Speed Limit test zones dead in the water! [Archive] - Page 2

Bear Islander

08-30-2007, 08:37 AM

I have a test zone detector.

This summer I noticed my depth finder alarm going off in deep water. Then I discovered it was the Marine Patrol's radar that was setting off the alarm on the depth finder. I checked it out on a test zone last week. He points the gun at my boat, the alarm sounds.

This test zone data may give them information on how to use radar on the water but I don't see it makes a difference to the speed limit debate. I don't see that numbers change the central argument.

The age when children are required to wear a PFD changed from 5 to 12. I assume this was done because the legislature felt 12 was a more appropriate age than 5. How many 5 to 12 year olds were already wearing PFD's doesn't change the argument much. The issue was setting an appropriate standard. I hope the legislature does that again when they consider speed limits.

ITD

08-30-2007, 09:42 AM

........... "declare victory, and then get out"..............

........... It sounds like he gave great advice!.............

You've followed the first part of the advice, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE follow the last part.:D

Islander

08-30-2007, 10:26 AM

You've followed the first part of the advice, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE follow the last part.:D

Shall I also stay away from ForumFest?

Asking someone to leave the forum is inappropriate. Even if you put a smiley face at the end.

Dave R

08-30-2007, 11:02 AM

This test zone data may give them information on how to use radar on the water but I don't see it makes a difference to the speed limit debate. I don't see that numbers change the central argument.

The age when children are required to wear a PFD changed from 5 to 12. I assume this was done because the legislature felt 12 was a more appropriate age than 5. How many 5 to 12 year olds were already wearing PFD's doesn't change the argument much. The issue was setting an appropriate standard. I hope the legislature does that again when they consider speed limits.

Sadly, I imagine there's plenty of "accidental drowning while swimming from a boat" data in the 5-12 year old range in NH. Assuming the data exists, and my gut says it does (just watch the news), I doubt that voting for a higher PFD age was a tough decision to make.

It's the utter lack of high-speed boat accident data in NH that makes the speed limit argument so tough for me to back. If there was a problem, I'd be for better enforcement of exsisting laws, and maybe a speed limit if it could really be enforced. In my opinion, the proposed speed limit is a "solution" in search of a problem.

That said, If the MP can't find any boats going at high speeds when it's perfectly legal to do so, what makes you think they'll be able to when it's illegal? Maybe the folks who said handheld radar would not work adequately on water were indeed right... I always figured it was just an excuse, but maybe not.

If you get your way, we will have a useless law and could very well have no reasonable way to enforce it in all but the most blatent instances. It would be like current speed limits on back roads and sport motorcycles. The smart police don't even bother to try to enforce them, because they know they have almost no chance of ever keeping up with a moderately well-ridden sport bike, they just radio ahead and hope for some good luck. The dumb police crash trying to keep up. The reality is, if you have the skills and wish to ride really fast on a sport bike, you can pretty much do so at will on back roads.

Seems to me, that if you have a boat that goes really fast, you can do so at will in the right areas, without any chance of getting caught. That's how it works in MA, where they've had speed limts for years and GFBL boats traveling at well over 45 MPH are quite common. I bet Lake George is the same way...

You may think a speed limit will rid the state of fast boats, it won't. Go to any decent-sized body of water in MA if you don't believe me. Even the smaller lakes have stupendously fast bass boats.

ITD

08-30-2007, 11:05 AM

Shall I also stay away from ForumFest?

Asking someone to leave the forum is inappropriate. Even if you put a smiley face at the end.

Honestly , I don't care what you do. Once again you twist and misconstrue, it's your trademark. Trust me, if I wanted you to leave I would have no problem saying it to you in words even you wouldn't be able to misunderstand. Here's another smiley face for you.:D

Just in case you forgot as you steer us down this road, there is no need for a speed limit, you have no case so your side had to resort to hiring a professional entity to try to make a case. The tests, requested by your side at a Meredith meeting showed that there is not a speed problem on the lake. A speed limit will take valuable resources now dedicated to safety enforcement and relegate those resources to sitting in a hiding spot trying to find the miniscule percentage of boaters that boat over 45 mph. Meanwhile, should you be successful, I predict that the death rate on the lake, which is very low, will actually increase, because of the diversion of MP from meaningful tasks. All of this because you want to turn Lake Winni into some "On Golden Pond" image that exists in your imagination. There are several scenes in that movie of an old "speedboat" that I'm sure had they been filmed in front of your place you would have sworn they were going 90 mph.

So, do I want you to go away, no, do I want your agenda to go away, absolutely. :D :D :D :D

GWC...

08-30-2007, 11:38 AM

The white flag flies at the FF.

It's a day for all to enjoy - just one rule - no heated topics are to be discussed...

Oops, two rules - kayaks are welcome, too;
but occupants must not be nekked - must keep Weirs guy happy.

Bear Islander

08-30-2007, 01:12 PM

pm203

08-30-2007, 02:22 PM

Dave R - You make some good points. But what makes me believe in speed limits is reports from other lakes that have enacted them.

You bring up Lake George. Lt Sneider runs the Marine Patrol there and thinks speed limits have helped their lake. Here is a link to a citizen article on Lake George.

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060107/CITIZEN0101/101070073/-1/CITIZEN

I know Winnipesaukee is not Lake George, but if it can help there, it can help here. At least that is the way I see it.

I have friends that boat on lake George. They tell me that they can go whatever speed they want and that the speed limit law is unenforceable. Unless you are going 80 mph 100 feet from shore, blatantly breaking the law, you will not be bothered.

BroadHopper

08-30-2007, 03:11 PM

It may be true that the GFBL crowd may not want speed limits. But I don't have a GFBL boat. Unless you want to call a Mastercraft ski boat a GFBL boat. If that is the case, we have outlawed the Abenaki ski club!
My point is, why 45 mph? There are a number of barefoot skiers that will tell you that they can't ski comfortably at 45. I can ski comfortably at 52 mph. You are not only 'discriminating' the GFBL crowd, you are discriminating the barefooot skiers! I will be happy to support a 55 mph limit, but I am totally against 45.
Now that Islander has mentioned an agenda against most boats by imposing a horsepower limit as well as a boat length limit. I can see where a lot of people that can not go that fast is coming from. We need to prevent the speed limits people from gaining an inch. I can see we are up to a lot of discrimination against boaters when they go the mile.
Islander, you can't tell me what 'discrimination' is. I've been profound hard-of-hearing since birth. Believe me! I know what discrimination is!
'Don't tread on me!'

jeffk

08-30-2007, 03:54 PM

The following link is to the Lake George Park commission 2006 Annual report.
http://www.lgpc.state.ny.us/pdf/2006%20LGPC%20Marine%20Patrol%20Report.pdf

The report states at least a couple of speed related items.
There was a poker run in October 2006 and 6 boats were running side by side in excess of 70 MPH, the fastest at 83 MPH. These people were ticketed (5 tickets). There is no further breakdown for non PWC speeding tickets (nor were any mention in last years report).

PWC tickets are broken down into categories. For 2005 and 2006 NO PWC speeding tickets were issued for speeds in excess of 45 MPH. All PWC speed tickets were for no wake speed violations. The previous report also showed no PWC fast speeding tickets issued for 2004 either. No PWC has been been ticketed for over 45 MPH for the past 3 years.

In other statements I have seen online, patrol personnel have stated that they focus on noise more than speed and that speed enforcement is NOT a primary focus.

From a previous forum post:
WeirsBeachBoater01-07-2006, 05:32 PM
From: Lt. Joseph Schneider
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: Info request
The speed limit on LG is only one regulation of a comprehensive set of regulations passed in 1988 on Lake George when the NYS Legislature recognized the need for additional protection of the unique resource that is Lake George. LGPC regulations were promulgated regarding public safety, resource protection, docks and moorings, and special navigation issues such as overcrowding, vessel noise, PWC operation, and more; as such it is impossible to say what the effect of just the speed limit has been.
Lt. J.H. Schneider
Director of Law Enforcement
Lake George Park Commission
PO Box 749
Lake George, NY 12834

So the head of the patrol stated that he thinks speed limits have helped. What is he supposed to say "Well. we ticket people in no wake zones but in the middle of the lake it's a free-for-all and we don't pay much attention there"? If speeding was a focus they would publish the non PWC speeding ticket statistics. They probably don't for a good reason and their public statements played down speed enforcement until 6 BOZOS were so blatant that they couldn't possibly be ignored. They would have probably been ticketed on Winnipesaukee for reckless behavior.

People wanted to feel better about the safety of Lake George. The head of the Marine Patrol is telling them they are safer. This is a public official saying he is doing a good job by telling the people what they want to hear. The observable facts and anecdotal evidence of boaters on Lake George tell a very different story of lax enforcement of the 45 MPH limit. If Lake George is safer, it isn't because of speed limit enforcement.

Bear Islander

08-30-2007, 04:14 PM

4Fun

08-30-2007, 04:16 PM

It's not surprising that the MP can't find a speed problem in the test areas.

If you visit the offshore boating site you will find members, some that post in this forum, planning to either avoid the test sites or stay under the proposed limits when they are in the test sites.

If the truth doesn't work...... screw up the data.

If the MP wated to collect some valid data they could try unmarked boats in undisclosed areas. Publicizing the test area is... ..... .... ...... sorry I was laughing to hard to type.

ITD - Can you tell me the make and model of those PWC's that have a top speed under 45 mph?

1993 SeaDoo GTS. top speed a whopping 37MPH. For sale by the way for $1500.....

1996,97,97 SeaDoo GTI top speed about 45MPH....

1997 SeaDoo GS 45MPH tops....

overlook

08-30-2007, 04:35 PM

Dave R - You make some good points. But what makes me believe in speed limits is reports from other lakes that have enacted them.

You bring up Lake George. Lt Sneider runs the Marine Patrol there and thinks speed limits have helped their lake. Here is a link to a citizen article on Lake George.

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060107/CITIZEN0101/101070073/-1/CITIZEN

I know Winnipesaukee is not Lake George, but if it can help there, it can help here. At least that is the way I see it.

Lake George does not have a safe passage law now and not before there speed limit. Of course it changes the opinion of Sneider. But remember two boats can have a closure rate of 90 mph within a few feet today. Right now in NH the closure rate is 12mph.

Do you really feel safer on Lake George?

codeman671

08-30-2007, 04:49 PM

Lake George does not have a safe passage law now and not before there speed limit. Of course it changes the opinion of Sneider. But remember two boats can have a closure rate of 90 mph within a few feet today. Right now in NH the closure rate is 12mph.

Do you really feel safer on Lake George?

I have to agree here on the lack of safe passage. I feel safer having a boat doing 80mph that is by law to be 150+ feet away than having a 40mph boat passing me down the side at 30-40 feet away. The 80mph boat has less response time to react in an adverse situation than a 40mph boat, but if the 40mph boat is that much closer than the 150' limit in place here the reaction time is cut as well. Taking into account closing speeds of two boats each doing 40mph and headed towards each other the result could still be catastrophic.

jeffk

08-30-2007, 05:04 PM

pm203 and jeffk

If there are reports that the speed limit on Lake George is not working I would like to read them. I try and keep an open mind, but the only things I know about the Lake George speed limit are positive. If there is another side to the story then it should be told.

But neither of you have provided anything solid. "A friend told me" is not good enough in my book. Are there articles, web sites, letters to the editor etc..

I provide a link to the Marine Patrols report. This is hardly hearsay information. Further I provide a copy of an email provided to a forum member, also hard data. I could have provided a link to the comments of the marine patrol I found online but I figured my vouching for it was enough. I should have known better. The last third of my post is my summation and interpretation of the facts. Feel free to disagree with me. But don't try to dismiss hard information simply because it disagrees with your point of view.

Bear Islander

08-30-2007, 06:07 PM

The statement that the Marine Patrol focus more on noise than speed does not mean that speed limits are not working. It may mean that speed is not a problem therefore does not require enforcement.

I don't find anything in the Report that indicated to me that speed limits are not working. What specifically indicates a problem with speed limits.

Lt Schneider admits he can not tell how much of their success is due to speed limits alone. That is a long long way from saying speed limits are not working.

Cal

08-30-2007, 07:10 PM

Shall I also stay away from ForumFest?

Asking someone to leave the forum is inappropriate. Even if you put a smiley face at the end.

But it's ok for you to try to get rid of performance boats:rolleye1:

Gavia immer

08-30-2007, 09:52 PM

He was definitely showboating for the camera a bit and caught a wave the wrong way. His boat looked to be trimmed up quite high to maximize "air" and he landed into a wave that tossed him. It is quite easy for people to bounce around or fall in the cockpit and get hurt, that wave almost stopped them dead. Compare it to rear ending another car when you are moving along, the force involved certainly does not leave you sitting in your seat. Their injuries could have been just as bad at slower speeds.
"Showboating", using your described method, is breaking another of NH's boating rules. "Maximizing Air" is illegal on Lake Winnipesaukee. Also, it is impossible to "Showboat" at reasonable speeds. The broken back and pelvis couldn't have happened at reasonable speeds either.

The wave did cause him to be stopped "almost dead". But the video shows that he continued to swerve directly into the path of two similar boats approaching at a high rate of speed. They both swerved to avoid colliding with him, but also came close to colliding with each other, as the video shows. If he had stopped "dead", instead of "almost dead", the passenger's injuries could have been compounded by collisions with the other two boats. The injuries were severe enough without involving other speedboats in a juvenile quest for "Maximum Air".

chipj29

08-31-2007, 06:55 AM

"Maximizing air" is illegal? And only on Winni?
Interesting...I never knew that.

Dave R

08-31-2007, 07:40 AM

I don't find anything in the Report that indicated to me that speed limits are not working. What specifically indicates a problem with speed limits.

It's not in the report, per se, but since the real goal of speed limits is to rid a lake of high speed boats, it's obviously failed when folks hold poker runs there. What convinced you that Winnipesaukee will be different?

4Fun

08-31-2007, 08:51 AM

It's not in the report, per se, but since the real goal of speed limits is to rid a lake of high speed boats, it's obviously failed when folks hold poker runs there. What convinced you that Winnipesaukee will be different?

Islander, Why don't you push on areas that really need to be addressed. You would get a lot more cooperation and your agenda could be met without stepping on anyone else. Here are a few suggestions.

Try coming up with a plan to quiet down the boats that are way above the legal limit? You already have a law to work with. I see and hear lots of boats that have to be over the NH law. Just enforce the law!!! This one should be easy.

Try taking you energy and put it in to education. Focus the efforts of Winnfabs to educate the 50 bass boaters before they all take off from lee's mill at 60mph ALL AT ONCE!!

Try to lobby for better enforcement of the 150 rule. Not just more marine patrol but actually having them look for unsafe boating activity instead of sitting in the usual spots..

Separate the night speed issue from the day speed issue. Don't tell me I need a day speed limit because of an accident at night. They are two different issues.

If you really want safety then the above suggestions will help you get there.

Acres per Second

08-31-2007, 09:01 AM

It's not in the report, per se, but since the real goal of speed limits is to rid a lake of high speed boats, it's obviously failed when folks hold poker runs there. What convinced you that Winnipesaukee will be different?
That's because Poker Runs are not speed events. The publisher of "Poker Runs America" says so himself:

"...One of the reasons behind this craving for power is that more and more poker runners are itching to race. And, while I must make it clear that poker runs are NOT A RACE, I can't say that I blame performance boaters for wanting to get out on a course and show their stuff. Boat builders, too, have recognized this growing trend.

"While many poker runs invite every conceivable type of boat owner, the emphasis on performance boats is pretty evident, judging from the sleek, fast-forward designs owned by power-hungry participants, some equipped with three - even four - motors..."
http://www.pokerrunsamerica.com/publisher/pub-32.html

codeman671

08-31-2007, 09:33 AM

"Showboating", using your described method, is breaking another of NH's boating rules. "Maximizing Air" is illegal on Lake Winnipesaukee. Also, it is impossible to "Showboat" at reasonable speeds. The broken back and pelvis couldn't have happened at reasonable speeds either.

The wave did cause him to be stopped "almost dead". But the video shows that he continued to swerve directly into the path of two similar boats approaching at a high rate of speed. They both swerved to avoid colliding with him, but also came close to colliding with each other, as the video shows. If he had stopped "dead", instead of "almost dead", the passenger's injuries could have been compounded by collisions with the other two boats. The injuries were severe enough without involving other speedboats in a juvenile quest for "Maximum Air".

Funny, I don't recall seeing a law about jumping waves... Can you point that one out? You can launch a boat off a wave and not be doing it in a reckless manner. heck, I have had a 22' bowrider completely out of the water as I am sure many have on Winni being caught by a large wave on a bad day in the broads. If this has not happend to you then you do not boat enough...

They were showing off for the camera and got caught by the wrong wave. Yep, he was pushing the envelope and paid the price as did his pasengers.

After rewatching the video twice I see nothing that show other boats swerving to avoid a collision. As the boat wiped out the do not show any other boats in the video so how can you claim that they almost hit other boats? I think you are completely embellishing this.

jrc

08-31-2007, 10:46 AM

How many of these rules did the boat in the video break? Of course these rules only apply in NH.

Saf-C 404.12 Operational Rules for Crossing Boat Wakes and Conduct Near Other Vessels.
(a) No boat operator shall allow his or her boat to cross the wake of another boat, or cross its own wake, in a way that causes the vessel to become airborne. For the purposes of this section, "airborne" means that the boat's hull completely leaves the water.
(b) An operator shall slow to headway speed when crossing the wake of another vessel when within 150 feet of another vessel.
(c) No boat operator shall operate his/her vessel in a manner that is unsafe, including the following types of conduct:
(1) Challenging other boaters by heading directly at a vessel and then swerving at the last minute to avoid collision;
(2) Weaving through congested boat traffic at greater than headway speed;
(3) Operating while his/her vision is obstructed; and
(4) Other types of operation that are intended to create erratic operational patterns so that other boaters cannot determine the course or heading of the vessel.

Bear Islander

08-31-2007, 11:35 AM

It's not in the report, per se, but since the real goal of speed limits is to rid a lake of high speed boats, it's obviously failed when folks hold poker runs there. What convinced you that Winnipesaukee will be different?

My goal is to try and change the direction the lake is going in. I would like the lake to be for the peaceful enjoyment of all. Not the enjoyment of a few at the expense of many. I think the are limits to size and speed that need to be set. I would like this to be done in a way that does not punish the boats that are already here.

If I had the power to set a "limit" it would preclude boats over 300 hp that where manufactured after 2008. But nobody is asking me.

On another site one of the boaters in that poker run said he had to go to court and pay a $250 fine. I hope that is exactly how a speed limit will work on Winnipesaukee.

codeman671

08-31-2007, 11:47 AM

WeirsBeachBoater

08-31-2007, 12:31 PM

"I think the are limits to size and speed that need to be set."

Finally someone admits to Winnfabs true agenda. So its not about speed, its now about size and speed!!!!!

"I would like this to be done in a way that does not punish the boats that are already here."

So why are you pushing to get speed limits?

"If I had the power to set a "limit" it would preclude boats over 300 hp that where manufactured after 2008. But nobody is asking me."

300 hp???? You have got to be kidding me. That is most boats over 20ft nowadays.

So if I want to stay on "your" lake I should invest in a canoe?

So much for my enjoyment, because of the few of you that don't agree with my style of boat. Isn't that exactly what you are preaching? That a few powerboats ruin your enjoyment. Now you are trying to say its ok, for the few of you to ruin the powerboaters enjoyment, as long as it is in your favor????

jrc

08-31-2007, 12:36 PM

At the time of the accident he was not crossing another wake, it was a wave that made him go airborne. When he did cross a boat wake he never left the water. He did cross the wake of a boat at less than 150', I am not sure what the FL ruling is on safe passage.

You are right, there doesn't seem to be a specific rule to address jumping waves, just jumping wakes. I did not catch the difference.

I didn't watch the video closely enough to notice that the accident was cause by a natural ocean wave versus a boat wake. I guess it is safer to run those boats on a lake.

Bear Islander

08-31-2007, 12:42 PM

WeirsBeachBoater

08-31-2007, 12:54 PM

It is a 25ft bowrider. Might do 55 on a good day.

Municipal Drinking water supply, is that the new angle that is going to be used next?

Sorry to assume you were a member of Winnfabs, guilty by association I guess.

Bear Islander

08-31-2007, 01:17 PM

Municipal Drinking water supply, is that the new angle that is going to be used next?

It's already being used. And it's a pretty good argument.

And it's the kind of argument non-boaters and politicians can understand and hang their hat on.

Cal

08-31-2007, 02:35 PM

And exactly what does horse power have to do with it:confused: I'm sure my two inboard/outboards are cleaner than 12 ,100 hp two stroke outboards:eek:
What are you going to try next , color , shape , 1 , 2 or 3 engines , date of manufacture , location of manufacture , number of passengers it can hold , gross weight , with or without a windshield.
I'll swear , I've never heard so much noise from so few people in all my life:laugh: :laugh:

Resident 2B

08-31-2007, 02:42 PM

Bear Islander

08-31-2007, 02:57 PM

Bear Islander,

Now that the exclusionary agenda you support is starting to come out, whether or not you are part of Winnfabs, let me elaborate on what you are saying.

No more boats with 300HP or more on the lake means no more Mount Washington, a legend that has been on the lake longer than most of us have been alive. Take the Doris E and the Sophie C off the lake as well and end the mail service to the folks on the islands.

You make a ton of sense:confused:

R2B

Hi Cal, At the Marine Patrol site there is a long list of NH lakes that already have horsepower limits. This is nothing new. HP and year of manufacture are listed on the registration of every boat.

Hi Resident2B, The Mount, Sophie C. and Doris E. all have dates of manufacture before 2008.

Please don't get so worked up, this is just one guys idea.

Cal

08-31-2007, 04:45 PM

Hi Cal, At the Marine Patrol site there is a long list of NH lakes that already have horsepower limits. This is nothing new. HP and year of manufacture are listed on the registration of every boat.

Without even looking , I'll bet they're all smaller than Winni and probably considerably smaller.
The statement was made about hp limits on drinking water lakes and again I'll say I'll bet my two I/Os are cleaner than 12 , 100 hp two stroke outboards , or 24 , 50 hp's

Skip

08-31-2007, 05:38 PM

Without even looking , I'll bet they're all smaller than Winni and probably considerably smaller.
The statement was made about hp limits on drinking water lakes and again I'll say I'll bet my two I/Os are cleaner than 12 , 100 hp two stroke outboards , or 24 , 50 hp's

If you go to this LINK (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-XXII-270.htm) and review RSA 270:76 through 270:131 you can find the names of the lakes, or in most cases the ponds, that Bear Islander referes to.

Bear Islander

08-31-2007, 05:39 PM

Without even looking , I'll bet they're all smaller than Winni and probably considerably smaller.
The statement was made about hp limits on drinking water lakes and again I'll say I'll bet my two I/Os are cleaner than 12 , 100 hp two stroke outboards , or 24 , 50 hp's

Since Winnipesaukee is the largest lake east of the Mississippi contained in one state.... or whatever the claim is, that is a safe bet. That doesn't mean a hp limit will not work on a large lake.

Two stoke engines have been all but eliminated by federal engine regulations. That is why you see all the four stroke outboards now.

Cal

08-31-2007, 06:06 PM

Two stoke engines have been all but eliminated by federal engine regulations. That is why you see all the four stroke outboards now.

Better tell Mercury , Evinrude and Johnson. They're still selling plenty and I have no plans to stop that I've heard of:)

Bear Islander

08-31-2007, 07:18 PM

I think you know what I mean. The old polluting two strokes are gone. The new two strokes have to be heavily engineered to meet tough EPA regulations.

Gavia immer

08-31-2007, 07:30 PM

Funny, I don't recall seeing a law about jumping waves... Can you point that one out? You can launch a boat off a wave and not be doing it in a reckless manner. heck, I have had a 22' bowrider completely out of the water as I am sure many have on Winni being caught by a large wave on a bad day in the broads. If this has not happend to you then you do not boat enough...

They were showing off for the camera and got caught by the wrong wave. Yep, he was pushing the envelope and paid the price as did his pasengers.

How closely did you look? I don't see any "wrong wave" or "wrong wake" that caused the crash impact. And his passengers "paid the price" with more than a fractured pelvis suffered by the female passenger. Her bikini top got ripped off in the impact, and soared 40 feet over the crash vessel. You missed that during your careful analysis of the crash video, maybe.

Thanks, jrc for New Hampshire's wake-jumper RSAs.

codeman671

09-01-2007, 08:33 AM

How closely did you look? I don't see any "wrong wave" or "wrong wake" that caused the crash impact. And his passengers "paid the price" with more than a fractured pelvis suffered by the female passenger. Her bikini top got ripped off in the impact, and soared 40 feet over the crash vessel. You missed that during your careful analysis of the crash video, maybe.

Thanks, jrc for New Hampshire's wake-jumper RSAs.

I do not think that her bikini top got ripped off, where the heck did you get that? Part of the windshield did break loose as did a towel fly. I have read comments from people at the scene on another site, by a friend of occupants of the vessel involved. They were the other boat pictured side by side before the lead boat moved ahead for the camera shoot. It was a wave that they caught at a bad angle when they landed. Maybe you should watch it again...

Please tell me what the impact was with then if there was no wave or wake involved???

Cal

09-01-2007, 10:24 AM

I think you know what I mean. The old polluting two strokes are gone. The new two strokes have to be heavily engineered to meet tough EPA regulations.

Sorry , I simply read what you said...didn't fill in any blanks. But until they are outlawed there will still be the older ones around for years. And yes , I know some places have already banned them out west.

Rattlesnake Guy

09-01-2007, 04:02 PM

Since Winnipesaukee is the largest lake east of the Mississippi contained in one state.... or whatever the claim is, that is a safe bet. That doesn't mean a hp limit will not work on a large lake.

Good point. It's a big lake.

When people live in a big city and don't care for the big buildings and the noise they try to find a place to live where they can be happy. I think that our lake has something for everyone and am always overwhelmed with how most of us try to share it together.

Perhaps if someone longs for peace and quite and small boats they should find that type of lake or pond so they can be happy with the restrictive environment they long for. We don't kayak at the Weirs but have no problem finding an appropriate spot to enjoy quite time with the lake.

I don't think it is up to the government to legislate your idea of what you would like the rest of us to do to make the lake the way you would like it.

If I ever feel that the lake is too busy or the waves are too big when the wind blows, I would consider it my responsibility to find a place I could be more happy. Hey but that's just me.

LIforrelaxin

09-01-2007, 04:36 PM

I have been reading this thread off and on wondering where things are going to go. And one thing strikes me everyone has picked a side and no one seems willing to compromise. certainly there are many issues speed, size, and noise levels that always come up. And sure the lake is here for eveyone to enjoy, but it is also our reposibility to preserve it tranquility. Myself I live on the Northern side of the lake where it is quiter most of the time, because I have no interest in being buy the hustle and bussle of Laconia and the wiers etc. that is a choice I made. I also made a choice to own a small boat because on the bad days I have no need to go out. In short people need to have some freedom to enjoy what the like.

Now when it come to speed... yes there are all kinds of arguments but when it come down to it we regulate speeds on the roads, why not in certain area of the lake... a comprimise that will still leave areas of the lake open for speed demons, but will insure that area where traffic tends to be heavier have some addition control.

when you look at noise.... the best thing when used properly ever invented where switchable exhaust... unfortunately NH saw fit to outlaw them......

As for size.... well I am one that admits enough is enough...... you can put specialties clause in for the Mount etc. but at some point the size of the yachts needs to be controled.....it seems that every year some get a bigger model, and the Marinas find a way to accomidate them..... when I watch my boat and dock get yanked around buy the incosiderate... few I know.... cruiser owner with displacemnt hulls that through out huge wakes it does get irritating.....how to comprimise here well this is tough....but I would say any boats currently on the lake are fine..... and start restricting what comes onto the lake........not that enforcing this would be easy.... there would be alot of responsibilty on the marina's I feel.....

Anyways enough of my rambles.... remember these are My views.... just as I appriciate everyone else... take mine for what they are MINE.....

Bear Islander

09-01-2007, 05:04 PM

Good point. It's a big lake.

When people live in a big city and don't care for the big buildings and the noise they try to find a place to live where they can be happy. I think that our lake has something for everyone and am always overwhelmed with how most of us try to share it together.

Perhaps if someone longs for peace and quite and small boats they should find that type of lake or pond so they can be happy with the restrictive environment they long for. We don't kayak at the Weirs but have no problem finding an appropriate spot to enjoy quite time with the lake.

I don't think it is up to the government to legislate your idea of what you would like the rest of us to do to make the lake the way you would like it.

If I ever feel that the lake is too busy or the waves are too big when the wind blows, I would consider it my responsibility to find a place I could be more happy. Hey but that's just me.

I see the situation differently. I think if you want to buy a 1500 hp boat that is your business. But you need to use it in the ocean or some other body of water that is large enough for you to use it without endangering and disturbing others. Somewhere that is not a drinking water supply.

It IS the job of the government to protect our natural recourses and provide safety standards.

It actually amazes me that people can think speed limits on our highways are logical, necessary and in the public interest. However speed limits on our waterways are outrageous, illogical, unnecessary, dangerous or a violation of our rights.

tis

09-01-2007, 06:12 PM

As usual, I totally agree with you RGuy.

BI. You said if someone wants a 1500 hp boat they shouldn't use it on this lake but on the ocean or some other big body of water. Didn't you just say that Winni is the largest in one state east of the Mississippi? So?
Did you ever stop to think that sometimes YOU in your kayak are an annoyance to someone in a big boat who has to watch out for you? It works both ways, you know.

Cal

09-01-2007, 07:44 PM

I see the situation differently. I think if you want to buy a 1500 hp boat that is your business. But you need to use it in the ocean or some other body of water that is large enough for you to use it without endangering and disturbing others. Somewhere that is not a drinking water supply.

It IS the job of the government to protect our natural recourses and provide safety standards.

It actually amazes me that people can think speed limits on our highways are logical, necessary and in the public interest. However speed limits on our waterways are outrageous, illogical, unnecessary, dangerous or a violation of our rights.

I still haven't got the connection between HP and drinking water. I know I don't drain my oil into the lake , nor do I bubble carbon monoxide though the water with my exhaust , so what's the big whoop:confused:
As far as speed limits on the highway , THERE'S NOT 150' RULE THERE. Cars have a 10 to 12 foot lane and can pass at a closing speed of 110 mph on a two lane 55 mph highway. I have yet to see a deer jump out in front of a boat.
Finally , if i didn't like my neighborhood , I'd move. You said yourself it's the biggest lake east of the Mississippi.

LIforrelaxin has the right attitude. Anything else will just give you ulcers and a lot of other people a P.I.A.;)

Dave R

09-01-2007, 07:47 PM

It actually amazes me that people can think speed limits on our highways are logical, necessary and in the public interest. However speed limits on our waterways are outrageous, illogical, unnecessary, dangerous or a violation of our rights.

Having driven quite a bit, all over the world, I can honestly say I vastly prefer places without speed limits or with really high speed limits. Not only can one make better time, the drivers in these places tend to be vastly superior to a typical driver here. I'd vote to eliminate or raise speed limts and increase the requirements for getting a license in NH.

GWC...

09-01-2007, 09:18 PM

Just curious...

Did speed cause this or something else?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/N/NH_BOATERS_RESCUED_NHOL-?SITE=NHMAL&SECTION=STATE&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Airwaves

09-02-2007, 12:45 AM

LIforrelaxin wrote:
Now when it come to speed... yes there are all kinds of arguments but when it come down to it we regulate speeds on the roads, why not in certain area of the lake... a comprimise that will still leave areas of the lake open for speed demons, but will insure that area where traffic tends to be heavier have some addition control.

Island/relaxin I understand what you are saying. The thing is, from what the Marine Patrol and anecdotal evidence suggests, excessive speed, even on the broads, is something that, if it happens, it is rare. So the folks advocating a speed limit are doing so with another goal in mind.

when you look at noise.... the best thing when used properly ever invented where switchable exhaust... unfortunately NH saw fit to outlaw them......
I 1-Thousand precent agree! Noise limits are needed. I don't have a boat that makes excessive noise, but I know that I was refueling once, just once, and I was having problems keeping the engine running (bad fuel), and while I was trying to hear the engine a loud boat fired up a dozen yards away and I couldn't hear my own engine. Yes, noise can be a problem.

As for size.... well I am one that admits enough is enough...... you can put specialties clause in for the Mount etc. but at some point the size of the yachts needs to be controled....

I disagree here, who are you, or who am I to say someone can't purchase a substantial yacht and bring her onto the lake? You exempt the Mount because she's been on the lake for decades? Hell, my great grandfather lost his boat in the fire that destroyed the first Mount, the paddle wheeled steamer. (we still have my Great Grandfather's boat's flag and mount saved from the fire) So what if I wanted to become a competitor? My family certainly has just as much right and history! If someone has the money to bring in another substantially sized boat and can work a deal to moor her, who am I to say no? Who are you to say no? What makes the Mount untouchable in that case?

You make a good point that large personal cruisers can be a serious issue in the wrong hands. I was coming out of Paugus Bay with a friend who lives near Gov's Island. We were in a 23' bowrider. A large Carver passed us well beyond 150 feet and he was booking it, but the bow wave on that cruiser was going up above the bow onto the cabin deck! I have done some ocean boating in my life and I have never seen anything like that! The couple was on the flybridge and they were getting the spray from the bow wave!

I've never seen anything like it! I figure a combination of a poorly designed boat and ignorant skippers! Watching them convinced all of us to never buy a Carver and the wake he kicked up was amazing! You could have surfed on it!

Cruisers in the wrong hands are a problem, but that is a problem that will be addressed only through both, education of the bonehead skippers of the Cruiser/Bowrider/PWC/GoFast boat that are screwing up, and of them also being chastised by folks at his marina, yacht club, etc. Only then will they learn but probably very slowly. There are too many of these boats on the lake and each of them represents big money so they are not going away.

Certainly, it is easier for the legislature and advocates of a speed limit to pass a speed limit law but it won't solve a thing because, as has been shown through statistics, there isn't a speed problem on Lake Winnipesaukee there are other issues that are already regulated but not enforced consistantly.

When I first suggested a long time ago that the MP and SP be merged for better coverage on land and on the water and efficent control over financial resources I was told to mind my own business and to keep my mouth shut because I was critical of the NH way! Someone even asked I really believed the SP would give up their weapons to take to the water! I didn't bother to answer back then because the question was foolish, it still is.

Of course just because I pay taxes in three (3) NH communities and I still can't vote or have any say in town or state policy, what right do I have? Why shoud I have any say in how the money is spent or what laws are passed? By the way, how many towns in NH do folk on this forum pay property taxes in? Just curious.

:coolsm:
AW

Acres per Second

09-02-2007, 04:45 AM

This accident occurred on the ocean this past weekend/

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/article/8695

Direct link to video.

http://www.brightcove.com/title.jsp?title=1155180898

These guys are running the same way on the inland lakes.

The reply:

So are you implying this is happening on Lake Winni?? I've yet to see it in the 7 summers I've been here. :rolleye2:

Now that you've asked twice (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=55571&postcount=217), here's just one reminder of those inland waters of Wolfeboro—2 summers ago:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i117/chipmunkwhisperer/WONandWOFFL/CopplecrownMountainWolfeboro.jpg

Islander

09-02-2007, 10:43 AM

I still haven't got the connection between HP and drinking water. I know I don't drain my oil into the lake , nor do I bubble carbon monoxide though the water with my exhaust , so what's the big whoop:confused:
As far as speed limits on the highway , THERE'S NOT 150' RULE THERE. Cars have a 10 to 12 foot lane and can pass at a closing speed of 110 mph on a two lane 55 mph highway. I have yet to see a deer jump out in front of a boat.
Finally , if i didn't like my neighborhood , I'd move. You said yourself it's the biggest lake east of the Mississippi.

LIforrelaxin has the right attitude. Anything else will just give you ulcers and a lot of other people a P.I.A.;)

I prefer to stay in my neighborhood and see to it that standards of safety, environment and water purity are maintained. It's the people that are introducing faster, larger, noisier, polluting boats that must be kept from moving into this neighborhood.

Five states have banned recreational power boating on all drinking water sources. Many more have horsepower limits on their drinking water sources. Mass has a 10 hp limit on reservoirs. Even with MTBE free gas being sold on the lake it can be introduced by trailer boaters. MBTE attacks the central nervous system. And there are other pollutants in gas besides MTBE.

NH is one of the few states that allow unrestricted power boating on drinking water sources.

WeirsBeachBoater

09-02-2007, 11:18 AM

"NH is one of the few states that allow unrestricted power boating on drinking water sources."

So now you are going to push to restrict all powerboats from the lake? Is that what you are saying?

I think I will become a birch bark canoe dealer, That way I can corner the market before your proposed restrictions take place! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Islander

09-02-2007, 11:43 AM

Please stop deliberately misunderstanding what I post. It's not fair and not funny.

If you have a point, make it. Trying to change my words to suit you purpose is silly.

Rattlesnake Guy

09-02-2007, 01:02 PM

I can't think of anything to say to hurt your cause more than you just did.
Thank You:)

WeirsBeachBoater

09-02-2007, 02:56 PM

Please stop deliberately misunderstanding what I post. It's not fair and not funny.

If you have a point, make it. Trying to change my words to suit you purpose is silly.

Why, that is what you do on here daily. Also I am not changing your words, I was kind enought to quote you directly. I would dare say most others would read your words to mean the same I did, so therefore no "deliberate misunderstanding".

KonaChick

09-02-2007, 04:44 PM

The reply:

Now that you've asked twice (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=55571&postcount=217), here's just one reminder of those inland waters of Wolfeboro—2 summers ago:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i117/chipmunkwhisperer/WONandWOFFL/CopplecrownMountainWolfeboro.jpg

Where are the boats he was racing? Was the end result an accident like in the video clip? Just showing a random picture of a boat in choppy water in Wolfboro catching air doesn't relate to that video at all. Sorry but all you're "reminding" me of is how choppy lake winni can be at times!! :laugh:

GWC...

09-02-2007, 05:31 PM

I prefer to stay in my neighborhood and see to it that standards of safety, environment and water purity are maintained. It's the people that are introducing faster, larger, noisier, polluting boats that must be kept from moving into this neighborhood.

Five states have banned recreational power boating on all drinking water sources. Many more have horsepower limits on their drinking water sources. Mass has a 10 hp limit on reservoirs. Even with MTBE free gas being sold on the lake it can be introduced by trailer boaters. MBTE attacks the central nervous system. And there are other pollutants in gas besides MTBE.

NH is one of the few states that allow unrestricted power boating on drinking water sources.
That explains a lot... :D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

and to think, we have the environmentalists to thank for its usage.

Thanks... :D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

and its replacement, ethanol, is increasing the food prices and raising havoc with combustion engine fuel systems.

Thanks, again... :D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Cal

09-02-2007, 06:50 PM

Five states have banned recreational power boating on all drinking water sources. Many more have horsepower limits on their drinking water sources. Mass has a 10 hp limit on reservoirs. Even with MTBE free gas being sold on the lake it can be introduced by trailer boaters. MBTE attacks the central nervous system. And there are other pollutants in gas besides MTBE.

I don't doubt that one bit. I also don't doubt that that are small enough 10hp could get you anywhere on the lake in a matter of minutes and a large high horse power boat could barely get to top speed before having to slow , stop or turn because they're running out of water , but don't mention that. I live in a town with a lake limited to electric trolling motors. It's all of about 5 acres.

I see exactly what you mean with the MTBE. May I suggest changing to bottled water for drinking. You know what fish do in the water:rolleye2:

LIforrelaxin

09-02-2007, 07:27 PM

LIforrelaxin wrote:

Island/relaxin I understand what you are saying. The thing is, from what the Marine Patrol and anecdotal evidence suggests, excessive speed, even on the broads, is something that, if it happens, it is rare. So the folks advocating a speed limit are doing so with another goal in mind.

I think you might have missed my point here... I think the Broads should be a wide open avenue for speed.... but more then once I have had speed deamons buzz around me in tight crowded quarters. So in my mind putting speed limits in Areas like Wolfeboro Bay and Center Harbor are a good idea... putting one in around a place like the Wiers wouldn't be bad either but defining the speed zone could be rough. As for other goals the blanklet speed limit people have.... we all know what they are trying to do...

I disagree here, who are you, or who am I to say someone can't purchase a substantial yacht and bring her onto the lake? You exempt the Mount because she's been on the lake for decades? Hell, my great grandfather lost his boat in the fire that destroyed the first Mount, the paddle wheeled steamer. (we still have my Great Grandfather's boat's flag and mount saved from the fire) So what if I wanted to become a competitor? My family certainly has just as much right and history! If someone has the money to bring in another substantially sized boat and can work a deal to moor her, who am I to say no? Who are you to say no? What makes the Mount untouchable in that case?

I should have been more clear here.... If someone wants to bring a boat to compete with the mount then yes they should have the oppertunity to do so. The mount should not be allowed a monopoly....The control needs to be on the recreational boats.......And I am sorry but my opinion is that Some of the boats on the lake have gotten to large.......but this is my opinion... and yes I know that there are many large boat owner that operate responsible.... it the ones that don't that have caused the problems.... and that is unfortunate.....

Gavia immer

09-02-2007, 08:00 PM

I do not think that her bikini top got ripped off, where the heck did you get that? Part of the windshield did break loose as did a towel fly. I have read comments from people at the scene on another site, by a friend of occupants of the vessel involved. They were the other boat pictured side by side before the lead boat moved ahead for the camera shoot. It was a wave that they caught at a bad angle when they landed. Maybe you should watch it again...

Please tell me what the impact was with then if there was no wave or wake involved???
It wasn't the wave when they landed, it was the water condtions when they launched. It isn't possible to see what altered the boat's attitude in the air, causing it to land sideways. It's most likely the captain's option of going too fast for conditions. Or as you put it, "Showboating". If the cause was easy to see, the driver wouldn't have had the choice or ability, to alter his course in the air, other than inevitably landing at those high speeds on the boat's side.

The captain of the boat had no control of his boat whatsoever while he was "getting air." His passengers and crew no longer had a voice in the driver's capabilities and skills. They were now at the mercy of brutal physics. These "performance boats" have heavily bolstered interiors and seats to protect the passengers against injury. But operating at high speed, zero control in the air, and uncertain waters below wrote the ending even before the helicoper started to record it. Winnipesaukee saw at least three similar high speed crashes in three successive summer seasons. None on Winnipesaukee were videotaped.

Would the other site admit to seeing an injured passenger, not just with a triple fracture of her pelvis, but being naked too? Look again at the video, especially at 1:03 and 1:18. The video ends at 1:23. Use the "pause" feature and don't make the common mistake of enlarging the screen for clarity, please.

There's no denying the windshield gets ripped away by the impacting force of the water. It's tinted, and was launched to fly very high above the boat. The same sudden thrust of water that tore off the windshield ripped the bikini top upwards close to the glass fragment in the air. Or what her friends call a towel. If it's a towel, it's a towel that stays in the shape of a bikini top.

http://www.brightcove.com/title.jsp?title=1155180898

Islander

09-02-2007, 10:01 PM

I don't doubt that one bit. I also don't doubt that that are small enough 10hp could get you anywhere on the lake in a matter of minutes and a large high horse power boat could barely get to top speed before having to slow , stop or turn because they're running out of water , but don't mention that. I live in a town with a lake limited to electric trolling motors. It's all of about 5 acres.

I see exactly what you mean with the MTBE. May I suggest changing to bottled water for drinking. You know what fish do in the water:rolleye2:

You are wrong again. Quabbin Reservoir is a comparable size and shape with Winnipesaukee. 39 square miles to 69 square miles. It has a 10 hp limit.

GWC...

09-02-2007, 10:18 PM

You are wrong again. Quabbin Reservoir is a comparable size and shape with Winnipesaukee. 39 square miles to 69 square miles. It has a 10 hp limit.
Yes, if you enjoy comparing apples to oranges.

Things to know before you go
The primary purpose of DCR water and surrounding lands is drinking water supply. Public access, therefore, is carefully regulated and controlled to protect over 2 million people’s source of drinking water. State regulations require all entry and exit through gates or other designated areas only. Anything that could pollute the water supply system, such as litter or refuse of any sort, is prohibited. Please observe restrictions on recreational activities. Direct water contact activities, such as swimming and wading, are strictly prohibited by regulation.
URL link:http://www.mass.gov/dcr/parks/central/quabbin.htm

Yes, that definitely reads as if it were written with the Lake in mind... :D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

chmeeee

09-03-2007, 12:15 AM

You are wrong again. Quabbin Reservoir is a comparable size and shape with Winnipesaukee. 39 square miles to 69 square miles. It has a 10 hp limit.

Quabbin also has a protected watershed with almost all development prohibited. If that had been put into place on Winni, you wouldn't live on Bear Island, Laconia would not be a tourist town, and none of us would be on here in the first place.

Acres per Second

09-03-2007, 02:25 AM

"...If that had been put into place on Winni, you wouldn't live on Bear Island, Laconia would not be a tourist town, and none of us would be on here in the first place...."
Oh, I think it'd be plenty crowded.

The lake is too good a tourist-draw to have remained uncrowded: it's future likely to have been in State or Federal control.

The state would have put up lodges and provided buses for tours. All the surrounding towns would profit via their restaurants, touristy cabin-motels, video rentals, RV campsites and small-boat rentals. Summer camps for kids would be given special exemptions for zoning and taxes. Existing lakeside and hillside residences from the time the park was established would be allowed to remain throughout the lives of the original owners, then bulldozed after a eminent domain purchase. (As is done now in many locales).

Mt. Washington boat tours would be booked for months in advance and private tourist boats—operated by retirees—would take those turned away.

The entire Lake Winnipesaukee Basin would have become a State or National Park. Forests would go to "Old Growth" and the surrounding hillsides restricted to woods with only selective cutting. There would have been official and private camping sites scattered about—with clearings for nature trails, overlooks, and educational exhibits. Even snowmobile access could have been limited—as in Yellowstone Park National Park recently.

To retain the quietude of Thoreau's time, to protect the shorelines, to keep the air pristine, to ensure tourists' safety, to protect loons, to continuously-project its alpine and native-American ambiance, "On Golden Pond National Park" would prohibit the launching of "extreme boats" onto its waters.

Islander

09-03-2007, 08:31 AM

The only difference between Quabbin and Winni is the degree of protection they receive. Quabbin is well protect against the pollution of boats. Winni is poorly protected against boat pollution. That does not mean they are inherently different, it means Winni needs more protection from out of control boating, and she is going to get it.

The number of people served by the water supply doesn't make any difference. Is it OK to pollute the water because the number of people that drink it is relatively small. Obviously not!

I can still get to the island with a 10 hp. For a few islanders that is the only boat they have.

Hopefully swimming etc will never have to be banned on Winni. But tighter regulations on lake use are happening all the time. Check out the new shore land protection act. Get used to it!

However I don't understand your argument. Are you saying that because making Winni exactly like Quabbin would be odious, then we can't make Winni even a little like Quabbin? That argument does not follow.

Your argument was that boating did nothing to pollute drinking water. That turned out to be false. Your argument had been that only tiny reservoirs had speed limits. That turned out to be false. You argument is boating need not be regulated on Winni. That is also false.

Cal

09-03-2007, 10:28 AM

Your argument was that boating did nothing to pollute drinking water. That turned out to be false. Your argument had been that only tiny reservoirs had speed limits. That turned out to be false. You argument is boating need not be regulated on Winni. That is also false.

And this is all true in "your" way of thinking and half truths:emb:
First off Winnis 72 square miles the last time I checked , not 69 sq. mi. as you posted. Given your other half truths I would doubt the 39 sq mi is correct too. Probably more like 36 which is half the size.
Now excuse me for a couple of hours while I go stir up some water and make some noise.

Islander

09-03-2007, 04:56 PM

And this is all true in "your" way of thipedia says.nking and half truths:emb:
First off Winnis 72 square miles the last time I checked , not 69 sq. mi. as you posted. Given your other half truths I wouldi doubt the 39 sq mi is correct too. Probably more like 36 which is half the size.
Now excuse me for a couple of hours while I go skitir up some water and make some noise.

It's great that with all the points I made you only find fault with the size of the lake.

Winni is 69 square miles, if you want to include Paugus it is 71, at least that is what Wikipedia says.

Cal

09-03-2007, 05:27 PM

It's great that with all the points I made you only find fault with the size of the lake.

Winni is 69 square miles, if you want to include Paugus it is 71, at least that is what Wikipedia says.

Trust me , I could and a lot of others continually find a LOT of faults and half truths. I try to keep it nice and keep most of my thoughts to myself as do many others.
BTW , check the Winnipesaukee.com home page. 72 square miles;)

ITD

09-03-2007, 06:04 PM

Disclaimer: Unless otherwise specified all words, term and phrases in the above document are used in their generic or every day meaning.
Example: "lives" does not necessarily imply permanent legal residence registered with the Secretary of State, but may simply imply a home where a person or persons takes up residence for an indefinite period.

Every post of yours that I read now has this disclaimer, but I can't for the life of me figure out what it means. The disclaimer is straight forward enough. It's the example that blows me away. I live ( ITD "lives" if someone else were describing it) in a small town in Massachusetts. I would never tell anyone that I live on Lake Winnipesaukee because I know that that would be misleading. I would say something to the effect of " I stay at the lake during the summer." Which I actually do say regularly to my neighbors or anyone who needs to know. Furthermore, you say "...takes up residence for an indefinite period." . Couldn't indefinite mean an unlimited period? I think it may have been better to use finite instead of infinite. Anyway I know you don't like people parsing your words, but I don't consider your use of "lives" as the "generic or everyday meaning".:)

codeman671

09-03-2007, 06:33 PM

It wasn't the wave when they landed, it was the water condtions when they launched. It isn't possible to see what altered the boat's attitude in the air, causing it to land sideways. It's most likely the captain's option of going too fast for conditions. Or as you put it, "Showboating". If the cause was easy to see, the driver wouldn't have had the choice or ability, to alter his course in the air, other than inevitably landing at those high speeds on the boat's side.

The captain of the boat had no control of his boat whatsoever while he was "getting air." His passengers and crew no longer had a voice in the driver's capabilities and skills. They were now at the mercy of brutal physics. These "performance boats" have heavily bolstered interiors and seats to protect the passengers against injury. But operating at high speed, zero control in the air, and uncertain waters below wrote the ending even before the helicoper started to record it. Winnipesaukee saw at least three similar high speed crashes in three successive summer seasons. None on Winnipesaukee were videotaped.

Would the other site admit to seeing an injured passenger, not just with a triple fracture of her pelvis, but being naked too? Look again at the video, especially at 1:03 and 1:18. The video ends at 1:23. Use the "pause" feature and don't make the common mistake of enlarging the screen for clarity, please.

There's no denying the windshield gets ripped away by the impacting force of the water. It's tinted, and was launched to fly very high above the boat. The same sudden thrust of water that tore off the windshield ripped the bikini top upwards close to the glass fragment in the air. Or what her friends call a towel. If it's a towel, it's a towel that stays in the shape of a bikini top.

http://www.brightcove.com/title.jsp?title=1155180898

We can bicker back and forth all you want on this, but I think that the opinions of the people that were actually at the Poker Run as well as friends of the occupants account of the accident hold a lot more water than your opinions.

By the way, you are wrong about the windsheld as well. Sunsation has two windshield options on that boat, a solid painted fairing which is a molded part of the top deck and will not come off, or a completely clear windhshield that screws down like on any other boat. The boat had a clear windshield. Your monitor must be tinted... :laugh:

Islander

09-03-2007, 06:47 PM

Gavia immer

09-03-2007, 07:55 PM

Sunsation has two windshield options on that boat, a solid painted fairing which is a molded part of the top deck and will not come off, or a completely clear windhshield that screws down like on any other boat. The boat had a clear windshield. Your monitor must be tinted... :laugh:

There are aftermarket windshield tints even in New Hampshire, and these injuries were done by a hotdogging showboater in Florida. If you won't review the video, no one can lead you to see with your eyes what you have already accepted in faith.

http://www.brightcove.com/title.jsp?title=1155180898

Airwaves

09-03-2007, 08:35 PM

Island/Relaxin wrote:
but more then once I have had speed demons buzz around me in tight crowded quarters. So in my mind putting speed limits in Areas like Wolfeboro Bay and Center Harbor are a good idea... putting one in around a place like the Wiers wouldn't be bad either but defining the speed zone could be rough. As for other goals the blanket speed limit people have.... we all know what they are trying to do...
I believe that has more to do with a violation of the 150' no wake zone than speeding boats doesn't it? As you saying these boats were buzzing around you at greater than 45 miles an hour?

A speed limit zone around the Weirs? Again, I think you might be confusing the need for a speed limit with enforcement of the 150' rule. To tell you the truth I've never seen anyone going 45 or above at the Weirs.

Island/Relaxin wrote:
And I am sorry but my opinion is that Some of the boats on the lake have gotten to large.......but this is my opinion... and yes I know that there are many large boat owner that operate responsible.... it the ones that don't that have caused the problems.... and that is unfortunate.....
How large is too large? Are you talking style of boat (cruiser v cigarette style) or are you talking tonnage? There are some large cruisers on the lake but nothing really outrageous. I got the impression you're going after cruisers only because of your comments about exempting the Mount.

As I have said many times, enforcement of existing laws will solve the problems the speed limit crowd has without additional laws or spending the limited funds the Marine Patrol has on a law that it appears data collected and anecdotal evidence shows isn't needed. So enforce the laws we have and get those few operators that you cite into compliance and everyone is happy.

I was going to respond to a number of Islanders comments about limiting power on a "drinking water supply" but they have become just too ridiculous!

I now believe she is writing these posts to be intentionally outrageous to push buttons! :laugh: Good one!:)

codeman671

09-03-2007, 08:40 PM

There are aftermarket windshield tints even in New Hampshire, and these injuries were done by a hotdogging showboater in Florida. If you won't review the video, no one can lead you to see with your eyes what you have already accepted in faith.

http://www.brightcove.com/title.jsp?title=1155180898

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was the one that stated he was showboating... Pushing the edge. Never said that he wasn't. Some of your claims though are embellishing the situation a bit.

But the video shows that he continued to swerve directly into the path of two similar boats approaching at a high rate of speed. They both swerved to avoid colliding with him, but also came close to colliding with each other, as the video shows. If he had stopped "dead", instead of "almost dead", the passenger's injuries could have been compounded by collisions with the other two boats. The injuries were severe enough without involving other speedboats in a juvenile quest for "Maximum Air".

No other boats were came close to colliding with each other. When he took the lead no other boats were even pictured! Aftermarket tints on the boat? You could pick this out in the midst of the accident? Gimme a break.

Check out the following link, the accident victims were actually the ones that released the video to promote safety/ No cover up there...

http://destinsharks.com/photo-and-video/196#more-196

A quote from the link:

"As the video shows, the boat was driving mostly south at high speed into the mouth of Destin Pass were it ‘hooked’ after landing from a big wave jump. Destin Pass, like most passes, is subject to unpredictable wave patterns due to tide/wind conflicts, shallowing water, and busy boating traffic by vessels of all sizes."

If you would like to contact ACTUAL people at the poker run that can attest to weather/water conditions and the proximity of other boats in the area I am sure I can point you in the right direction. Lets agree to disagree and move on. Isn't this thread supposed to be about Winnipesaukee anyway?

ITD

09-04-2007, 07:30 AM

I was referring to someone else in the original post.

"The new Senator for this area lives on Bear Island"

I guess I could have said

"The new Senator for this area stays on Bear Island"

I doesn't make any difference to me, It shouldn't make any difference to anyone else.

You people only care because you think it is an error I have made that you can exploit. The reality is you are pissed! You are on the losing side of an argument you hate to lose. Your arguments do not stand up again real data, real deaths, political reality and public opinion. In your hearts you know the speed limit will pass this time and nothing you can do will stop it. And this has you really pissed.

I can't do this anymore, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. And I am starting to feel sorry for the fish. I hope you all still find this beautiful lake a wonderful place to come to even with a speed limit.

That long beautiful pirate boat went by a while ago, you know the one, it has a skull and cross bones on the side. The people inside were waving and having a great time. I hope things like that never leave this lake.

The only thing that irritates me is when people lie or twist the truth for their own personal agenda. Little by little we extracted the truth out of you. You don't like loud boats, you don't like wakes, you don't want GFBL boats in front of your house. You want the lake all to yourself. The speed limit is first, then you want the cabin cruisers gone, finally you seem to be advocating for a 10 horsepower limit.

Here's a little bit of news for you, it's a big lake, you're going to have to keep sharing it with many people. Most of them are good people, a few are inconsiderate jerks. You want more laws because in the past a few jerks have not obeyed the laws already in place. The speed limit won't work. My opinion (see, that's what you say when your trying to be honest, you should give it a try sometime) is that a speed limit will make the lake more dangerous. We're not going to get more MP to set up speed traps, so the ones that patrol now will be assigned to sitting in a hiding spot, trying to catch someone going over 45mph. Problem is that their are few, if any going that fast so stops will be few and far between. So you or someone like you, insistent that you can't be wrong, will start demanding more MP resources be committed to speed traps.

Anyway, please do stop posting, I need a break from pointing out your incorrect assumptions and conclusions.

BTW,
"The new Senator for this area stays on Bear Island" is the truth, your other statement just like most of your "facts" just doesn't cut it.

Finally, that long pirate boat you're talking about, is a very fast GFBL boat, I find it funny that you "hope things like that never leave this lake", it is exactly what you are trying to run out. :)

Dave R

09-04-2007, 09:33 AM

Finally, that long pirate boat you're talking about, is a very fast GFBL boat, I find it funny that you "hope things like that never leave this lake", it is exactly what you are trying to run out. :)

Not sure I'd take that boat very far offshore. It's more like a loud (in more ways than one) deck boat. It's quite a bit different than the 51' 9", blue and white Nor-Tech that's been out and about this year which may be the biggest GFBL I've seen on the lake yet and certainly an easy target for the speed limit proponents. I don't know the name of the boat, but it says "Londonderry New Hampshire" on the transom.

That said, that Londonderry Nor-Tech wasn't loud (so GFBQ??) and sure throws a tiny wake for a 50+ foot boat. I was shocked when I crossed it's wake a couple of weeks ago while it was cruising at an estimated 50 MPH and I could not really hear it nor did the wake affect me any more than typical chop. I hope boats like THAT never leave the lake. It's dripping with sophistication and class.

bbarrell

09-04-2007, 09:38 AM

Where are the boats he was racing? Was the end result an accident like in the video clip? Just showing a random picture of a boat in choppy water in Wolfboro catching air doesn't relate to that video at all. Sorry but all you're "reminding" me of is how choppy lake winni can be at times!! :laugh:
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i117/chipmunkwhisperer/WONandWOFFL/CopplecrownMountainWolfeboro.jpg

You are correct KonaChick.......I WAS ON the boat when the pic was taken, choppy day going about 50 mph with the trim up. We were not racing, in the 25 years I've been on Lake Winni I've never been in a 'boat race'. So I wish the speed limit supporters would quit putting up this picture and trying to claim we were speeding or racing.....because we weren't. It's simply another day on the lake enjoying the ride. We were away from the shore and probably 500 feet from any other boat. Not breaking any laws or even going fast. This is a perfect example of how perception IS NOT reality.

Rattlesnake Guy

09-04-2007, 07:46 PM

It's simply another day on the lake enjoying the ride. We were away from the shore and probably 500 feet from any other boat. Not breaking any laws or even going fast. This is a perfect example of how perception IS NOT reality.

We are on the broads side of RSI and can testify that after many many observations of boats going by, there seems to be an almost universal correlation between the speed of the boats and the distance they keep from shore and other boats. It must be a matter of human instinct since it seems so universally observed. My rough estimation is that less than 5 percent of boats above 40MPH are racing. It does happen and we do enjoy it. Even the racing boats are 200-300+ feet apart. Much more likely to see 150 rule violations on boats below 40MPH.

We also see boats with what seems like barley more than the prop in the water quite routinely. Looks like fun. Wish my boat could do that. The rougher the water the more likely the boats will ride a bit higher. We have observed that boats don't have to be going especially fast for them to get air. (I know some on the forum would say that above 30 is fast, to them I would say, yes it was above 30)

I would also say that the thing that seems to slow a fast boat most is if rough water lifts the prop too high. Most don't seem to want to risk the investment if the boat is not properly engaged with the water. I don't know if it's concern over control or lack of load on the prop but it does seem to be the natural limit the lake puts on everyone.

I find the operators of the boats going fast past our place to be paying much better attention to what's going on than the average boater. Out of self preservation they seem to avoid the unpredictable things in front of them.

Phantom

09-05-2007, 07:55 AM

Kewl Pic-- bbarrell

Wish someone could snap one off of our boat like that !!

Damn, ours is only a bowrider, probably wouldn't look all that great anyway :(

Acres per Second

09-05-2007, 08:29 AM

Kewl Pic-- bbarrell
Wish someone could snap one off of our boat like that !!
Damn, ours is only a bowrider, probably wouldn't look all that great anyway
:(
Well, Dave R's boat only goes 50-MPH: both of you could come over and I'll snap a few shots of you both on the edge of control. (Or airborne, and not in control at all).

Where are the boats he was racing?

I turned right 90°, and photographed these two: four boats in a 500' space between the markers. (Two being anchored).

SIKSUKR

09-05-2007, 09:25 AM

Great picture but what's your point?If the boats were too close that's a violation.You certainly can't tell from the photo that these boats are going more than the proposed speed limit.Why would Dave's boat be "on the edge of control" as you put it because it goes 50 mph.Maybe your sailboat would be on the edge of control at 15 knots and could take out a kayker or someone in a canoe.I believe sailboats have the right of way because they are at the mercy of the wind,have less control than a powerboat,and certainly have a much more obstructed view with all the sails and rigging.
There's plenty of room for every type of pleasure craft on this lake.

Dave R

09-05-2007, 09:47 AM

.Why would Dave's boat be "on the edge of control" as you put it because it goes 50 mph?

Because I once wrote something like: "my boat feels "twitchy" above 50 MPH".

It's irrelevant now though because that boat has been used in IL/MN for the past three seasons by the guy who bought it from me in 2005; and I'm in a different boat now that just breaks 50 MPH on a good day. The new boat feels completely planted at WOT, or any other speed. The old boat was a lot more fun though, I miss it.

Cal

09-05-2007, 10:41 AM

four [/I]boats in a 500' space between the markers. (Two being anchored).

It's amazing how the lack of "depth of field" can make pictures appear. But any reasonably intelligent person will realize this

jrc

09-05-2007, 10:42 AM

My boat feels twitchy at 5mph in the Weirs channel, am I on the edge of control? If I slow down it gets worse, but if I speed up it gets better.

Should :laugh: I fight :laugh: for increased speeds :laugh: in the channel?

BTW the last sentence is a joke, I really don't mean it, really. Please don't quote me later and say one speed limit opponent advocates speeding in the channel.

ITD

09-05-2007, 12:43 PM

Well, Dave R's boat only goes 50-MPH: both of you could come over and I'll snap a few shots of you both on the edge of control. (Or airborne, and not in control at all).

I turned right 90°, and photographed these two: four boats in a 500' space between the markers. (Two being anchored).

APS, I did a careful and painstaking analysis of your picture and came up with the following results:

Assumption, the guy standing on the boat is 6 feet tall.

Observation,

1. From the bottom edge of the picture to the first white boat would take 6 guys stacked one on top of the other to fill in the space.

2. Only one guy will fit between the two white boats

3. The boats are pointed directly at each other in this picture.

4. The guy in the picture was fishing for Mahi.

Conclusion,

1. Since you stated that their was 500' between markers, that aren't even in the picture and only 6 guys at 6 feet fit in the space from the edge of the picture to the boat you were in, only 36 feet from the other boats in violation of the 150' rule.

2 and 3. Since only one guy fits between the boats (6 feet) and they were pointed at each other there was a collision and ensuing explosion in which no one including yourself survived.

4. The guy was fishing for Mahi because it would be as accurate as all the other assumptions you could draw from a picture like this.

Your picture is useless and shows nothing but a couple boats out on the lake.

bbarrell

09-05-2007, 01:58 PM

AC2717

09-05-2007, 02:44 PM

When you say you turned right 90 degrees are you implying my boat and these 3 others were all within 500 feet? I can't speak for the 3 others but mine wasn't next to them. This is a totally different pic of 3 different boats from across the other side of the shore. My boat isn't in that pic, not even sure if this pic was taken on the same day or in the same area? And I only see 1 anchored. I do agree though those 3 boats appear too close although you can't judge speed or distance from a pic that far away.Isn't it interesting that the hulls of these boats are way straight on top of the water? I smell photo shop:laugh:
seriously though, this looks very super-imposed

BroadHopper

09-05-2007, 04:30 PM

Isn't it interesting that the hulls of these boats are way straight on top of the water? I smell photo shop:laugh:
seriously though, this looks very super-imposed

Very suspicious

Acres per Second

09-06-2007, 04:25 AM

From other Internet photoshopping questions, I understand that such changes can be detected by examining the enlarged edges of the suspect object for "blurring". Since I use only film—with no pixilations whatsoever—you're welcome to check for any and all irregularities: prepare for disappointment.

"Lack of depth of field" would indicate one object sharply in focus, with the foreground and/or background being out of focus. This photo has great depth of field: everything is in focus.

When you say you turned right 90 degrees are you implying my boat and these 3 others were all within 500 feet? I can't speak for the 3 others but mine wasn't next to them. This is a totally different pic of 3 different boats from across the other side of the shore. My boat isn't in that pic, not even sure if this pic was taken on the same day or in the same area? And I only see 1 anchored. I do agree though those 3 boats appear too close although you can't judge speed or distance from a pic that far away.
You may recall that this was a 2005 Poker Run. Your recollection after two years of your exact speed is truly remarkable. :confused:

It's also reassuring to know that a pleasureboat can still "showboat" at only 50-MPH. :rolleye2: And we all know that "a Poker Run is not a Race". :rolleye1: Your boat's photo may have followed the other photo. Boating, even by weekend standards, was especially hectic.

However, it was still a signature moment for me, as I was one of the two small stationary boats between the two markers, located in the sudden Poker Run rush. As the fisherman in the photo stated here (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showpost.php?p=23903&postcount=54):

"It looks like my boat. If it was on July 30, 2005 outside of Winter Harbor it is me. The Marine Patrol came by for 1/2 an hour and those boats didn't buzz me at that point but as soon as the MP left it was back to the way the picture is."

Not one, but two, MP boats appeared together—perhaps someone on shore called them in. I was close enough to shore at one point to have a resident (a stranger to me) ask me if I wanted to borrow his video camera!

"...There's plenty of room for every type of pleasure craft on this lake..."
There was a time I'd have agreed with you. Among a new generation of boaters, "pleasure" has a whole new meaning.

Phantom

09-06-2007, 06:56 AM

Aren't we now considered WAY OFF topic as the thread was "Speed Limit Test Zones now Dead in the Water" -- and finally end this thread till there is more news on the topic.

Another Great boating action shot !!!

Perhaps you can start a thread for Action Shot pic's (just an off the wall thought) as I truely like to follow the "News" through this forum yet unfortunately find important topical threads like this get bogged down with "off Topic" material.

Great Photo's ----- means nothing with regards to speed, spacing, or more importantly -->> "Speed Limit Test Zones now Dead in the Water"

bbarrell

09-06-2007, 09:18 AM

You may recall that this was a 2005 Poker Run. Your recollection after two years of your exact speed is truly remarkable. :confused:

It's also reassuring to know that a pleasureboat can still "showboat" at only 50-MPH. :rolleye2: And we all know that "a Poker Run is not a Race". :rolleye1: Your boat's photo may have followed the other photo. Boating, even by weekend standards, was especially hectic.

Um, you've got your facts wrong. I didn't participate in the 2005 Poker Run. Or 2006, or 2007.......
And remembering my speed isn't hard because we drive at about the same speed in open water most of the time 45-50 mph....my boat doesn't go much faster than that (contrary to popular belief, it tops out around 65mph and loses maximum speed capacity every year).

KonaChick

09-06-2007, 09:20 AM

Um, you've got your facts wrong. I didn't participate in the 2005 Poker Run.

Sorry bbarrell but there's just no way APS is wrong, it has to be your mistake!
:emb:

bbarrell

09-06-2007, 09:29 AM

Sorry bbarrell but there's just no way APS is wrong, it has to be your mistake!
:emb:

Yeah, maybe I blacked out that day....or possibly I have a twin that drives the same boat. More likely APS assumes every boat on the lake that's a power boat participated in the Poker Run that day if they were on the water going over 20 mph. More support for my 'perception is not reality' theory.

Acres per Second

09-07-2007, 03:24 AM

Sorry bbarrell but there's just no way APS is wrong, it has to be your mistake!
:emb:
It may only be a coincidence that the "buzzing" of the other boats around me coincided with this photo. I could be very wrong...so I ask you: what is your understanding of the following?

What does bbarrell really mean when he wrote:

"I was 'ON' THE BOAT"
"We weren't racing"
"I wasn't "participating" in the Poker Run"
"...possibly I have a twin who "drives" the same boat". (Makes bbarrell the driver, doesn't it?) :D

We're led to questions like the following:

1) Was he a passenger in a boat whose driver wasn't registered in the Poker Run?
2) Was he the driver in a boat whose driver wasn't registered in the Poker Run? (Or hadn't paid).
3) Was he in a Poker Run in 2005 and mistook it for 2004? (when he remembers not being in one—or at least not being "a participant").
4) Is bbarrell the "driver", owner, or a passenger? (A passenger may—or may not—be a registered "participant").
5) How could this boat be identified as the boat he was on (or "driving")? It looks just like many other boats with three aboard.

I must ask because both photos are from the middle of an entire roll of film that was gone in about an hour. Perhaps I could e-mail the file to a neutral forum member for corroboration.

It is said "there are no coincidences", but there were so many ocean-racers that day operating at similar speeds and traveling on the same pathways. :confused: (And no shortage of Jet-Skis trying unsuccessfully to catch them).

"...And I only see 1 anchored..."
All twenty-three photos were taken from my anchored powerboat, positioned 150-feet from the marker to get a closeup. Those two ocean-racers passed to the far side of the fishermen, but I have another 20 photos taken that day.

"...So I wish the speed limit supporters would quit putting up this picture and trying to claim we were speeding or racing.....because we weren't.
There is no speeding law; however, my NH Boaters Guide describes the following:
"Reckless operation is the failure to exercise the degree of care necessary to prevent the endangering of another person or their property. It can be the result of operator ignorance, carelessness, inattention, or indifference."
—NH Boaters Guide

With a few tons of airborne boat—unable to stop or turn—I wouldn't admit to being "the driver" either. :blush:

BTW: Both photos have a widespread and interesting history. I think every concerned NH Legislator received a copy of them last year.

Some disregarded their significance to the "Unlimited Speeds" issue prior to the election, and are employed differently today.

WeirsBeachBoater

09-07-2007, 03:14 PM

I won't spoil the fun I will let bbarell break the news to you.

The only history those photos have is the one you made up yourself.

KonaChick

09-07-2007, 08:06 PM

APS you have waaaaaaaaay to much time on your hands..my suggestion is to take up a hobby, preferably NOT photography! :emb:

codeman671

09-07-2007, 08:25 PM

APS you have waaaaaaaaay to much time on your hands..my suggestion is to take up a hobby, preferably NOT photography! :emb:

Maybe APS should write fiction??? Definitely getting plenty of practice here! :D

Airwaves

09-07-2007, 10:13 PM

I doubt it!

My family has been on Lake Winnipesaukee for just about a century! Yep, 100 years! With the exception of a sanctioned race a number of years ago that involved the MP and even the Mount Washington, I have never NEVER seen an ocean racer on this lake!

A Go Fast boat is not an ocean racer! What is an offshore racer?

http://www.amfoffshoreracing.com/

APS wrote:
there were so many ocean-racers that day operating at similar speeds and traveling on the same pathways. (And no shortage of Jet-Skis trying unsuccessfully to catch them).

Where are they? I assume you must have knowledge of each marina on the lake where these boats berth? I assume you would certainly know exactly where each of these monster boats are located privately, right? Because you and your supporters would have certainly spoken to them before trying tryin to change a state law that would impact everyone, right?? Right!

It's time to get the facts staight. There are no ocean racers on this lake! This is no speed problem on this lake! There are only folks who want to elimiate an entire class of boaters/people from this lake!

I the no speed crowd persists, I would be willing to lead an effort to eliminate kayaks and canoes from Winnipesaukee since they are responsible for the majority of accidents and rescues!

Talk among yourselves

Acres per Second

09-08-2007, 03:31 AM

"...Aren't we now considered WAY OFF topic as the thread was 'Speed Limit Test Zones now Dead in the Water'..."
OK, as a followup to my post #3, the Broads-side of Rattlesnake Island (which bore the brunt of the Test Zone avoiders) now has more houses for sale than I've ever seen before. The air is rich in hydrocarbon emissions there.

It's nice that the speeders stayed 150' offshore from Rattlesnake, but at least two huge sentinel boulders 100' off its northern shore act as submarine enforcement.

"...The only history those photos have is the one you made up yourself..."
New Hampshire Legislators received the photos directly from me—via USPS. A few weren't impressed enough, I guess. :confused:

"...my suggestion is to take up a hobby, preferably NOT photography...!"
Too late: here's one looking back towards the other marker. :D

Winnipesaukee

09-08-2007, 11:18 PM

I was sailing today (although not on Winni, but have had similar experiences on the Big Lake) and thought I'd go back to the dock to grab my camera to shoot something that had happened several times already, but was afraid I'd get it wet from the wake of a boat passing very few feet off my bow. I also felt the need to have my hands free to prevent the boat from capsizing from said wake and dropping the mast on said boat.

In my opinion, I think the problem is a combination of speed and boat wakes.

If a boater wants to be able to do 90 in the middle of the Broads on a weekday, that should be allowed to, but one doing 40 in the Weirs area on the 4th of July weekend should not be; therefore, I feel that passing legislature for a blanket 45/25 is not a good idea. Like most issues in our great country, the end legislature usually falls into a "happy medium." Oh, the beauty of checks and balences.

Somthing like a law stating that a boater may not operate "recklessly" would work for me. But how can we define "recklessly?"

This might be a good point of reference. RSA 636:2.
(c) ""Recklessly.'' A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the circumstances known to him, its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the situation. A person who creates such a risk but is unaware thereof solely by reason of having voluntarily engaged in intoxication or hypnosis also acts recklessly with respect thereto.
(d) ""Negligently.'' A person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he fails to become aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that his failure to become aware of it constitutes a gross deviation from the conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.

I think something has to be done, but not as extreme as a blanket 45/25 law or nothing at all. In addition, I think the "150-foot rule" needs to be more heavily enforced.

bbarrell

09-10-2007, 01:09 PM

What does bbarrell really mean when he wrote:

"I was 'ON' THE BOAT"
"We weren't racing"
"I wasn't "participating" in the Poker Run"
"...possibly I have a twin who "drives" the same boat". (Makes bbarrell the driver, doesn't it?) :D

We're led to questions like the following:

1) Was he a passenger in a boat whose driver wasn't registered in the Poker Run?
2) Was he the driver in a boat whose driver wasn't registered in the Poker Run? (Or hadn't paid).
3) Was he in a Poker Run in 2005 and mistook it for 2004? (when he remembers not being in one—or at least not being "a participant").
4) Is bbarrell the "driver", owner, or a passenger? (A passenger may—or may not—be a registered "participant").
5) How could this boat be identified as the boat he was on (or "driving")? It looks just like many other boats with three aboard.

.

I was on the boat as a passenger that day...and last time I checked I was a 'she' not a 'he'. We were not participating (registered or otherwise) in the Poker Run, didn't even know it was happening. I've seen you post this pic several times and if you simply zoom in on it, it's clear it's my boat. I can see myself, my husband, and my friend in the pic. You can even see the Boston Red Sox cap I'm wearing. I agree with the other poster, we should start a new thread 'APS greatest hits' and post all your wanna be speeding pics out there.

Cal

09-10-2007, 06:55 PM

With that amount of boat in the water it could be doing 30 mph and a zoom lens distorts distances and depth so you should put this picture on your dart board and use it for practice because that's all it's worth:cool:

Acres per Second

09-11-2007, 05:59 AM

"...I won't spoil the fun I will let bbarell break the news to you..."
Not exactly a blockbuster, was it?

"...I think something has to be done, but not as extreme as a blanket 45/25 law or nothing at all..."
Well, we know what didn't work:

"Good skippers know the rules of the water and make sure they are followed. They use caution and consideration when mixing noise, speed and smoke with the gentle, refreshing, relaxing life on the water".
—New Hampshire Boaters Guide 2001
Department of Safety
10 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03305

"...I assume you would certainly know exactly where each of these monster boats are located privately, right? Because you and your supporters would have certainly spoken to them before trying tryin to change a state law that would impact everyone, right...??

WinnFABS' outlook is different: I have much less of a gripe with the bass-boaters, who have a longer history of safety, respect for our waters, and abstinence than the ocean-racers who are trailered in.

"...APS you have waaaaaaaaay to much time on your hands..."
Wait 'til the rest of the Boomers retire here. :p

Phantom

09-11-2007, 07:15 AM

Acres per Second --

Enough is Enough !!!

Give your keyboard a rest for a week or two, take a trip to the mountains, see a movie or two, play with the kids (or grandkids), visit relatives - preferably out of state, or whatever

But STOP draggin this Forum down

Cal

09-11-2007, 07:16 AM

Wait 'til the rest of the Boomers retire here. :p

Speak for yourself. I may be 60 but I still haven't grown up(or old):p

ITD

09-11-2007, 07:44 AM

WinnFABS' outlook is different: I have much less of a gripe with the bass-boaters, who have a longer history of safety, respect for our waters, and abstinence than the ocean-racers who are trailered in.

Wait 'til the rest of the Boomers retire here. :p

Let's see, you use pictures that were taken with a telescopic lens and tell us it shows how dangerous it is out there when in fact it shows nothing because photos like that distort distances. To get those pictures you stop your boat in a "500 foot" channel, with your boat "150 feet from the marker" along with two other boats that are stopped or anchored. Talk about creating a problem to make your point. You do this on a busy day yet pontificate about how other boaters are inconsiderate and dangerous, I think you should look in the mirror, but then again, the end justifies the means with you people.

Six sights were tested, only two announced publicly and Dir Barrett tells us that essentially there is no speed problem and that some people sitting on their islands see a boat going by and mistakenly assume it is going fast.

You've had your chance to prove your case and you have not. Let's see if the legislature can see through this fear mongering and twisting of the truth. They did once already, we'll see if these newbies have any guts and integrity.

codeman671

09-11-2007, 08:35 AM

WinnFABS' outlook is different: I have much less of a gripe with the bass-boaters, who have a longer history of safety, respect for our waters, and abstinence than the ocean-racers who are trailered in.

Have you ever driven in a bass boat? There is nothing safe about them. I drove a 17' Skeeter with a 150hp Yamaha on it, it was capable of 70+mph and did not steer at all above 55mph. It hardly touches the water. You would be much safer in an "ocean racer" doing 70mph. Ever watch the bass boats in the broads on a rough fall morning? Most of these yahoos should not even be driving boats.

I am sure a quick search of bass boat related accidents will turn up plenty, as a matter of fact an executive for Brunswick Corp (Sea Ray) lost his life in a bass boat related accident where it collided with a ski boat.

http://www.bassresource.com/bass_fishing_123/sea_ray.html

Airwaves

09-11-2007, 12:44 PM

APS wrote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves
"...I assume you would certainly know exactly where each of these monster boats are located privately, right? Because you and your supporters would have certainly spoken to them before trying tryin to change a state law that would impact everyone, right...??

WinnFABS' outlook is different: I have much less of a gripe with the bass-boaters, who have a longer history of safety, respect for our waters, and abstinence than the ocean-racers who are trailered in
OCEAN RACERS http://www.amfoffshoreracing.com/ aren't trailered anywhere! They are shipped in specially designed vehicles.

So outside of that one sanctioned race that I recall a number of years ago, when did you ever see an ocean racer on Lake Winnipesaukee?

BTW, you didn't answer the question, do you know where these MONSTER boats are berthed and have you spoken with the owners/marina operators???

Acres per Second

09-12-2007, 07:17 AM

Quotes by codeman671:
1) Have you ever driven in a bass boat?
2) There is nothing safe about them.
3)...it was capable of 70+mph and did not steer at all above 55mph.
4) It hardly touches the water.
5) Most of these yahoos should not even be driving boats.
6)...a bass boat related accident where it collided with a ski boat

Holy Moly! Whose side are you on? :eek:

7) You would be much safer in an "ocean racer" doing 70mph.

The above quote is why the Unlimited-Speeds people don't get it and have zero empathy for the others afloat on the lake: :confused:

It's not how you feel about your own safety, it's how unsafe everybody else feels while afloat in the path of a 70-MPH boat.

Most of "those invisible kayaks" are longer than the boat in this photo, and this boat was right where bbarrell's airborne Baja went by in 2005: we have testimony that a 4-ton boat can become airborne at "only" 50-MPH.

Fortunately, this photo was taken two weeks ago. Unfortunately, we weren't in any test zone.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i117/chipmunkwhisperer/WONandWOFFL/ThreeBoatersWH.jpg

And yes, that's a young girl swimming behind them—doing a "long swim".

Maybe the 45-MPH daytime limit is set too high for our waters. :(

I have many more photos, but unless there are more questions, I now yield the floor to those WinnFABS supporters who have had a well-deserved rest. :look:

LIforrelaxin

09-12-2007, 09:16 PM

OCEAN RACERS http://www.amfoffshoreracing.com/ aren't trailered anywhere! They are shipped in specially designed vehicles.

So outside of that one sanctioned race that I recall a number of years ago, when did you ever see an ocean racer on Lake Winnipesaukee?

BTW, you didn't answer the question, do you know where these MONSTER boats are berthed and have you spoken with the owners/marina operators???

Don't be sure thos boats aren't pulled around on trailers.... they have Custom Haulers and custom built trailers...But nothing I would call specially designed.. they are far from being shipped like cargo...especially the boats that race in the Factory Classes....

Also why is it that the Racers only came up here for one year.....where people that upset over the race? I thought it was a great weekend and brought alot of business to the area. I had lunch the friday before the races with some of the participants, they were nice curtious and wanted to make sure everyone was having a great time......

Airwaves

09-12-2007, 10:15 PM

LI Relaxin wrote:
Don't be sure thos boats aren't pulled around on trailers.... they have Custom Haulers and custom built trailers...But nothing I would call specially designed..
Regardless of whether you call a custom hauler specially designed or not, these offshore vessels are not towed behind the family Buick with a destination of Lake Winnipesaukee as APS would have us believe.

LI Relaxin wrote:
Also why is it that the Racers only came up here for one year.....where people that upset over the race? I thought it was a great weekend and brought alot of business to the area. I had lunch the friday before the races with some of the participants, they were nice curtious and wanted to make sure everyone was having a great time......
I don't know why they didn't come back maybe money? It's an expensive sport, maybe they didn't see the fan support they expected? I didn't hear any complaints about that event. It's a question for one of the folks you had lunch with the Friday before the races.

My point in posting about this is to respond to the APS posts, in which he suddenly changed the terminology of the vessel involved in the debate.

APS has shifted the terminology from Go Fast boats, which are recreational in nature, to Ocean Racers, which are not recreational boats and aren't even on Lake Winnipesaukee!

Get the sides to start talking Ocean Racers, even though there are no Ocean Racers on Lake Winnipesaukee, and it changes the timber of the debate here and in Concord now doesn't it?

Karl Rove would be proud!

lfm

09-13-2007, 08:10 PM

Most of "those invisible kayaks" are longer than the boat in this photo, and this boat was right where bbarrell's airborne Baja went by in 2005: we have testimony that a 4-ton boat can become airborne at "only" 50-MPH.

Fortunately, this photo was taken two weeks ago. Unfortunately, we weren't in any test zone.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i117/chipmunkwhisperer/WONandWOFFL/ThreeBoatersWH.jpg

And yes, that's a young girl swimming behind them—doing a "long swim".

Maybe the 45-MPH daytime limit is set too high for our waters. :(

I have many more photos, but unless there are more questions, I now yield the floor to those WinnFABS supporters who have had a well-deserved rest. :look:

I don't get it. What are you trying to say; that because 2 years ago a boat went through this area at 50mph that the kids in the rowboat are in danger or feel unsafe:confused:

Airwaves

09-13-2007, 08:49 PM

lfm wrote:
I don't get it. What are you trying to say; that because 2 years ago a boat went through this area at 50mph that the kids in the rowboat are in danger or feel unsafe
I'm thinking that APS is suggesting, no not suggesting but DEMANDING! that no boats with mechanical power be allowed on these waters.

Of course looking at the photo, and given Islander's concern about the contamination of the drinking water supply as horsepower increases, there appears to be a person in the water!

People tend to do things in the water that cause e-coli bacterial contamination of the drinking water supply do they not? That would be why most drinking water supplies ban swimming or any physical contact with the water.

Have you heard any of the Speed limit/OMG the drinking water is at risk crowd suggest no swimming on Lake Winnipesaukee?

Just curious.

ITD

09-13-2007, 09:01 PM

Quotes by codeman671:

Holy Moly! Whose side are you on? :eek:

The above quote is why the Unlimited-Speeds people don't get it and have zero empathy for the others afloat on the lake: :confused:

It's not how you feel about your own safety, it's how unsafe everybody else feels while afloat in the path of a 70-MPH boat.

Most of "those invisible kayaks" are longer than the boat in this photo, and this boat was right where bbarrell's airborne Baja went by in 2005: we have testimony that a 4-ton boat can become airborne at "only" 50-MPH.

Fortunately, this photo was taken two weeks ago. Unfortunately, we weren't in any test zone.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i117/chipmunkwhisperer/WONandWOFFL/ThreeBoatersWH.jpg

And yes, that's a young girl swimming behind them—doing a "long swim".

Maybe the 45-MPH daytime limit is set too high for our waters. :(

I have many more photos, but unless there are more questions, I now yield the floor to those WinnFABS supporters who have had a well-deserved rest. :look:

APS, this is probably the most lame arguement I have ever seen out of you. Come on, I've come to expect better and, according to the data collected at the six test sites, I doubt there is even one instance of a boat going 70 on the lake especially 20 feet from the shore as the rowboat is if I apply your previous photo measurement standards.:laugh:

You have no real case so now you are taking pictures of rowboats and a swimmer and making things up. Give me a break.

jeffk

09-13-2007, 09:25 PM

I don't get it. What are you trying to say; that because 2 years ago a boat went through this area at 50mph that the kids in the rowboat are in danger or feel unsafe:confused:

Yup, it sure seems like it.

I said at the start of this thread that this was not a rational discussion and APS once again proves the point. By this logic everyone should be terrified to walk across a street because over the last 2 years thousands of cars have passed over the exact spot going at speeds of 30 MPH or more. If a boat is doing 70 MPH in the Broads, canoeists in Green's Basin better watch out. Oh my Gosh, I just realized the Mt Washington goes through the Broads several times a day, in the exact spot I passed last weekend. :eek: If the rowboat in the picture gets caught in the warp it could run right over the swimmer, maybe not fatal but probably very painful.

What's more dangerous, a boat doing 70 MPH that is nowhere near you (perhaps as far as 2 years away :D ) or 5 boats going 20 MPH 50 feet or less way from you? Since I have rarely seen a boat traveling at 70 MPH on the Lake but run across boats coming too close frequently on the Lake, I have worried more about the people breaking the safe passage/150' rule.

But that was before I knew about APS's Space-Time warp. Be afraid. Be very afraid. :(

Dave R

09-14-2007, 06:35 AM

Peasant #1: We have found a witch, may we burn her?
Angry Mob: BURN HER! BUUUURN HER!!
Bedevere: How do you know she is a witch?
Peasant #2: She looks like one!
[mob roars in agreement]
Bedevere: Bring her forward.
"Witch": I'm not a witch, I'm not a witch!
Bedevere: But you are dressed as one.
"Witch": They dressed me up like this.
[Witch removes her fake nose and "witch" hat]
Peasant #1: Well, we did do the nose.
Bedevere: The nose?
Peasant #1: And the hat. But she is a witch!
[mob roars in agreement]
Bedevere: Did you dress her up like this?
Angry Mob: NO! NO!
Peasant #1: ... Yes... a bit. But she has got a wart! [Peasant #2 points at her cheek]
Bedevere: What makes you think that she is a witch?
Mr Newt: What, she turned me into a newt!
Bedevere: A newt?
[pause]
Mr Newt: I got better.
Peasant 2: BURN HER ANYWAY!!!!
[mob roars in agreement]
Bedevere: Good! So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
Peasant #1: Build a bridge out of her!
Bedevere: Ahh, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?
Peasant #1: Oh yeah.
Bedevere: Tell me, does wood sink in water?
Peasant #2: No, no, it floats. Floats!
Peasant #1: Throw her into the pond!
[mob roars in agreement]
Bedevere: No, no, no. What also floats in water?
Peasant #1: Bread.
Peasant #2: Apples.
Mr Newt: Very small rocks.
Peasant #1: Cider.
Peasant #2: Gravy.
Mr Newt: Cherries.
Peasant #1: Mud.
Peasant #2: Churches! Churches!
Mr Newt: Lead! Lead!
Arthur: [has been silent in the background] A duck.
[pause]
Bedevere: Exactly! So, logically...?
Peasant #1: ...If she weighs the same as a duck... then she's made of wood.
Bedevere: And therefore...?
[pause]
Peasant #2: A WITCH!
[mob roars in agreement]
Peasent #3: Here's a duck.
Bedevere: We shall use my largest scales. [Peasents 2&3 Set the duck and witch on the scale and hold up very large mallets] Remove the supports!
[Having been revealed to weigh the same as a duck, therefore proving her a witch. The crowd goes berserk.]
"Witch": It's a fair cop.
Mr. Newt: BURRRRN HER!

Cal

09-14-2007, 09:06 AM

It certainly has turned into a "Witch hunt" alright and the longer it goes on the more rediculous it's getting. People ignoring facts and figures , posting pictures of almost ANTHING and trying to make something out of them that's not there. The more these people keep this up , the worse it makes them look.
I say , let them keep it up till they shoot themselves in the foot and get nothing:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

codeman671

09-14-2007, 12:24 PM

Quotes by codeman671:
Holy Moly! Whose side are you on? :eek:

I have much less of a gripe with the bass-boaters, who have a longer history of safety, respect for our waters, and abstinence than the ocean-racers who are trailered in.

I think it is quite clear what side I am on. I feel that a bass boat is much more dangerous at speed than an "ocean racer" traveling 70mph, and more to themselves than others. The type of boat is not the danger, it is the driver. Your team of fiction writers should stop claiming it is the boats doing the harm and focus on the drivers. A 25' Baja can be driven just as safely as a 25' pontoon, and both could also be a deadly weapon if not handled correctly. Education and enforcement of existing laws is the key to success, instead of creating a useless bill that will not stop 28mph accidents at night from happening.

And for the record, a 25' Outlaw weighs nowhere even close to 4 tons. The new Outlaw 26 weighs 4800lbs, the older 25' slightly less.