Wakesurfing legislation call to action

[Winni P]

https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstrea...=1&isAllowed=y

Interesting that they only compared a few wakeboats to a few "traditional recreation boats that pull skiers and tubers".

How about comparing them to the large cabin cruisers that plow through the lake and throw HUGE wakes? I think that is very important information for Winnipesaukee.

[Descant]

Originally Posted by Winni P

https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstrea...=1&isAllowed=y

Interesting that they only compared a few wakeboats to a few "traditional recreation boats that pull skiers and tubers".

How about comparing them to the large cabin cruisers that plow through the lake and throw HUGE wakes? I think that is very important information for Winnipesaukee.

I won't defend cabin cruisers here, but this bill is state wide. There are few, if any, cruisers on other lakes. Wake boats can be anywhere, including on lakes of <300 acres.

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by Winni P

https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstrea...=1&isAllowed=y

Interesting that they only compared a few wakeboats to a few "traditional recreation boats that pull skiers and tubers".

How about comparing them to the large cabin cruisers that plow through the lake and throw HUGE wakes? I think that is very important information for Winnipesaukee.

Here is the difference: The large cruisers may pass by when they go somewhere and may pass by on their return. The wake boats will stay in one area while everyone has a turn. The waves washing up on the front lawns, the boats smashing against the docks, and the loud stereos can last for hours. I have had to go inside my house, close the windows, and turn the TV volume up while I waited for the clowns to go home.

Originally Posted by LakeDad

If you want to address this topic due to erosion, you might have a valid, environmentally based argument.
But as soon as you add:
“And loud radio, and F bombs, and…”
You immediately discount your argument and degrade your status to “get off my lawn”. Nobody is going to listen to you if you take this approach.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is my hope that the people who will vote on this legislation may read the comments on this website, and realize that wakes are not the only problem created by these boats. This is just an additional negative aspect.
Maybe it will prompt them to vote the right way. With any luck, maybe they will add language further restricting the use of wakeboats on the lakes.

[John Mercier]

I think it would be different legislation.

I believe the PWC still use the 300' rule due to the erosion from wake they cause... not sure if it would go more than that for a bigger vessel.

Noise is a bit different.
Legally, they could float right next to the house in the No Wake/Headway area and blast the radio... so that has to be less about distance from shore than a dB limit.
But with all the different sourcing... it would be tough to enforce.

[mswlogo]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

Here is the difference: The large cruisers may pass by when they go somewhere and may pass by on their return. The wake boats will stay in one area while everyone has a turn. The waves washing up on the front lawns, the boats smashing against the docks, and the loud stereos can last for hours. I have had to go inside my house, close the windows, and turn the TV volume up while I waited for the clowns to go home.


It is my hope that the people who will vote on this legislation may read the comments on this website, and realize that wakes are not the only problem created by these boats. This is just an additional negative aspect.
Maybe it will prompt them to vote the right way. With any luck, maybe they will add language further restricting the use of wakeboats on the lakes.

One problem is, boat owners from all over the whole state get their vote/voice counted just as much as the fraction of folks that actually live on the lakes.

And we know how loud many (I didn't say all) WakeSurfers like to be
And to their credit they are very organized.

And I'm sure most of the small vessel owners (off lake) don't even know it's happening because they don't have such a large investment.

It will be a miracle if it goes through.

[Lakegeezer]

There is an increased understanding of the economic value of water quality in the Lakes Region. Lake Winnipesaukee Association recently published a study on that. While swimming, boating, fishing, vacation homes and more are attractions, people prefer to do it in clear water.

Many things degrade water quality. The overall trend is towards lake eutrophication, or aging. Aging can't be stopped but it can be sped up or slowed down. When a lake ages, its water quality declines, and vice-versa. Areas with lower water quality generally have lower economic activity. The question is how fast will any water body age to the point of economic downturn and where should the government add regulations. The State of NH owns most of the water bodies after all. It should have a say in how it is used.

The proposition in this legislation is that wakesurfing is a outlying contributor to lake aging and should be regulated.

Cruisers and commercial craft, even the marine patrol, leave large but infrequent wakes, especially in the sensitive coves. Winnipesaukee is still pristine in many areas, but noticeably aging in others. Winnipesaukee can handle wake boat traffic in the wide open areas, but some water bodies already see accelerated aging, likely due to watershed development. Many things impact water quality and many things are already regulated. In this case, there is a higher risk of water bodies having a algae crisis if a higher wake intensity is introduced. A 500 foot distance from shore requirement would restrict wakesurfing on smaller water bodies yet allow it on lakes that can support it, like Winnipesaukee.

Political parties sometimes agree on measures to protect the state's ecology and along with it the economic driver it provides. Hopefully this is one of those cases.

I've submitted my testimony via the web site referenced and encourage you to do it too. Deadline is tomorrow (2/9)

[mswlogo]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

There is an increased understanding of the economic value of water quality in the Lakes Region. Lake Winnipesaukee Association recently published a study on that. While swimming, boating, fishing, vacation homes and more are attractions, people prefer to do it in clear water.

Many things degrade water quality. The overall trend is towards lake eutrophication, or aging. Aging can't be stopped but it can be sped up or slowed down. When a lake ages, its water quality declines, and vice-versa. Areas with lower water quality generally have lower economic activity. The question is how fast will any water body age to the point of economic downturn and where should the government add regulations. The State of NH owns most of the water bodies after all. It should have a say in how it is used.

The proposition in this legislation is that wakesurfing is a outlying contributor to lake aging and should be regulated.

Cruisers and commercial craft, even the marine patrol, leave large but infrequent wakes, especially in the sensitive coves. Winnipesaukee is still pristine in many areas, but noticeably aging in others. Winnipesaukee can handle wake boat traffic in the wide open areas, but some water bodies already see accelerated aging, likely due to watershed development. Many things impact water quality and many things are already regulated. In this case, there is a higher risk of water bodies having a algae crisis if a higher wake intensity is introduced. A 500 foot distance from shore requirement would restrict wakesurfing on smaller water bodies yet allow it on lakes that can support it, like Winnipesaukee.

Political parties sometimes agree on measures to protect the state's ecology and along with it the economic driver it provides. Hopefully this is one of those cases.

I've submitted my testimony via the web site referenced and encourage you to do it too. Deadline is tomorrow (2/9)

Keep in mind the bill is not directly trying to prevent wake surfing on smaller bodies. It’s only proposing increasing safer distant from 150 to 250 ft. Not 500 ft.

I agree 500 ft would be better and would rule out some smaller bays and lakes. And folks are arguing to extend it to 500 ft.

I don’t disagree wake surfing does probably contribute to aging. But it’s hard to prove and a weak argument. Lawns, chemicals on those lawns and run off from those lawns are probably the #1 reason. Even lawns further up the mountains around the lakes are aging it. Poor rules from decades ago around septic systems is probably #2. Stirring up the water is probably way down the list.

I think sticking with safety and erosion are more direct and immediate consequences that can be debated. Aging will be a LOT harder. We’ve had significant aging long before the wake surfing was even a thing.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by mswlogo

I don’t disagree wake surfing does probably contribute to aging. But it’s hard to prove and a weak argument. Lawns, chemicals on those lawns and run off from those lawns are probably the #1 reason. Even lawns further up the mountains around the lakes are aging it. Poor rules from decades ago around septic systems is probably #2. Stirring up the water is probably way down the list.

Aging might be harder for people to see, but it is not hard to prove--it's very well documented that erosion and the chemicals and septic issues you mention all speed the time that a lake can go from beautiful to a marsh. These things all need attention.

You might check out the Lake Winnipesaukee Association website, as geezer suggested, and also Google Lake Champlain water quality to learn more

[LakeDad]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

Here is the difference: The large cruisers may pass by when they go somewhere and may pass by on their return. The wake boats will stay in one area while everyone has a turn. The waves washing up on the front lawns, the boats smashing against the docks, and the loud stereos can last for hours. I have had to go inside my house, close the windows, and turn the TV volume up while I waited for the clowns to go home.


It is my hope that the people who will vote on this legislation may read the comments on this website, and realize that wakes are not the only problem created by these boats. This is just an additional negative aspect.
Maybe it will prompt them to vote the right way. With any luck, maybe they will add language further restricting the use of wakeboats on the lakes.

Bluntly, to me, it just makes you sound grumpy and illogical. Win with logic and focused topic. Environment is a hot one right now.

As soon as most people see the “those damn kids and their rock’n’ roll music.” they’ll disengage, especially in a hall meeting. Logic and topic…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by LakeDad

Bluntly, to me, it just makes you sound grumpy and illogical. Win with logic and focused topic. Environment is a hot one right now.
As soon as most people see the “those damn kids and their rock’n’ roll music.” they’ll disengage, especially in a hall meeting. Logic and topic…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Grumpy? Yup,you got me! At least ten years of listening to and observing these wake boats and their negative impact has certainly shaped my outlook.

Illogical? I think not. If you want the legislation to pass you may as well cite every reason, not just one reason. The more evidence you can present that these boats are a problem the better chance there is that the legislation will pass.

Focused topic? The topic: Wake boat legislation doesn't change. There are just additional reasons it should pass.

[mswlogo]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

Grumpy? Yup,you got me! At least ten years of listening to and observing these wake boats and their negative impact has certainly shaped my outlook.

Illogical? I think not. If you want the legislation to pass you may as well cite every reason, not just one reason. The more evidence you can present that these boats are a problem the better chance there is that the legislation will pass.

Focused topic? The topic: Wake boat legislation doesn't change. There are just additional reasons it should pass.

If you throw to many reasons it’s looks like you are trying to find something to stick because you don’t have a solid reason.

[Winni P]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

Here is the difference: The large cruisers may pass by when they go somewhere and may pass by on their return. The wake boats will stay in one area while everyone has a turn. The waves washing up on the front lawns, the boats smashing against the docks, and the loud stereos can last for hours. I have had to go inside my house, close the windows, and turn the TV volume up while I waited for the clowns to go home.

Maybe in your part of the lake. Unfortunately, where we are located there is heavy cabin cruiser traffic all day long...

[chachee52]

I have a friend that has a wakesurfing boat, and i participate regularly and it is fun!!! They are on a smaller pond with many other of these boats on it. Is ir wrecking the pond? YES. He was one of the complainers of errosion until he did it and he loved it and bought the boat.
I guess how do you just say wakesurfing boats with the big waves when there are lots of other people boating with the bow up not on plane that are creating a big wake too? And forget about Winni, in smaller lakes/ponds where people just go in circles for a bunch of laps doing this. Doesn't that too create errosion?
The noise thing? Throw it out. I sit at night on the lake all summer and the pontoon boats that I can hear from LSP out to the Witches are just as bad, not JetSkis have sound systems and they are running back and forth in front of places as well. I'm not complaining about them, it is what it is. Just like Motorcycles with sound systems, I can hear them up and down my neighborhood from the main road all night too. There are laws about Db levels in NH. No need to add more laws that are already there. Just because it doesn't get inforced doesn't mean it's not a law.
I agree, focus on the main concern and don't bring up little things to confuse the issue or the issue will never get "fixed"

[boat_guy64]

Living in a community with multiple beaches and waterfront I will have to say that when the Sophie and Doris were running full force they caused much more damage that the wake boats. When they used to run full force between Meredith and the Weirs during bike week, they did a lot of damage. They would cause more damage during bike week than all the rest of the boats for the rest of the year. I've seen a lot less damage the past two years with them not running much even with the additional wake boats. Disclaimer.....I'm too old and fat to wakesurf and don't own a wake boat. But I do sit on the beach.

[MAXUM]

This no doubt will get about as heated as the speed limit debate.

[upthesaukee]

Do I miss having a boat? Yes. Are there irritants that no longer bother me now that I don't have a boat? Yes.

I don't miss the wakeboard boats tossing me around like a bobber when I'm anchored in a cove. I don't miss the boats who plow all over the lake in a bow high attitude (me too Chachee). I usually don't have a problem with cabin cruisers, even in Sanders Bay because they never seem to be in a rush to get anywhere. Sophie and Doris, now there is a whole different, but the same, problem.

In all the years of boating, what I really wish was enforced is responsibility for one's own wake. Unfortunately, I'm not sure how enforceable that would be be. There's so many complaints about the 150' rule "being ignored" by MP. Let's give them something else that is equally as difficult to enforce. But I'd still like to see an effort made.

End of rant and back to the wakeboard boat bill.

Dave

[tummyman]

Did anyone listen in to the hearing today? Any outcome?

[fatlazyless]

https://www.facebook.com/eastcoast.flightcraft/ probably knows all about it .... someone here, give them a friendly phone call! ....

Don't they support the WeirsCam or something with a place to put it? ....

Hey there FlightCraft ..... you want to stop selling those eighty thousand dollar wake boats and bring back the three dollar miniature golf! Miniature golf is a real sport while wake boarding is just an activity! .....

[chachee52]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Hey there FlightCraft ..... you want to stop selling those eighty thousand dollar wake boats and bring back the three dollar miniature golf! Miniature golf is a real sport while wake boarding is just an activity! .....

$80k? lol, your funny!!!!! Try $100 - 200K for most of them!!!!!


That's going to start a whole new debate about the price, i know.

[mswlogo]

Here is the hearing. It starts about 4 hrs in and goes for 2 hours.

https://youtu.be/XNzW7TinlcQ

Didn’t see any vote or anything. Just arguments for and against.

One person asked about invasive species type problems.

And the answer was a huge eye opener.

You know how careful NH is on boats being cleaned coming and going.

How the hell do you clean the INSIDE of a BALAST TANK. You can’t !!!
So they could suck in an invasive species from one lake and dump it in another.
Or bring problems that are in one part of the lake to another.

50 years from now people will laugh that these things were ever allowed.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by mswlogo

Here is the hearing. It starts about 4 hrs in and goes for 2 hours.

https://youtu.be/XNzW7TinlcQ

Didn’t see any vote or anything. Just arguments for and against.

One person asked about invasive species type problems.

And the answer was a huge eye opener.

You know how careful NH is on boats being cleaned coming and going.

How the hell do you clean the INSIDE of a BALAST TANK. You can’t !!!
So they could suck in an invasive species from one lake and dump it in another.
Or bring problems that are in one part of the lake to another.

50 years from now people will laugh that these things were ever allowed.

They don't hold committee votes in public session. They have a special executive session where several bills are discussed among the committee and votes are taken. The bill then enter the CC *Consent Calendar* with a committee recommendation of OTP, OTP-A (Amended), or ITL.

[Flotnjr]

Originally Posted by mswlogo

Here is the hearing. It starts about 4 hrs in and goes for 2 hours.

https://youtu.be/XNzW7TinlcQ

Didn’t see any vote or anything. Just arguments for and against.

One person asked about invasive species type problems.

And the answer was a huge eye opener.

You know how careful NH is on boats being cleaned coming and going.

How the hell do you clean the INSIDE of a BALAST TANK. You can’t !!!
So they could suck in an invasive species from one lake and dump it in another.
Or bring problems that are in one part of the lake to another.

50 years from now people will laugh that these things were ever allowed.

Typically most of these boats stay on a body of water- not a lot go from lake to lake. If transmitting invasive species is an issue- I would look at fishing boats more than boats with a ballast tank. These boats tend to be in the murky, shallow water more than any other boat. Livewells would be a bigger culprit than any ballast boat. Most of these boats are trailered. BUT- that's not what the bill is about...

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Flotnjr

If transmitting invasive species is an issue- I would look at fishing boats more than boats with a ballast tank.

This type of reasoning--"fishing boats are worse..."--is a roadmap to always do nothing. No matter what the issue, there's always somebody or something that is worse.

We should be tougher on everybody who might be transporting milfoil, and everybody who might be causing excessive erosion, and everybody who makes the lake way less pleasant for everybody else. Wake boats do all 3 of these things

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

This no doubt will get about as heated as the speed limit debate.

Probably so.
Whether anyone likes it or not, we are going to have more activity on the lakes... which generally means more waves and more noise.

[TiltonBB]

Maybe in your part of the lake. Unfortunately, where we are located there is heavy cabin cruiser traffic all day long...

You location puts you either on Dockham Shore Road or Varney Point.

Did you buy your home before or after Mountain View and Silver Sands opened for business?