibilty. They are low in the water and sometimes in different water conditions are hard to see. I think they need to have some type of flag pole (fishing pole) with a colored triangled flag. or something like a divers flag. Attached to the kayak or canoe. Can't stay 150' away if I cannot see them.<O:p</O:p
From a long distance, the most visible part of a paddler is the moving, reflective paddle. I can almost always spot another kayaker when they are still a mile or more away.

My sea kayak is only 23 inches wide. <O:p</O:pA flag on most sea kayaks would make them very unstable, especially on windy days. And a flag would make doing a recovery roll impossible. <O:p</O:p

This guy’s kayak was bright yellow, with a red and yellow sail, but his kayak still go cut in half by a speedboat.

<O:p</O:p
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q30/arweneve/kayak/0306-p15-1.jpg

And you guys claim that my fear of being run over by a high speed powerboat is irrational.

ADDED: This is the letter, that goes with the above photo (It was in AFLOAT Magazine:
Keep a proper lookout:
I was recently sailing my kayak near Speers Point on Lake Macquarie when it was cut in two by a bowrider speedboat.
Just before the collision, I saw the faces of kids in the bow of the boat as it veered towards me but I could not see the skipper. With less than a second to spare, I yelled “Hey!” and jumped clear to save my life.
Apparently the skipper had not seen the bright yellow kayak or the yellow and red sail standing two metres above the water. Maybe his view was obscured by the five kids in the bow. He was good enough to help me salvage the pieces of kayak and equipment and take me home. If I had not been quick to jump, it would have been pieces of me that had to be salvaged.
The rule about power giving way to sail is no good to you if you are dead. Never assume another skipper has seen you. In a busy waterway, constant traffic scanning is required and in a speed boat, scan wider and further. In a collision, the boat with the least weight and speed suffers most.
The main message is keep a proper lookout! See and be seen.

G.J. Robinson, Toronto.

<O:p</O:p

overlook

02-24-2007, 12:48 PM

I would like to read the article that you posted the picture from. Could you please post the link.
Thank You

codeman671

02-24-2007, 01:03 PM

Yes, please post the link to the article. I find it hard to believe that a high speed boat hitting that kayak would have done such small damage. I doubt highly that anyone was in that kayak when it got hit. Something seems fishy...

SteveA

02-24-2007, 01:37 PM

It's a little dated... and a big file but check out Chapter 4 Boating accidents stats. Biggest cause... human error, careless operation and drunk boaters.

http://www.bts.gov/publications/maritime_trade_and_transportation/2002/pdf/entire.pdf

Sadly, no laws passed will solve the biggest problem(s). Captain Boanhead and Captain Tipsy.

I have to come down on the side of more enforcement and stiifer fines as opposed to more rules. Maybe we need to make it VERY expensive to get out on the lake if you aren't willing to do so safely within the rules that already exist.

codeman671

02-24-2007, 02:25 PM

And the faster the boat goes, the less time the operator has to avoid hitting anything in its path.<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p

<O:p</O:p
From a long distance, the most visible part of a paddler is the moving, reflective paddle. I can almost always spot another kayaker when they are still a mile or more away.

My sea kayak is only 23 inches wide. <O:p</O:pA flag on most sea kayaks would make them very unstable, especially on windy days. And a flag would make doing a recovery roll impossible. <O:p</O:p

This guy’s kayak was bright yellow, with a red and yellow sail, but his kayak still go cut in half by a speedboat.

<O:p</O:p
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q30/arweneve/kayak/0306-p15-1.jpg

And you guys claim that my fear of being run over by a high speed powerboat is irrational.

ADDED: This is the letter, that goes with the above photo (It was in AFLOAT Magazine:

<O:p</O:p

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't this take place in Australia??? Last time I checked that was at least a few hour drive from Winnipesaukee...:laugh: Can you find anything closer?

Lets check out a few quotes on www.kayakforum.com about safety:

"I just saw on the evening news here in Maine that a kayaker had his kayak cut in half in a collison with a powerboat.

Information gleaned from the TV report:
The incident occurred on Long Lake.
It was 11:30 at night.
The kayaker displayed a warning light and shouted loudly enough to wake people on shore.
When the collision seemed imminent he capsized and wet exited.
The kayaker was unhurt.
The power boat, according to wardens, was operating legally.
There seemed to be some issue in the powerboater reporting the incident promptly.
The powerboater was fined $500. "

Please note that this took place at 11:30pm !!! Do you think that the kayaker was acting dangerously being out at 11:30PM??

Here are a few opinions of the above incident by kayakers:

"Many paddlers seem intent on ignoring all of this and using whatever lights they have or like - including strobes - which are illegal except as emergency signals."

"If he had time for all that - couldn't he have just paddled clear? A stoke or two should be sufficient to get out of the direct path. Waving a light and shouting wastes valuable time in a situation like this. Stupid thinking IMO (same goes for waving paddles, blowing horns/whistles, etc. - unless the paddler is disabled somehow).

I'm not saying all collisions are avoidable - but in this case - there were two vessels involved. One unaware of any danger - the other failed to maneuver knowing a collision was imminent. By my understanding of ANY rules the paddler was at fault. "

A few more quotes from the above site, from kayakers about kayakers:

"Lots of casual kayakers are in la-la land
It's true. SOTs litter the waters surface in summer. They're rentals...then there's the EcoChallenge wannabes who charge about like they're hounding your rear on the freeway. Do they understand what the Navigation Rules are? Do they even recognize what those shapes are sailing/motoring at them as they paddle into the channel in front of those shapes? Many boaters have stories of such near-misses. Is it any wonder that boaters have a certain opinion of kayakers? "

"The above thread got me thinking about what appears to be a general attitude among sea kayakers toward power boaters. Past posts have made reference to six pack guzzling idiots endangering themselves and others. I think it's human nature perhaps to view our particular activity as superior and more pure than the other guys, but I just wanted to remind my fellow paddlers that MANY a sea kayakers life has been saved by a powerboater. Most often we don't hear about this, but I assure you it happens! Sure there are poor boaters, but it seems that kayakers account for a good percentage of mishaps where I live. I think the truth is that the majority of power boaters are pretty good. They have expensive vessels that they care about, insurance, and are more heavily scrutinized than kayakers. So in the spirit of cooperation I'd encourage paddlers to be friendly and courteous to all boaters. I think it goes a long way. Happy and safe paddling! "

"I'm not able to comment on statitistics but after 30 years on the water I can say that almost every time out I'm scared by what I see. First is the large number of kayakers who seem to feel that a PFD on the back deck will save them. I challenge any of these people to try and put on a PFD in a warm pool, never mind in cold water after a capsize. Second is the large amount of "luggage" I see on both front and rear decks. This raises the centre of gravity, contributing to instability, it can be a factor in capsizing in rough water and will certainly impede a safe re-entry. Third is what I consider ill advised clothing - dressing for the air temperature seems to be the norm instead of dressing for the water temperature. I could go on but I think you get the picture. I don't want to see unnnecessary legislation and would encourage all experienced paddlers to give advice on these matters, even when it's not been asked for. It could just save a life. Sorry to be so morbid at this time of year. Have a happy and safe Christmas and New Year. "

I can go on pasting for a while but I think you get the drift. Safety is an issue in all types of boating, I would not necessarily claim that kayakers are the opitimy of safety. There are many more fatal accidents each year involving paddlers than there are powerboaters. Most seem to be the error of the paddler.

GWC...

02-24-2007, 02:32 PM

This guy’s kayak was bright yellow, with a red and yellow sail, but his kayak still go cut in half by a speedboat.

<O:p</O:p
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q30/arweneve/kayak/0306-p15-1.jpg

And you guys claim that my fear of being run over by a high speed powerboat is irrational.

ADDED: This is the letter, that goes with the above photo (It was in AFLOAT Magazine:

<O:p</O:p
Keep a proper lookout:
I was recently sailing my kayak near Speers Point on Lake Macquarie when it was cut in two by a bowrider speedboat.

The main message is keep a proper lookout! See and be seen.
Some interesting info about Lake Macquarie…

http://members.aol.com/lakemach2otaxi/index.html

Also, interestingly, the people of Lake Macquarie seem to have more pressing concerns than aqua speed limits, as “residents are invited to learn more about Landcare projects at an Open Day at Kahibah on Sunday 25 February.”

Then, again, perhaps Australians view matters differently than you.

Did you find the land and people much different from life in Littleton, NH?

http://www.lakemac.com.au/news/news_details.asp?key=2004

For those who are curious, some info on Speers Point on Lake Macquarie…

http://www.answers.com/topic/speers-point-new-south-wales

Evenstar

02-24-2007, 03:57 PM

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't this take place in Australia??? Last time I checked that was at least a few hour drive from Winnipesaukee... Can you find anything closer?
So this doesn’t count, just because it didn’t happen on Winni?

My point is that powerboats have indeed hit kayaks before . . . so we have valid reasons to be concerned for our safety on lakes that allow powerboats to travel at unlimited speeds, where many powerboats admit that they can’t often see kayaks very well.

Please note that this took place at 11:30pm !!! Do you think that the kayaker was acting dangerously being out at 11:30PM??
What I read was that the kayak had a warning light . . . which apparently met Maine’s regulations, since it was the powerboat that was cited for “operating illegally”, and not the paddler.

As far as being able to paddle a few strokes to avoid the collision . . . the top speed of paddling a kayak is about 6MPH, which is only 8.8 feet per second. In my case, at my top speed, it takes me nearly 2 seconds to just paddle the length of my kayak. So unless the guy had more than a few seconds warning, he could not have paddled out of the way of the oncoming boat.

There are many more fatal accidents each year involving paddlers than there are powerboaters.
This is completely untrue: Most fatal boating accidents involve powerboats (85% in 2005) – not paddlers.
According to the United States Coast Guard’s 2005 Boating Statistics:
In 2005 there were 78 fatalities among paddlers (49 canoes and 29 kayaks), And there were 501 fatalities among powerboaters (54 in Cabin Motorboats, 10 in Houseboats, 1 in a Jet Boat, 351 in Open Motorboats, 65 on Personal Watercraft, 20 in Pontoon Boats).

Mee-n-Mac

02-24-2007, 04:09 PM

And the faster the boat goes, the less time the operator has to avoid hitting anything in its path.<O:p</O:p
True enough but how much time is needed ? If you can be seen "far away" (see below) why limit speed to a low number ?
From a long distance, the most visible part of a paddler is the moving, reflective paddle. I can almost always spot another kayaker when they are still a mile or more away.
I have no problems seeing kayakers and canoeists "far away" as well. So if you, sitting low, can see the kayaker why are you so worried that the boater, no doubt sitting higher, can not ? Do you think you need a mile to avoid a run-over at 45 mph ? How much sighting distance do you calculate is needed for a boat to safely run 45 and not run you over ? for 65 ? for 85 ?

My sea kayak is only 23 inches wide. <O:p</O:pA flag on most sea kayaks would make them very unstable, especially on windy days. And a flag would make doing a recovery roll impossible. <O:p</O:p
Yes and I don't think it (the flag) is needed. The problem is not that you can't be seen, it whether the person will be looking. You can reduce people's speed but that won't make them look. At some point (speed limit) you're restricting normal people going about what is a safe activity because some small percentage of the population are boneheads. This is why people are getting so upset. The onus of making "you" feel safe from the bonehead boaters is being laid on the backs of the performance boaters. You, rightly, don't like it when the same is tried on you.
This guy’s kayak was bright yellow, with a red and yellow sail, but his kayak still go cut in half by a speedboat.
And you guys claim that my fear of being run over by a high speed powerboat is irrational.

The question is whether the fear level can be justified by the risk. Bad things are always going to happen when people and machinery are combined. Let's say that a 45 mph limit is enacted. Do you think that no runovers will ever occur thenceforth ? I wouldn't think so. So when one does occur will "you" say that you're afraid and the speed limit must be reduced even more ? How low an accident rate is needed for you not to be afraid and why should other people be restricted to satisfy your fears ? And when you're satisfied, what do we do with the person who's still afraid ? There will never be no boating accidents so long as human beings are at the helm. At some point you need to accept that there's some level of risk in what you're doing. This is where the stats come in. You're at more risk now from the bonehead boater than the fast boater. Slow the faster boater down and your risk level isn't going to change in any practical manner.

ps - Just how fast was that bowrider speedboat going with it's 5 kids in the bow ? Over 45 mph ?

FWIW : Can anyone tell me what doesn't qualify as a speedboat these days ? Between the above and the Crownline cruiser speedboat I'm left wondering.

Cal

02-24-2007, 06:15 PM

And you think speeding boats are a problem:emb: :emb:

DRH

02-24-2007, 07:11 PM

Hey Cal, is that Rattlesnake Island on the right side of the photo? :D:laugh::D:laugh:

WeirsBeachBoater

02-24-2007, 09:22 PM

Limiting the size of great whites!!!!:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

KonaChick

02-24-2007, 09:23 PM

Ok...everyone gives good arguments for and against speed limits and I enjoy reading them....they help to educate for the most part. We're at the point now where people need to make up their own minds and I'm amost at that point! I know you're all so excited for me!:laugh: Here's a question for you all. Why do you have speed limits on the roads then? Don't they cut down on the number of fatalities and accidents? Wouldn't a speed limit on a body of water do the same thing? I know there are no stats to prove there is a problem with speed accidents either...I'm just curious to what people's thoughts on this are.

Dave R

02-25-2007, 08:23 AM

We do have speed limits on the water: 6 MPH, where necessary, and for good reason. It's not unlike driving in-town and I think the need is obvious. Out on the highway, speed limits are mostly set to keep the speed differential down. With mere inches between vehicles, it's a good idea to keep the speed differential in check. This is why we have lower limits on the highway as well.

With at least 150 feet, by law, between boats exceeding 6 MPH, the speed differential is as relevant as the speed differential between your car on route 93 and a tree 150 feet from your car on the side of the highway. Do you ever feel compelled to slow to 45 solely because of trees near the highway?

Some, including me, would argue that some highway speed limits are set for revenue enhancement. I think the heavily patrolled 55 MPH zones on 93 by Manchester, Concord and Salem are perfect examples of this.

SteveA

02-25-2007, 09:27 AM

If this thread has gotten a little too stressfull for you... and you could use some help..

Click Here

http://www.bouldertherapist.com/html/humor/Audio/Psychiatric_Office_Answering_Machine%201.mp3

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Just a little humor... all nasty replies ignored..:D

Evenstar

02-25-2007, 10:16 AM

With at least 150 feet, by law, between boats exceeding 6 MPH, the speed differential is as relevant as the speed differential between your car on route 93 and a tree 150 feet from your car on the side of the highway. Do you ever feel compelled to slow to 45 solely because of trees near the highway?
<O:p</O:p
But there are lanes on highways, and the trees don’t move out onto the highway. Here’s an analogy:
<O:p</O:p
Picture a huge open parking lot, were there’s nothing but acres of pavement. Then add a couple hundred cars and tell the drivers that they can drive just as fast as they want - as long as they stay 150 feet from the edge of the parking lot and from the other vehicles - at those times they must slow down to 6 mph. Oh, yeah – none of the cars have regular brakes (only their parking brake works). Now add 30 or 40 bicyclists – who are given the same rules. How long do you think it will be before the first collision occurs?

ADDED 2/26 at 11:18 PM: I'm being moderated to the point that I can't even post anymore (I posted my last reply this morning, and it still hasn't appeared). I can no longer even defend myself or respond to any questions that are directed to me, so debating is now totally impossible. Apparently only the anti-speed limit view is now being permitted on this forum - so I hope you guys have a nice one-sided discussion here.

Mee-n-Mac

02-25-2007, 04:40 PM

Here's a question for you all. Why do you have speed limits on the roads then? Don't they cut down on the number of fatalities and accidents? Wouldn't a speed limit on a body of water do the same thing?

Let's talk about speed limits on land for a minute. What purpose do you think they might serve ? I can name 2 up front. First they're there to prevent "you" from hitting "me" due to "your" excessive speed. Secondly they're there to prevent the driver from going too fast for the road and hurting themselves. Continuing on the latter point, it's not too hard to imagine a blind corner (or like) where, absent some signage, even an attentive driver could be going to fast to make the corner. For the most part, when people are talking about speed limits for the lake, this isn't the situation they're concerned about. Moreover, IMO, it's not the Govt's job to keep me safe from myself. If it want's to advise what to do then advise ... but don't restrict.

The first reason is (purportedly) why people are advocating for a speed limit. Back on land you have intersections and corners and hills and obstructions that limit a persons ability to see what lies ahead (and act accordingly). This reason plays a part in why the around town speed limits are lower than what we have on the highways. Coming back to the water there are parts of the lake that are comparable to being "around town" (think coming around L. Bear, btw Long I, near FL10) and other parts that are more "highway like" (think Broads). The 45 mph limit might be appropriate for the former but isn't, IMO, for the latter. What would you think if RT93 imposed a 45 mph, in all places at all times, just because a local road was connected to it* ? Or because sometimes it backed up enough due to traffic congestion that 45 mph made sense at those times ? In the latter case existing road speed laws holds that the driver is supposed to exercise control an,d use speeds which are reasonable and prudent for the conditions. You can be stopped and cited for doing 50 mph on a road posted for 55 mph if the conditions are such that 50 is unreasonable. The problem I have with the proposed 45 mph limit is that it seeks to impose a "worst case" limit in all places and at all times that's overly restrictive. I understand Evenstar's concerns but I think she's safe at speeds far above the proposed 45 mph limit. This, and not pure luck and probability, is why boats, canoes and kayaks aren't being runover every weekend. I could go on but this is long enough for one post.

To answer your last question directly, we're already at the point where boat-boat collisions due to speed alone are essentially a random number in any given year. Pass a law and I don't see how it'll make any difference in the accident rate. The few boneheads who don't use good judgement today aren't going to be deterred by a speed limit. The drunks aren't likely to care much either.

*In fact this isn't that far from the truth. The present 55/65 mph laws are a compromise from the days when 55 mph was the rule. Because so many people were driving above 55 mph and federal highway funds were being threathened, the western states forced a compromise that left 55 as the rule where population density was above a certain number. 65 became the rule where population was scarce enough (like out west). This was just a political ploy, much as the 55 limit became, having no grounding in any science or engineering. And we here in the NE are still stuck with it. Out west you see limits that are the 70 mph (and higher :eek: ) that was the law when I was younger (and had cars not as good as those today).

Silver Duck

02-25-2007, 05:27 PM

codeman671

02-25-2007, 06:34 PM

So this doesn’t count, just because it didn’t happen on Winni?

Were you there? I wasn't. Unless you have an official report of the actualy facts of the incident I would not make such hasty judgement of the details. Maybe in Australia they discriminate against foreigners in kayakers the way certain groups on Winni discriminate against powerboaters or GFBL's.

[My point is that powerboats have indeed hit kayaks before . . . so we have valid reasons to be concerned for our safety on lakes that allow powerboats to travel at unlimited speeds, where many powerboats admit that they can’t often see kayaks very well.

And according to the kayakers forum, kayakers have wandered into shipping lanes and places they really do not belong putting themselves and others at unnecessary risk. Kayakers can be reckless too, and put themselves in harm's way all to often.

What I read was that the kayak had a warning light . . . which apparently met Maine’s regulations, since it was the powerboat that was cited for “operating illegally”, and not the paddler.

Actually if you reread what was quoted in my post the warden involved stated that the powerboater was acting LEGALLY, not illegally. I have not had a chance to dig for the actual incident report but if you have please post a link. Being that the boater was only fined $500 and the main complaint seemed to be their lack of a hasty reporting of the incident it does not seem to me that they found too much fault with the boater.

Lets reread my post again for something else, a quote from a kayaker from the kayaker's forum:

"Many paddlers seem intent on ignoring all of this and using whatever lights they have or like - including strobes - which are illegal except as emergency signals."

Nothing in the post that I read mentioned anything about the light used being legal for navigation use in the state of Maine. It could have been a penlight for all we know...

This is completely untrue: Most fatal boating accidents involve powerboats (85% in 2005) – not paddlers.

My comment was tailored towards the findings in NH for 2006. All of the fatalities reported in the 2006 NHMP report were from drownings from paddlers, swimmers off boats, and the unfortunate rescue sinking on the CT River. None were from fatal reckless boating accidents. I am sure if I take the time (of course I am sure someone else will or has) to go back over past NH reports each and every year you will find more fatalities tied to paddlers, swimming accidents off anchored boats and capsizes than you will from the reckless boating accidents which you are so worried about.

codeman671

02-25-2007, 06:43 PM

Mee-n-Mac

If I correctly understand what you posted, it makes a lot of sense. I fully agree that there are, indeed, times and places where 45 mph (or, even slower) makes sense, and times and places where it's an unreasonably restrictive limit.

But, would the boating community be able to reach a concensus about this to offer as a guide to the legislature? (As little as I like it, for reasons stated many times in previous postings, I'm pretty sure that some kind of speed limit is going to pass this time.)

Let's try a few questions, and see whether we can come up with something we could all live with.

First, I've heard very little complaining at the idea of a night time speed limit. Is there some agreement amongst us that this wouldn't be a bad idea? If so, are we happy at the proposed 25 mph?

Second, would most of us be reasonably content with some areas of the lake having a 45 mph (or some other figure) limit and some areas having a higher (or no) speed limit.

Third, if so, what areas should be restricted speed areas, and which don't really require restrictions?

Silver Duck

I think a lot of people tried the "common ground" approach last year and unfortunately it did not go anywhere. I personally have no issue with 25mph at night and have stated so before. This seems to be a non-issue. Many have suggested setting speed limit zones in different areas makes sense although I do not see the proponents of the bill wanting to settle or negotiate whereas many of us against it as written would.

I think that some of the smaller bodies of water should have speed limits. I personally think that 70-80mph on Ossipee or Lovell Lake for instance is a bit much, but it is certainly fine on many parts of Winni. Maybe a group should sit down with a legislator and try to draw up a new, alternative bill that is much less of an "all or nothing" approach to give the lawmakers something else to consider instead of approving or denying what is at hand. If this is already being attempted I would love to get involved.

Dave R

02-26-2007, 09:05 AM

<O:p</O:p
But there are lanes on highways, and the trees don’t move out onto the highway. Here’s an analogy:
<O:p</O:p
Picture a huge open parking lot, were there’s nothing but acres of pavement. Then add a couple hundred cars and tell the drivers that they can drive just as fast as they want - as long as they stay 150 feet from the edge of the parking lot and from the other vehicles - at those times they must slow down to 6 mph. Oh, yeah – none of the cars have regular brakes (only their parking brake works). Now add 30 or 40 bicyclists – who are given the same rules. How long do you think it will be before the first collision occurs?

You'll need to make a few changes to make the analogy work more like the real world: The human powered vehicles cannot exceed 7 MPH, The vehicle brakes improve with the square of the speed above 20 MPH, only the most expensive 5% of motorized vehicles can exceed 70 MPH, the parking lot is 72 square miles, and the parking lot will have to become bumpier with more traffic or wind.

Oh wait, that experiment has already taken place over the last 100+ years. Turns out that it works fine. High speeds collisions are quite rare. You are much more likely to be in a car collision on the way to the lake.

codeman671

02-26-2007, 10:28 AM

National rules for all recreational vessels including kayaks set forth by the Coast Guard:

"Mandatory Accessories United States of America

In the United States boating regulations vary from state to state but on a national level the United States Coast Guard requires that:

All recreational boats must carry one wearable PFD for each person aboard. The USCG divides PFD’s into 3 categories: type I: off shore type II: Near shore type III: flotation aid
Your kayak must include a system to signal your presence such as flares, signal mirror or flashlight
All recreational vessels, including kayaks, are required to display navigational lights between sunset and sunrise and during other periods of reduced visibility like fog, rain or haze.
The USCG, working with affiliated local organizations, offers all small craft owners a free, annual Vessel Safety Check (VSC). An educational procedure, rather than an enforcement of the law, the VSC helps to increase the safety of everyone involved with small craft boating. "

A simple warning light displayed on the kayak incident in Maine may not have been enough to meet Coast Guard regulations, the kayaker may have been at fault more than Evenstar thinks.

Evenstar

02-26-2007, 11:52 AM

A simple warning light displayed on the kayak incident in Maine may not have been enough to meet Coast Guard regulations, the kayaker may have been at fault more than Evenstar thinks.

This is taken directly from Maine Boating Laws:
"(5) Watercraft Manually Propelled: All other watercraft, not propelled by machinery, such as rowboats, canoes and rafts, and which are only operated by hand power, rowed, paddled or navigated by the current shall have ready at hand a lantern or flashlight showing a white light which shall be exhibited in sufficient time to prevent collision."

The powerboat hit the kayak and the kayak had the required warnng light, and the powerboat was fined - yet you're still trying to place the blame on the paddler - give it a rest.

Acres per Second

02-26-2007, 02:39 PM

And you think speeding boats are a problem:emb: :emb:

For those dismissing small boaters' "FEAR", this is a real photograph (http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/sharkkayak.asp).

And Winnipesaukee's speedsters are expressing no empathy with this guy?

:confused: Problem! :eek:

Mee-n-Mac

02-26-2007, 10:30 PM

Let's try a few questions, and see whether we can come up with something we could all live with.

First, I've heard very little complaining at the idea of a night time speed limit. Is there some agreement amongst us that this wouldn't be a bad idea? If so, are we happy at the proposed 25 mph?

Second, would most of us be reasonably content with some areas of the lake having a 45 mph (or some other figure) limit and some areas having a higher (or no) speed limit.

Third, if so, what areas should be restricted speed areas, and which don't really require restrictions?

Silver Duck

1) 25 at night bothers me just a bit, I think 30 - 35 would be more appropriate. Here's why: Back when the whole HB-162 question came up I sat down and tried to figure out what would be reasonable speed limits. I did my own analysis and the end results back up what my 30 years of boating told me. Figuring out what's appropriate for night-time, vs day-time, is a bit more uncertain. The big problem (for boat-boat collisions) is not that an aware skipper won't see the other guy but that it's much harder to judge distances at night. At what distance will a competent, but not superhuman, skipper figure out that he's "danger close" and take corrective action ? How effective will this action be ? Somewhere on some PC I have the numbers but the end result is that for a simple encounter btw 2 boats I'd be worried over 45 mph. So I back off 10 - 15 mph and arrive at what I think is a safe limit but not unecessarily restrictive. Now I find I'm always taking action waaay before the distance I set for above analysis but I'm a pretty cautious person, perhaps more so that what I'm count on in my above average skipper.

2) and 3) Again any place that doesn't have the sightlines to support "high speed" becomes a candidate for a speed limit. You could approach this as set zones (which I think I mentioned back in prior discussion) or do an extension of the NWS/150' rule (as has been suggested by another forum member). Slow to 45 mph when with 450' (a SWAG, not my real numbers) of shore or another boat.... or 60 within 600' or ... well you get the idea. Certainly a lot of the inter-island channels become speed zones by either method and the Broads remains limit free. Perhaps we could persuade Bizer to put out a chart with distance contours instead of depth contours to see what such a plan would look like. ;) :D

FWIW : I think I recall Cal mentioning the concept of a speed limit on weekends and holidays vs one of the above concepts. Instead of dividing the cake up into pieces, it's more like timesharing.

Cal

02-26-2007, 11:35 PM

1)
FWIW : I think I recall Cal mentioning the concept of a speed limit on weekends and holidays vs one of the above concepts. Instead of dividing the cake up into pieces, it's more like timesharing.

Yup , it's been done in areas of Chesapeake Bay that are like Weirs Beach on the weekends. They have Sat/Sun/Holiday NWZs , any other time(like monday thru friday) it's a ghost town with no speed limits and guess what? It works great:)

LIforrelaxin

02-27-2007, 10:18 AM

Yup , it's been done in areas of Chesapeake Bay that are like Weirs Beach on the weekends. They have Sat/Sun/Holiday NWZs , any other time(like monday thru friday) it's a ghost town with no speed limits and guess what? It works great:)

Interesting concept.... with some merit I do believe..... The question is would the state consider it..... I think seeing both sides of the arguement that this would be a good way to make both parties happier....

Rayhunt

02-27-2007, 12:47 PM

I dont think the speed limit proponents will compromize and have localized speed limits/ no wake zones..
They have a hidden agenda which is to get boats off the lake period.
Anyone familiar with Winnipesaukee knows the congestion is localized to certain areas at certain times. ie: weekends at the weirs etc.
Nope , no compromise :(

GWC...

02-27-2007, 02:09 PM

ADDED 2/26 at 11:18 PM: I'm being moderated to the point that I can't even post anymore (I posted my last reply this morning, and it still hasn't appeared). I can no longer even defend myself or respond to any questions that are directed to me, so debating is now totally impossible. Apparently only the anti-speed limit view is now being permitted on this forum - so I hope you guys have a nice one-sided discussion here.
Would you like some cheese with your whine? :D :laugh:

Welcome to the real world.

Do you think that you are the only forum member whose post is reviewed before being posted?

Are you so self-consumed that you forget that the Webmaster has a REAL LIFE and being a Webmaster is not part of it? This website is a hobby or have you not ascertained that knowledge?

The reason for the length of posting delays is the Webmaster's REAL LIFE schedule. He does the best of his ability given his REAL LIFE schedule.

It would appear that you want the Webmaster to modify his REAL LIFE schedule to accommodate you and your lifestyle.

You could always post your thoughts and stress your lifestyle on another website. This is not the only website on the planet or in the Lakes Region. Since you have severe issues with the Webmaster, perhaps life would be less stressful for you if you were to promote your lifestyle on a different website, one that does not moderate any posts. Then, again, you would be subjected to more personal attacks, scrutiny and ridicule, of your posts.

Life is choices and challenges.

Cooks have a great saying, "If you can't take the heat; get out of the kitchen." They are not about to reduce the flame to cool the kitchen to your desire, which is to say, they are not willing to modify their lifestyle unnecessarily to accommodate your lifestyle.

Again, life is choices and challenges.

Here's a thought:

Put on a survival suit, get in your kayak, paddle with the waterfowl in the open water off the Corinthian Yacht Club in Wolfeboro for awhile, and release some of the stress before you have a stroke.

Check it out...
http://www.wcyc-nh.com/wcyc-nh_008/clubcampage.html

Island Life

02-27-2007, 03:23 PM

Are you so self-consumed that you forget that the Webmaster has a REAL LIFE and being a Webmaster is not part of it? This website is a hobby or have you not ascertained that knowledge?

The reason for the length of posting delays is the Webmaster's REAL LIFE schedule. He does the best of his ability given his REAL LIFE schedule.

It would appear that you want the Webmaster to modify his REAL LIFE schedule to accommodate you and your lifestyle.

You could always post your thoughts and stress your lifestyle on another website. This is not the only website on the planet or in the Lakes Region. Since you have severe issues with the Webmaster, perhaps life would be less stressful for you if you were to promote your lifestyle on a different website, one that does not moderate any posts. Then, again, you would be subjected to more personal attacks, scrutiny and ridicule, of your posts.

GWC: Vicious and uncalled for.

What on earth are you talking about, her "lifestyle"? Does she live with barn animals? Did I miss something? She's an athlete, for godsake. She's out there getting exercise and taking care of her body and soul. I, for one, admire that as I sit here on my lazy backside.

You might not agree with her arguments, but the personal attack is over the top.

While the discussion might be one-sided, Evenstar, there are plenty of us out here that agree with you. We just choose not to engage in the same old arguments. Anyone else want to speak up on behalf of Evenstar? :)

Rayhunt

02-27-2007, 07:54 PM

Personally i'm tired of this Kayak sympathy argument.
No statistics point to you being in any danger out there in your Kayak ! If your scared you have the choice to go elsewhere or stick to the shoreline like everyone else. Life is a risk.. When will we ban Mountain climbers from attempting Everest or K2
I see it as Darwinism if you want to paddle out in front of the weirs or around governors island on a saturday in July.
I don't see many island residents packing there weekend groceries in a kayak and heading out.
Its called common sense.

KonaChick

02-27-2007, 08:05 PM

Just a friendly suggestion GWC...you might also want to do whatever it is you do to relase stress..before you have a stroke! Maybe Evenstar could teach you the fine points of kayaking..you might relax and enjoy it! :)

Coastal Laker

02-28-2007, 09:59 PM

All this regurgitation of the s-a-m-e o-l-d s-t-u-f-f just makes me weary. It's getting hard to come up with reasons to stay on the lake.

I must confess that I prefer being 10 miles out to sea (in federal waters) far more than being on the lake. Peace and quiet, no arguing, no crowding, no 150 ft rule, no debating on who is more educated, who interprets statistics correctly, who is scared, who is not... nothing... just peace and quiet. Even the loud boats are quiet if you can understand that - since they come and go so fast you don't hear them.

:)

fatlazyless

03-02-2007, 04:06 PM

'Worry is a Misuse of Your Imagination.'

What am I talking about? Drove by the Lakeport Landing Marina on Union Ave, Laconia yesterday, and was surprised to see that message on their big signboard. In the past, it has said 'Governor Craig Benson' and more recently it said 'Senator Robert Boyce.' Today, it says 'Worry is a Misuse of Your Imagination.'

Lakeport is the only Winnipesaukee Formula dealer and Formula is the one brand that Lakeport carries.

Translation from New Hampshire-speak to American English-speak = 'Don't Worry - Be Happy!'

Hey, after Governor Craig Benson and Senator Robert Boyce it's terrific to see that Lakeport Landing is getting a new attitude adjustment and lightening up here. From Craig Benson to "Worry is a Misuse of Your Imagination." Get it? So, why are they saying this?

Chris Craft

03-03-2007, 10:52 AM

This is completely untrue: Most fatal boating accidents involve powerboats (85% in 2005) – not paddlers.
According to the United States Coast Guard’s 2005 Boating Statistics:
In 2005 there were 78 fatalities among paddlers (49 canoes and 29 kayaks), And there were 501 fatalities among powerboaters (54 in Cabin Motorboats, 10 in Houseboats, 1 in a Jet Boat, 351 in Open Motorboats, 65 on Personal Watercraft, 20 in Pontoon Boats).

I think that the point that he was trying to make was that more paddlers die from their own demise then from people hitting them. For example if a guy flips over and can not get back on his boat. There are with out a doubt more deaths from that then collisions.

Us coastguard regulations take precidence over state for lighting I believe. So if you look at the posted requirements above then you will see that Kayaks are required to have the same lighting that any other boat is based on size and tonage more then anything.

Don't give up over the moderation. As long as your post is worth while they seem to always post them. I am anti speed limit and also moderated.

fatlazyless

03-16-2007, 10:55 PM

Lately, there's been talk of requiring kayaks, canoes, rowboats, and sailboats less than 12' to purchase a ten dollar annual decal as a way to fund the Fish & Game Dept, which is broke. Kayaks, canoes, rowboats and sailboats less than 12' are all quiet, human powered vehicles which do little to disturb the environment and many would agree they add a welcome human element to the over-horsepowered lake. It makes a lot more sense to apply a yearly sticker to the inflatable vinyl rafts, waterskis and boogie boards that get towed behind the motorboats because they increase the overall length and imprint of a motor boat. Essentially, a 20' motorboat becomes a 95' vessel when it is used to tow Junior or Missy at the end of a 75' tow line.

So, a Fish & Game sticker for kayaks should be a no-go, while a sticker on that inflatable tow-behind is the way-to-go!

Acres per Second

03-17-2007, 08:08 AM

"...Lately, there's been talk of requiring kayaks, canoes, rowboats, and sailboats less than 12' to purchase a ten dollar annual decal..."

A sailboat that's less than 12' is a very inefficient design—as owners of the Alcort "Minifish" will tell you. Are there two "Minifish" in the whole state? Owners of the popular 14' "Sunfish" are presently paying a motorboat-equivalent in registration fees. :(

"...It makes a lot more sense to apply a yearly sticker to the inflatable vinyl rafts, waterskis and boogie boards that get towed behind the motorboats because they increase the overall length and imprint of a motor boat. Essentially, a 20' motorboat becomes a 95' vessel..."
And increases its "acres-per-second" coefficient? :laugh:

"...So, a Fish & Game sticker for kayaks should be a no-go, while a sticker on that inflatable tow-behind is the way-to-go...!
Watching for the poor family shlump who car-topped his canoe in the hope of enjoying a navigable U.S. waterway is a pitiful—even shameful—waste of the NHMP.

1) Canoes and kayaks are of microscopic environmental concern; indeed, operators of canoes and kayaks are often acutely aware of the environment.

2) Fish & Game would receive an immense windfall from your proposal.

3) Inflatable tow-behind toys, with the short non-recyclable lifespan of all vinyl products are of environmental concern. Even their shelf-life is short!

I agree 100% with your proposal. :) Who wouldn't? :confused: