Winnipesaukee Forum - Piscataqua River headway speed legislation Bill SB87

Winnipesaukee Forum (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/index.php)

- Boating (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - Piscataqua River headway speed legislation Bill SB87 (https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18703)

Piscataqua River headway speed legislation Bill SB87

I know it's short notice, but I just got wind of this via a friend.

I also know that it doesn't directly affect Lake Winni boating, but I'm sure there are plenty of Winni boaters that also enjoy the other waters of NH.

Notes from my friend:

Please note that the hearing on SB 87 -- relative to wake on a certain area of the Piscataqua River – will be held before the Senate Transportation Committee Tuesday, January 27th starting at 1:15 p.m. in room 103 of the Legislative Office Building here in Concord.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...15/SB0087.html

Quote:

*1 Reference Changed. Amend RSA 270:12, I to read as follows:
I. The commissioner of safety shall, after receiving a petition signed by 25 or more residents or property owners of each affected town or towns in which a lake, pond or river is located and after notice and hearing, at which it appears that the public interest requires, adopt rules governing the maximum horsepower of boat engines and outboard motors or prescribe maximum speed limits for the operation of such boats or outboard motors applicable to or upon all or any portion of the public waters of this state. The commissioner of safety shall, in like manner and after notice and hearing, prohibit the use of motorboats and outboard motors on bodies of public water having an area of 35 acres or less; provided, that said prohibition shall not be construed as affecting the bodies of water covered by RSA 270:75 through [270:132] 270:133. Hearings under this section shall be held in the vicinity of the body of water under consideration during the months of June, July, August, and September following the date of the petition.
*2 New Section; Restrictions on Boating; Piscataqua River. Amend RSA 270 by inserting after section 132 the following new section:
270:133 Piscataqua River. No person shall use or operate any vessel in excess of headway speed in the federal deepwater shipping channel of the Piscataqua River between navigation buoys R2, Wood Island at the mouth of the river and R12, opposite the Sprague Terminal. Any person who violates the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a violation.
*3 Repeal. RSA 270-D:2, VI(b)(2), relative to exempting a portion of Piscataqua River from headway speed requirements, is repealed.
*4 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2016.

Anyone that is a boater that knows this section of the river should think about the ramifications of requirements to be at headway speed (max) at all times.
Many boats with a planing hull think this is a very dangerous bill.

Reaction has been similar to the following:

Quote:

This is a really bad idea and I can't imagine that any boater would agree with this plan.

Perhaps you have experience navigating a boat on the Piscataqua River during a tide cycle - but the most dangerous time for my family and our small-ish (19') boat is when we are at headway speed under the bridges against the tide. (I understand and agree with the rationale of headway speed under bridges - and I believe this existing law has benefits which out-weigh the risks.)

The problem with this new Bill is that (like all planing hull boats) - when at headway speed against the tide - our boat plows through the water at a sharp angle (bow up, stern down):

1. making it difficult to see the way ahead

2. lowering our gunnels and transom to waves from other boats

3. making our boat less responsive to steering inputs

4. forcing our boat to throw up a very large wake

Additionally - every other boat going against the tide will be throwing up a huge 2'-4' wake as well. This coupled with the narrowness of the channel in spots will make for a "washing machine" like surface of waves - as wakes collide with the shore and return back out to the channel - resulting in increased risk of swamping.

I cannot imagine navigating the majority of the river in this position. This is not merely a bad idea - this is a dangerous and ill-conceived one.

As we're all NH boaters, please let your voice be heard on this even though it may not direclty affect boating on the big lake.

I agree, Rich, that it's not part of lakes region, but i am sure that many folks travel to the ocean via the Piscataqua. Ihave a friend with a camp on Rattlesnake who bought a used 42 ft Trawler cruiser. It's max speed is 11 or 12 knots. He hired a captain to travel with from Woods Hole to Great Bay marina. He said they had to time their arrival to come with the tide. Current speed is up to 6 kts. He anticipates a slow journey, but any other boat with higher speeds would have same slow crawl, up to 3 hours.
The sponsors of the bill say it is poorly written. The point of the legislation is due to large wakes damaging shorelines and other vessels.
I wrote to Sen. Nancy Stiles, committee chair, and suggested that SB87 be stopped, and instead, notify NH Marine Patrol and ask that they enforce and educate offendi g boaters about excessive wakes.
With the tides and currents, i would not want to stay a headway speed to avoid the tankers and freighters that ply the same waters.
Take Rich's good advice and contact Sen. Stiles with a cc to your senator.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using Tapatalk

The Marine Patrol and the Coast Guard are quite capable of enforcing USCG Rule VI, that speed should be appropriate to conditions. Senator Fuller-Clarke, prime sponsor, is always ready to add more rules and laws, even at a time when the last election demonstrated that voters wanted fewer restrictions, among other things.

Watch www.nh.gov. Tuesday may be cancelled due to snow.

If this bill passes the Senate, there will be a similar hearing and vote in the House (when weather is a little more hospitable?).

It looks like the next hearing is 02-05-2015 01:15 PM LOB 103

Details here: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill...umber=sb87&q=1

So the NH Senate Bill 87 was voted down 5-0 in committee today.

The more interesting question is wether anyone will confirm or deny that the Meredith Town Manager keeps a boat at Badger's Island Marina, which is directly across from downtown Portsmouth and right in the middle of the proposed "No-Wake" area, but also instrumental in getting the required number of signatures to get this to the point it was.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damdonzi (Post 240037)

Is his name "Rusty"?