Results!!!!! No Wake

Great Idea · 05-25-2006, 03:32 PM

I just received this email from Director Barrett's office. I spoke earlier with Director Flynn's office and he read a letter I had emailed in. They said action was forth coming........ It feels good to know that our state officials do listen!!! Thanks to all who championed the cause for NO WAKE.

Director Barrett has asked that I respond to your recent e-mail regarding Lake Winnipesaukee. Please be advised that the Department of Safety has just issued a press release announcing the adoption of an emergency rule as follows:

Saf-C 402.001 Emergency Restriction. Notwithstanding any rule to the contrary, until further notice, not person shall operate a vessel at a speed greater than headway speed within 600 feet from shoreline upon the waters of Silver Lake in the towns of Tilton and Belmont, Lake Winnipesaukee, Lake Winnisquam and Lake Opechee.

Dave R · 05-25-2006, 03:34 PM

600 feet is better than 150 but maybe not enough... Has the water dropped any or is it still full+13"?

B R · 05-25-2006, 03:47 PM

so people can start cancelling their weekend plans and make plans to go elsewhere.

i just cancelled mine.

HotDog · 05-25-2006, 03:58 PM

600 ft is fine don't be cancelling your plans!!!!!!!!

mcdude · 05-25-2006, 04:21 PM

Kayakers and Canoers....now is the time to actually go out on the BIG lake and enjoy!

ITD · 05-25-2006, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B R

so people can start cancelling their weekend plans and make plans to go elsewhere.

i just cancelled mine.

Thank you, especially if your plans had included bombing around in the lake.

My boat was scheduled to go in this Sunday, I just postponed for at least two weeks.

I still think this doesn't go far enough.

Kevin C · 05-25-2006, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ITD

Thank you, especially if your plans had included bombing around in the lake.

My boat was scheduled to go in this Sunday, I just postponed for at least two weeks.

I still think this doesn't go far enough.

ITD....I think you assume to much when you use words like "bombing" and you know what you do when you assume. I don't blame him for cancelling and being disappointed. A day out on the big lake is precious. I too have postponed my boating given the present scenario until the lake drops, however, I like to bring it up beyond no wake speed at times when it's ok to do so

ITD · 05-25-2006, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin C

ITD....I think you assume to much when you use words like "bombing" and you know what you do when you assume. I don't blame him for cancelling and being disappointed. A day out on the big lake is precious. I too have postponed my boating given the present scenario until the lake drops, however, I like to bring it up beyond no wake speed at times when it's ok to do so

You're right, bombing was too strong a word and I will quit on this before I dig in deeper. Sorry your plans were ruined BR (and Kevin) and thank you for choosing not to add to the problem by keeping your boat off the lake or not boating above headway speed.

ApS · 05-25-2006, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Great Idea

"...I just received this email from Director Barrett's office. I spoke earlier with Director Flynn's office and he read a letter I had emailed in. They said action was forth coming........ It feels good to know that our state officials do listen!!! Thanks to all who championed the cause for NO WAKE..."

We needed NO WAKE. What we got is scarcely better than last weekend's "urged".

Apparently state officials don't realize that wakes travel huge distances and don't stop magically at 600 feet.

Enforcement will be more difficult than the 150-foot rule, IMO. Hundreds just got carte blanche to cause mayhem.

TomC · 05-25-2006, 06:25 PM

..what everyone meant by "no wake lake-wide"? Was this what happened in the earlier "no wake" periods (i wasn't around the lake in 84, and i don't recall the 98 incident very well...)

600 ft instead of 150 ft doesn't seem to be much of a "decision"

KonaChick · 05-25-2006, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B R

so people can start cancelling their weekend plans and make plans to go elsewhere.

i just cancelled mine.

If it makes you feel better you're in good company. We as lakefront homeowners have also cancelled our plans to enjoy a weekend on the lake. It is depressing especially with temps. that are supposed to be in the 90's by Sunday. It's a small sacrifice to wait until things have dropped a bit though and that way we can keep down the wakes and hopefully keep damage to ALL things around the shoreline to a minimum.

SJF · 05-25-2006, 07:54 PM

Yep we also just canceled our plans. That is 5 more people that won't be able to spend their money in the lakes region. I hope this doesn't affect the economy in the area to badly. There are a lot of local businesses that count on these holiday weekends. Happy Memorial Day and see you in a few weeks!

Skipper of the Sea Que · 05-25-2006, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomC

..what everyone meant by "no wake lake-wide"? Was this what happened in the earlier "no wake" periods (i wasn't around the lake in 84, and i don't recall the 98 incident very well...) ...

As I recall, in 1998 the emergency No Wake restriction was for all of Lake Winnipesaukee. No exclusion 600 feet from shore as is the case today.

It did get a bit tedious boating at only headway back then. Particularly when I (very slowly) went to help a disabled boat get away from the rocks...

Coolbreeze · 05-25-2006, 08:21 PM

You are a fool if you cancell your holiday lake plans this weekend all because you can't go faster than headway speed! I know a boat is a big part of the lake, but common! I love the opportunity to get on that lake at any time under any circumstances,except lightning ofcoarse. As the previous poster put it, this is probably the safest time and rare opportunity to use a row boat or canoe on the lake and really enjoy and appreciate the true beauty without getting run over. Plus... think about how quiet it will be. Like being back in theold days. I will gladly take your place if you feel like trading! Relax and enjoy it even if it isn't what you are use to or planned on. When this "crisis" passes, you will look back on it and say "man, remember how quiet the lake was that holiday weekend, that sure was nice". Have a happy holiday.

MAXUM · 05-25-2006, 08:30 PM

Well this will make for a nice quiet weekend on the lake.

Quilt Lady · 05-25-2006, 08:34 PM

The "No Wake" was for the entire lake, with no exceptions. It was actually a very pleasant time on the water. Our sailboat was the fastest thing on the water. You could talk to other boaters as you went past. The fishing was great. Those who are cancelling their reservations are going to miss out on some "most excellent" time on the lake. When you slow down, you can see so much more of the lake, poke around places you've never been and get a real feel for the peace and beauty of the lake that we all cherish. It's only for a short time until the dam operators can restore the lake to its normal level. I, for one, plan to enjoy the slower speed. No need for sour grapes. When life hands you lemons, make lemonade!

Airwaves · 05-25-2006, 08:57 PM

Just FYI,
Here is what we are dealing with "downstream" of the lake. Putting the boats in? Not happening any time soon!

Even though the TV cameras are gone, the Merrimack River is still OVER flood stage at the Lowell Motor Boat Club.

Our Commodore heard that Winni is going to drop the lake by two feet just after Memorial Day, that will mean water at the LMBC, still above flood stage, will increase again.

We still can't get our docks into the water much less launch boats.

So, complain about No Wake? Come on down and help us complain about No Boating!

Kona Bay Girl · 05-25-2006, 09:42 PM

Do the Mount, Doris E., and Sophie C. still have cruising rights around the lake? If so, it's 10 bucks (on the Doris) for an hour of lake time and with gas the way it is, it seems like a pretty good deal.

I'm coming up this weekend; in fact I'm leaving at 6:30 AM for 3 whole days of awesomeness.

Merrymeeting · 05-26-2006, 05:41 AM

I find it interesting that they limited it to just a select few lakes.

Though I was happy to discover this morning that Merrymeeting is down 4-6" since last weekend and seems to be dropping fast now. This is good news for Winni too as once we're done releasing, your inflow will slow too.

Woodsy · 05-26-2006, 06:20 AM

They basically limited the NWZ restriction to the headwaters of the Merrimack River. I doubt they are going to drop Lake Winni 2' as Airwaves Commodore heard... they will drop the lake to just below full...

I knew the restriction would come as soon as it would be difficult for the tourists to cancel thier plans. I am surprised that they compromised on 600'.

Woodsy

jkjoshuatree · 05-26-2006, 07:10 AM

Quote:

You are a fool if you cancell your holiday lake plans this weekend all because you can't go faster than headway speed! I know a boat is a big part of the lake, but common! I love the opportunity to get on that lake at any time under any circumstances,except lightning ofcoarse. As the previous poster put it, this is probably the safest time and rare opportunity to use a row boat or canoe on the lake and really enjoy and appreciate the true beauty without getting run over. Plus... think about how quiet it will be. Like being back in theold days. I will gladly take your place if you feel like trading! Relax and enjoy it even if it isn't what you are use to or planned on. When this "crisis" passes, you will look back on it and say "man, remember how quiet the lake was that holiday weekend, that sure was nice". Have a happy holiday.

...I completely agree with CoolBreeze and QuiltLady.

Lake Winnipesaukee it one of the prettiest place on earth and to cancel your plans because of the "no wake" rule is insane.

There are a million other things to do in, on, or around the lake.

Hiking, fishing, horseback riding, getting in the car and exploring all the off-the-beaten roads around the lake (there must be hundreds of them-I try to explore at least one town in its entirety every year), not to mention shopping, fine dining, museums, and some great public libraries.

I live in the city, so just the thought of sitting on our porch on Bear Island with my family and enjoying the fresh air and tranquility is more than enough for me. I'd be there even if the forecast called for monsoons for the next three days.

Spend more time with your family, get to know them again, play stupid games, take a walk through the woods.

I'm a little bummed about the "no wake" rule? Yes. My dad just bought a brand new boat (our first one in over thirty years) and I'd love to be out in it waterskiing, hydrosliding, and tubing.

But I wouldn't miss being at the lake in ANY condition for anything in the world.

Okay...I'm stepping off my soapbox now. Thanks for listening to my rant.

Jk

ITD · 05-26-2006, 07:21 AM

I didn't know boat wakes only traveled 500 feet. Sounds like bureaucrat science to me.

GusMan · 05-26-2006, 07:33 AM

Wow.... I never knew it was up to certain people to decide what is foolish or not when it comes other people's hard earned vacation dollars.

Talk about arrogance.....

Gusman

B R · 05-26-2006, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coolbreeze

You are a fool if you cancel your holiday lake plans this weekend all because you can't go faster than headway speed! I know a boat is a big part of the lake, but common! I love the opportunity to get on that lake at any time under any circumstances, except lightning of coarse. As the previous poster put it, this is probably the safest time and rare opportunity to use a row boat or canoe on the lake and really enjoy and appreciate the true beauty without getting run over. Plus... think about how quiet it will be. Like being back in the old days. I will gladly take your place if you feel like trading! Relax and enjoy it even if it isn't what you are use to or planned on. When this "crisis" passes, you will look back on it and say "man, remember how quiet the lake was that holiday weekend that sure was nice". Have a happy holiday.

When all you have is a boat on the lake, spending $300-$400 a day when the lake is basically closed seems foolish to me.

What I am most upset about is we called marine patrol on Wednesday and they were adamant that the lake would be open. I’m not saying it's wrong to have a no wake limit, I’m saying the lack of communication on the subject was terrible. You have the governor saying "New Hampshire is open for business". All of us "day trippers" will probably disagree with that statement when we bring our boats to our usually place and find the lake practically closed. We’ll be at the Cape, not a bad second choice.

Woodsy, you took back your prediction too soon. You were right on!!!

KonaChick · 05-26-2006, 07:56 AM

Someone should call Mike Wallace..i smell a conspiracy! Wait..i think he's retired and on the lake boating (headway speed 600' from shore of course)!!

Woodsy · 05-26-2006, 08:26 AM

We have a bunch of competing interests, so it is a compromise...

NH had a very lackluster winter tourist season due to lack of snow. Then all of this flood damage. Where is the money supposed to come from to pay for the flood damage and make up the lost revenue? Tourists & daytrippers!

600' will dissipate alot of the energy from the wakes of smaller boats... the bigger cabin cruisers have the potential to do some damage.

Woodsy

Lake Lady 6 · 05-26-2006, 09:32 AM

I agree with you that the State could have imposed the ban earlier in the week so that those that wished to change their plans would have had more time to do so. The problems were here as early as 10 days ago.
We visit friends on the Cape and the offshore boating is great and the place to be if speed is your thing. Of course there isn't much to see out on the ocean and wide open but to each his own. When we first came to Lake Winnipesaukee we would stay in motels and tow our boat. We spent at least 8 hours a day, weather permitting, on the lake cruising. We knew every nook and cranny, what was for sale, where they were building, etc. Since the mid 80's we have owned a place on the water and it never ceases to amaze me the majority of large boats (not cabin cruisers) always go by at a high rate of speed - they certainly are not appreciating any of the mountain views, etc.
Maybe the answer is the ocean. There is a lot of ocean shoreline in New England.
Enjoy your weekend on the Cape.

playinghooky · 05-26-2006, 09:56 AM

For me it's hard to judge distance especially over water. Most people have trouble judging 150 feet no less 600 feet. So I went on to Google Earth and did some measurements. For example Alton Bay ranged from about 1300 feet wide to 3,000 feet wide further north. It's about 1950 feet wide across from Echo Point to the west side. What this means is that you could go full speed anywhere down Alton Bay as long as you stayed out in the middle (except around Sandy Point). Sandy Point is only around 850 feet across. I'm not suggesting you do this but it just gives you and idea of how far 600 feet really is. It really shouldn't hamper anybodies boating too much for the weekend.

Island-Ho · 05-26-2006, 11:18 AM

What a cop out by the powers that be. 600 feet is no better than the normal 150 feet as far as wake effect on docks and shorelines. I plan to be at the lake, and will certainly comply with the 600 foot rule and more. I need my boat to get to my island property, but once there I will enjoy the lake from non-motorized vessels. I had no problem keeping to headway speed last time this was imposed, even for my 2 mile ride. Just think, you can even talk to your passengers without shouting. I can't believe people are actually changing their plans because they have to slow down within 600 feet of shore instead of 150 feet, but thank you anyway.

The lake should be a little less hectic than normal this weekend.

gtxrider · 05-26-2006, 11:29 AM

From what I am reading the lake is not closed there are speed restrictions. Go out and enjoy a nice leisurely cruise see the sites. Some of us don't have the chance this weekend to be at the lake.

How about some cheese with the whine?

Lake Lady 6 · 05-26-2006, 02:40 PM

The NWZ rule is in effect officially 600 feet from shore. Unfortunately it is difficult for most people to visualize the distance from shore and most do not care.
I have been working outside all day and have observed about 2 out of 10 boats observing the NWZ. The boats that have been coming from the West Alton Marina area and heading to the west side of Rattlesnake have been among the worst offenders. Only one boat was going at headway speed. Have the marinas posted the official notice??
Perhaps the boaters are aware of the NWZ rule and choose to ignore it - they should stand on shore and see the effect as the wave increases as it rolls in.
You can't legislate common sense, courtesy or concern for others - there will always be a Capt. Bonehead on the water.

John A. Birdsall · 05-26-2006, 03:18 PM

I will also not be putting my boat in this weekend, but that has not changed my plans I leave for the State in one hour. I think that a speed limit has been placed on the lake. Never mind 25 or 45, It seems odd that this happens but it is something we all can live with, it won't be long. I think people will find it difficult to judge the 600' rule, and then also perhaps have to apply the 150' rule. Needless to say I hope that this Memorial Day will not cause anyone to have additional memorials to do, So Drive safe, drive responsibly either on land or on water. God Bless America!

Winni · 05-26-2006, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

We needed NO WAKE. What we got is scarcely better than last weekend's "urged".

Apparently state officials don't realize that wakes travel huge distances and don't stop magically at 600 feet.

Enforcement will be more difficult than the 150-foot rule, IMO. Hundreds just got carte blanche to cause mayhem.

I tried calling the Governor's office, the best governor we've had in a long time by the way, but was really disgusted. I was on hold forever and then told by the fellow answering the phone he would absolutely communicate my concerns to the Gov. He even used the word "promised"!

Well, contrary to what the Governor's website tells us, he apparently is not listening on this one. Have none of these grown men ever stuck their fingers in a bowl of water, swished them around, and seen what happens at the edges of the bowl?

Essentially that is what is going to happen this weekend. It always seems no one cares unless we get about 5 - 10 deaths due to a certain cause anymore. It was obviously the case with the 45/25 speed limit proposal, and it's holding true here once again. How many kids on waterskis, or whatever, are going to have to be hurt by the debris in the water? Does no one care that pieces of, if not whole docks, are going to come loose? Does no one care that people's boats are going to be damaged, not to even mention what will happen to the shore's wildlife nests!

Sorry, but I don't have the money to burn as those fellows who want to buzz my lake do. I don't have the money to rebuild my dock and I surely don't want to see anyone hurt by the debris. What was the Gov. thinking with this one? He needs a lesson in physics! It ABSOLUTELY should have been 100% NO WAKE, not only all weekend, but until we are back down to an at least close-to-normal level! Yes, I am mad about this one!

Aquadeziac · 05-26-2006, 09:25 PM

Lets see what happens Tuesday. Everyone will be home again, and then they can make the NWZ lake-wide. The merchants will have full pockets. There will be that much more unnecessary property damage done. But the all-mighty dollar will still rule. Seems to me that if these people have to lay out more and more money for property damage that could have been avoided, thats that much less revenue for the crying shopkeepers to rake in over a longer amount of time than just a three day weekend. Disposable income now becomes necessary income. Real tunnel vision, wouldn't you say? I don't recall this much whining in 1998 when the lakewide NWZ was in effect over the Fourth of July holiday.

Belmont Resident · 05-27-2006, 05:17 AM

Since many are so concerned why not take a proactive approach?
Call the marinas and ask if they have signs posted letting boaters know about the rule.
Or better yet print some out and post them yourself, I'll bet the marinas will not mind.
I found out only by mistake and I live here.

Grant · 05-27-2006, 05:36 AM

Well, you can mandate "now wake," but that doesn't mean people will comply. And the 600 feet does nothing. A big "belongs-in-the-ocean" boat came blowing by our place last evening, probably going 40-50 MPH, and a good 500-800 feet out. The resulting wake was a good as if he'd been 200 feet off shore.

jkjoshuatree · 05-27-2006, 06:27 AM

Wow.... I never knew it was up to certain people to decide what is foolish or not when it comes other people's hard earned vacation dollars.

Talk about arrogance.....

Gusman

Gusman, I hope you're not talking about me. It has nothing to do with arrogance. For those of you who know me, you know I don't have an arrogant bone in my body.

All I'm saying is that the Lakes Region has a lot to offer beside the lake itself.

This "the lake has a no wake zone...whaahhhh.....I'm gonna go to the Cape instead....whaahhhh....." is getting a little old.

Grow up.

Winni · 05-27-2006, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

Since many are so concerned why not take a proactive approach?

Well, I tried the proactive approach, but that doesn't work either. I've been watching these monster boats, who claim they make no wake on plane (right....), zipping by my place since Thursday, and it's now Saturday morning. I tried calling the governor's office. I tried calling the Marine Patrol multiple times. Last night I even brought them a nice big hunk of someones dock with a lot of nice long nails sticking out of it that washed up onto our boat ramp as an example of the deathly salad of trash floating out in the middle of our bay.

I got lambasted for all this effort. All I'm trying to do is get the Marine Patrol to understand that "dispatching" is not the answer. It doesn't work with the 150 ft. rule and it's not going to work with a 600 ft. rule. By the time these selfish people go blasting by, they are long gone before a Patrol boat can be "dispatched"! Who, by the way, is going to say they were 601 ft. away or 599? How can you ever read their numbers or identify them as anything but a "red boat"? (Sound familiar? It's just like the 150 rule. We've been through all this with the same arguments about the 45/25 limit and look where it got us.)

My suggestion to the Marine Patrol was to post patrol boats in each of the large bays around the largest lakes as deterrents. (Yes, I know they need to answer emergencies first.)

Perhaps by doing this, just as you naturally slow down when you see a policeman on the side of the road with his lights flashing (admit it; we all do it), it would at least slow down some of these people somewhat. But, instead of my suggestion being "heard", as usual, all I seemed to get were the excuses. This is no different than saying the 150 ft. rule will take care of everything; it doesn't work. This rule won't help either. Those who care will comply. Those who don't won't.

As for posting hand written, non-official signs at marinas, are you kidding? The people blasting their monster boats around this weekend are so arrogant they aren't going to care what's posted there! They don't under normal circumstances care about others and they won't now. Their only interest is in their own misguided adrenaline rush as they screw it to the rest of us.

Sorry, I don't want to be mean, but this IS the reality (see my tag) and yes, the proper word to use is "arrogant"!

SAMIAM · 05-27-2006, 09:47 AM

Aquadesiac...that was a pretty rude and thoughtless remark..."crying shopkeepers" indeed.In case you haven't noticed,there is very little industry in the lakes region.Tourism is the very engine that drives the economy.
Those of us in business got rained out two weeks in a row.We badly need a successfull holiday weekend,especially after a winter with no snow.
I don't think anyone is totally happy with the 600' rule,but it shows a little compromise on both sides.
The "almighty" dollar,as you call it,is what paves the roads,keeps schools open,provides fire and police service.Look at the bright side....at least you won't have to rake your beach.

NFFL · 05-27-2006, 10:37 AM

Very well said MJP!

Lakegeezer · 05-27-2006, 11:34 AM

The rule is sort of working up north of Moultonboro bay. I'm in an area where safe passage is less than 600', so everyone passing by should be leaving no wake. Lots of big boats out, and all but a few are going slow until they hit the big part of the bay. The bass boats and the midsize cruisers (23'-28') are the worst scofflaws today. Many bass boats are going by slow, but at maximum wake speed. Don't they get it? The midsize boats are the ones that don't seem to care at all, and just fly by with the family on board. When blasted with an airhorn, they just wave. I'd guess 80% compliance overall. The shoreline is taking a beating when the captain boneheads go by, but its not continuous. Better than last weekend, and much better it would be with no rule at all. No power boating for me today. I'm going out shopping, to show the local businesses that no-wake doesn't mean no money.

Aside the Point · 05-27-2006, 12:19 PM

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Everyone boating should check the Web-cams. Watch boats pass, white wakes curling, reload the image and see the effect on the water surface. Then go to the Gallery and view the images of 'Houses.' Many of the older camps, built close to the water, must be nearly floating off of foundations. Let's watch our wakes!

DRH · 05-27-2006, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

I'd guess 80% compliance overall. The shoreline is taking a beating when the captain boneheads go by, but its not continuous. Better than last weekend, and much better it would be with no rule at all.

I'd say it's about the same over our way today in West Alton ... probably 80% compliance. The other 20% either don't know or don't care about the 600' restriction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

The midsize boats are the ones that don't seem to care at all, and just fly by with the family on board.

Again, it's much the same here. Most of the performance boats we've seen today seem to be complying.

Considering that it's Memorial Day weekend, boat traffic seems to be relatively light overall.

GusMan · 05-27-2006, 06:07 PM

jkjoshuatree,

Yes, my note was in reference to your claim that anyone who altered their vacation plans due to the nowake restriction on winnie was "foolish".

That is an arrogant statement whether you meant it or not. To decide that you know what's best for *anyone* other than yourself is just plain silly. Furthermore, you imply that changing ones plans is a case of "whining" about the no wake zone.... not necessarily. I'm fairly confident that most of the people who heard about the nowake zone and chose to go elsewhere know that the lake has much to offer.

I'm not looking for an argument.....

I never whined, nor commented about the no wake zone... I simply turned left onto route 104 West (instead of East) and travelled over to Newfound and had a glorious day cruising (or bombing) around on an almost deserted lake and managed to land a few nice smallies to boot. For *MY* purposes... it was a much better option than my original plan of heading to winnie for the day.

Pretty simple, huh??

I truly hope *all* property owners survive these conditions with minimal damage...

Gusman

ApS · 05-27-2006, 07:31 PM

Boats here were so "all over the map" with respect to distance to shore, there was no point in determining a percentage of No-Wake compliance. Since most of my day was doing carpentry on the dock, a perpetrator-based rating system was in order—"A" being the best on the lake:

1) Outboards (All, irrespective of speed) should rate a B+ in dock-rocking.
2) Pontoon boats rate an "A"
3) Jet-Skis aren't in the running—Okay, an "A"
4) Ski-boats and wake-boats get a "D"
5) Remaining inboards: "D-"

An airhorn was used twice pre-emptively on two light cruisers, with 50% effectiveness. (One slowed to headway—one "didn't hear".)

A NW wind piped up at about 3:20PM: That wind, combining now with the boat wakes, repeatedly crashed the dock and pegged the dock-rocker meter. (The surface of a large water-filled garbage can). Some very large wakes appeared "out of nowhere".

One funny encounter earlier this morning was two inboards heading towards one another at ¾-throttle -- about 200' offshore. When they came within 600' of one another, they slowed to "headway speed". When clear, they took off again.

Talk about "Not Clear on the Concept"!

All in all? Not too bad—with two more days to go.

Winni · 05-27-2006, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GusMan

jkjoshuatree,

I'm not looking for an argument.....

... I simply turned left onto route 104 West (instead of East) and travelled over to Newfound and had a glorious day cruising (or bombing) around on an almost deserted lake
Gusman

First of all, this is not the kind of forum where people use that kind of language. I am surprised the web master even allowed your post!

Second, the people here are not trying to tell others how to behave. They are worried and concerned about the loon nests, the otter nests (which we have on our neighboring land) and other wildlife that live at the edge of lakes...something you apparently care little about. They are worried about the safety of the general public who might be hurt by the debris in the water. And, they are worried about the land, docks, boats, etc. many, not just they themselves, have poured their hearts and souls into, in most cases, to maintain.

So, that was really nice of you to go mess up the shores of Newfound instead of Winnipesaukee. I'm sure the otters, loons, and people whose docks are underwater on Newfound are appreciative of your generosity.

If you are this disrespectful in your writing, I'm not surprised you don't recognize arrogance when you see it in the mirror.

VarneyPoint · 05-27-2006, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJP

So, that was really nice of you to go mess up the shores of Newfound instead of Winnipesaukee. I'm sure the otters, loons, and people whose docks are underwater on Newfound are appreciative of your generosity.

MJP,
Before you go accusing GusMan of doing something utterly destructive to Newfound Lake, maybe you should do some research. According to the DES Dam Bureau website, the height of Newfound Lake is right where it is supposed to be and is not at all flooded. He didn't do anything wrong. In fact, bravo to him for thinking outside the box.

http://www.des.state.nh.us/RTi_Home/...found+Lake+Dam

PaulS · 05-27-2006, 09:27 PM

I saw a letter from the State of NH posted at 2 different marinas (I on Winnisquam, the other on Winnipesaukee). The marine patrol was also out in force "educating" those that weren't aware of the new rule. Paugus Bay was definitely quieter than usual, so the 600' rule is at least be helping somewhat. There is still alot of debris in the water, which is a good reason to go slow even if you aren't worried about the property owners and shoreline.

jkjoshuatree · 05-28-2006, 06:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GusMan

jkjoshuatree,

Yes, my note was in reference to your claim that anyone who altered their vacation plans due to the nowake restriction on winnie was "foolish".

That is an arrogant statement whether you meant it or not. To decide that you know what's best for *anyone* other than yourself is just plain silly. Furthermore, you imply that changing ones plans is a case of "whining" about the no wake zone.... not necessarily. I'm fairly confident that most of the people who heard about the nowake zone and chose to go elsewhere know that the lake has much to offer.

I'm not looking for an argument.....

I never whined, nor commented about the no wake zone... I simply turned left onto route 104 West (instead of East) and travelled over to Newfound and had a glorious day cruising (or bombing) around on an almost deserted lake and managed to land a few nice smallies to boot. For *MY* purposes... it was a much better option than my original plan of heading to winnie for the day.

Pretty simple, huh??

I truly hope *all* property owners survive these conditions with minimal damage...

Gusman

First of all Gusman,

Nice language. You're a class act.

Second of all, you should read my post(s) again. I never called anyone foolish. There was a quote from another forum member that I used.

You're missing the point completely.

I'm just letting people know that Winni has a lot to offer in all of its surrounding towns and areas and it'd be good if we could take care of the environment, businesses, and property of lakeside owners all at once.

After all, we're all in this together.

Jk

KennyOfTheLake · 05-28-2006, 07:03 AM

No less than three people at Irwin Marine reminded us of the no wake restriction when they put our boat in. This was our first boating of the season and we enjoyed just being out there even if it was just at headway speed most of the time. Very light boat traffic in Paugus, and as others have observed, about 80% compliance. 20% are jerks, which seems like the typical ratio for most things.

KOTL

Winni · 05-28-2006, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VarneyPoint

MJP,
Before you go accusing GusMan of doing something utterly destructive to Newfound Lake, maybe you should do some research. According to the DES Dam Bureau website, the height of Newfound Lake is right where it is supposed to be and is not at all flooded. He didn't do anything wrong. In fact, bravo to him for thinking outside the box.

First of all, I don't think I accused him of "something utterly destructive", but more like being inconsiderate and thoughtless. Newfound's levels are one thing, but I know that lake well and it is certainly not the size or character of lake anyone should be "bombing" around on at any time. Also, the tone and words used in his post were not, I believe, appropriate for this forum. I'm sorry you didn't like my comment, but I think his was just grossly inappropriate.

Now, if he had said respectfully something like, "I looked up Newfound's levels (and, are you even sure he knew that before he went there?) and finding them to be at normal levels, spent a nice day fishing there instead," then I wouldn't have had a problem. But, that's not what was said or how it was said.

As for Newfound, did you happen to notice in those charts how rapid the draw down was from the dam? Don't you wonder how the people below that dam feel about that? Imagine if that were done at Winnipesaukee? Good grief! I imagine there is someplace I can go look up if that rapid draw down did do damage, but frankly I'm getting off this computer today and going out to enjoy our beautiful weather for a change.

Anyway, none of this diminishes the fact that the NWZ on Winni. should have been lake-wide, not just for 600ft., and it was just a wrong decision by the governor. Many of you are saying you see 80% compliance, but it only takes one big jolt of waves from one boat to do damage. 20% is still 20% too many. I've had enough of this, though. I hope you all have a nice weekend. Get outside and enjoy it!

(p.s. In another thread, Bizer says Newfound had been 28" above level on 5/15! Ya' think they might have been a little nervous there about boats out on their lake this weekend regardless of what the charts show? Also, Right On!, JK; we are all in this together!)

Coolbreeze · 05-28-2006, 10:42 AM

WOW! It is amazing how fast the topic of not enough water in the lake can go polar opposite...too much water. YIKES!!

Winni · 05-28-2006, 12:20 PM

Just in for lunch and wanted to report what I'm observing as boaters zip around Little Mark Island...full speed ahead! No 20% observance here! They're barely even observing the 150 ft. rule! As I said right along...the MPs should have had a boat stationed in each of the large bays. This whole thing has become nothing but a joke. It may just take a little longer for the waves to hit shore. I could practically build a whole new dock with the stuff washing up on our shore! Groan....

And...uh, mcdude...I wouldn't be out there in my kayak today if my life depended on it; 'cause it would. What a mess!

mcdude · 05-28-2006, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJP

And...uh, mcdude...I wouldn't be out there in my kayak today if my life depended on it; 'cause it would.

Thanks for the heads up, MJP. I had pretty much come to the same conclusion. Other than this glorious weather, the other nice thing I've noticed about this week-end is NO BUGS!!!

GusMan · 05-28-2006, 02:46 PM

You're right... I apologize for the language...
Inappropriate phrase used without thinking and
without hostile intent.

Gusman

GusMan · 05-28-2006, 02:51 PM

Also... I edited the offending reply out of the original message...

Not trying to hide from it... just cleaning it up.

Gusman

Winni · 05-28-2006, 04:42 PM

I feel so sorry for the Marine Patrol. We had so many violators, including a few PWCs doing wheelies no more than 60ft. from our shore (for hours!), I finally started calling the Marine Patrol around 1:00 pm. 4 calls later and they still didn't show and my husband started getting really fed up. I think he probably made another 5 or 6 calls. At 5:20 pm, they FINALLY showed and of course everyone had cleared out for supper (and/or because he was there) and all was (fairly) calm.

I'm telling you I'm ready to bust a gasket! I watched two kayakers have to hold on to each other not 10 ft. off my shore so they wouldn't be tipped over by the waves. When the MP got here we told him exact descriptions of the PWCs and showed him what house they were at. He came back and told us, "They have them all covered up and denied everything!" Well, of course! Then he told me he'd need me to, and you all know this bit of insanity, "Get their bow numbers!"

My word, people, what is it going to take to get some sanity into our NH government!!! I think I'm living in a parallel universe, because it just seems that no one in Concord is getting it!

I'm beginning to believe the state motto is mis-stated, it might as well read, "Live Free AND die," because I feel like I must be dead...no one is listening!

JK47 · 05-28-2006, 08:15 PM

The MP can't be everywhere at once. If people are being irresponsible and you know where their dock/house is, go over there and inform then of the no wake rule. Much of it is innocent - many people not boating from marinas have no idea about the no wake restriction. Above all, relax and enjoy the holiday.

ApS · 05-28-2006, 08:59 PM

Tolerable as Saturday was, today was awful.

You could have told me that the No-Wake Rule had been rescinded at 2PM today, and I'd have believed you. (And the exhaust-noise abatement rule, too).

I re-learned something about wakes: You can make a huge arc with your boat and the inside, more curved, wake will triple in intensity and size as it reaches the shore: One of the biggest wakes crashing against my dock today was made by a ski-boat close to the opposite shore, one-half mile away.

They constructed my dock really well in 1985, but my neighbor's much newer docks have been taking a beating. One neighbor has a dock made with mahogany decking. What that's going to look like after a month of this -- is anybody's guess.

There appears to be more debris in the water today than yesterday, and nobody's slowing to pick up any of it.

These aren't the boaters of 1984. (Or 1998, for that matter).

Winni · 05-28-2006, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JK47

The MP can't be everywhere at once. If people are being irresponsible and you know where their dock/house is, go over there and inform then of the no wake rule. Much of it is innocent - many people not boating from marinas have no idea about the no wake restriction. Above all, relax and enjoy the holiday.

Oh, don't worry; we DID inform them and as I said, they just denied everything they were doing. We went over and had a discussion of the 3 rules they were breaking over and over and what it was doing to the wildlife and all of our docks. They still lied to the MP 4 hours later! I've been through this enough times to know the routine, believe me! There is not a thing the regular law abiding citizen/victim can do.

This isn't about the MPs. It's about Gov. Lynch making the tourist dollar more important than the safety of the wildlife, the public, and our property. He put the MPs in an impossible position. They are hugely understaffed and underpaid. It IS about Lynch not looking at the whole picture. As someone said in another post, this is worse than no ruling at all.

Clearly you must not live on the shores of one of the affected lakes or are in an area not as exposed as we are. We've all been just holding our breaths here waiting for someone to get hurt or our boats or docks to get bashed with trash or snapped off in whole or part. If you were sitting there watching your dock (which has always been very secure) being thrashed about, as well as your boat and those of your neighbors, you would not be having such a nice weekend either.

Glad you're enjoying it; I'm not and won't be until all these self-centered fools get off the water. Then we can gear up for the invasion of 500,000 +/- more people who could also care less about the preservation of the NH Lakes Region in about 2 more weeks... Zoom Zoom... It is so sad to see what has happened here in the last 20 years. And, I think we're supposed to call this "progress", right?

hiker47 · 05-28-2006, 10:01 PM

It is with amusement and disgust that I have read some of the postings and replies. The words selfish, arrogant, and seldf centered cross my mind. I feel soory for the merchants with the poor winter and rainy weekends as well as the landowners who have property destroyed by the flooding. What I can't understand is the people who have no regard for others or their property as well as no regard for their safety or the safety of others. I have heard many times " no one owns the lake" or "we have the same rights to the lake as the propery owners". Consider this before you speed across the lake, in violation of the law, or reply in anger to others thoughts. God owns the lake because hemade it. He has given all of us the privelege of using it and enjoying it. Also, along with rights are respect and responsibility. It is a privelege to use the lake, not a right, and that privelege is constatntly earned by being respectful of others and rsponsible in followingh the rules and laws set forth.
Life is too short, Slow down, stop and smell the roses. They really doo smell very nice. YIS, doc

foster · 05-29-2006, 11:11 AM

mjp, it sounds to me that you might never be happy or content around people having a good time in ways that you do not approve of. so why don't you move to a nice secluded place with no one around ? you cant change other people by complaining, you can only change your own attitude.

KonaChick · 05-29-2006, 12:18 PM

My husband is up today doing some seasonal chores. The water is unbelievably high...he's been coming to the lake his whole life and had never seen it this high. Our dock is taking a pounding he says...not many observing the NWZ w/in 600' of shore...hell not ever our neighbors are he said. MJP I know how furstrated you are we have similar neighbors. Their favorite thing to do is let their 12 yr. old kids and friends out on the jetski's alone....they do it all the time. I've called MP so many times it's on speed dial..they've never show up. Foster it doesn't sound like to me that MJP is upset about people having a good time in ways he does not aprove of..it sounds as if all he wants is for people to have thier good times w/in the confines of the law. Funny that he's the one you pointed out in your post..and not the people who were breaking the law.

Airwaves · 05-29-2006, 12:38 PM

Let me preface this by saying I have looked at, but NOT read, all the posts on this topic.

One thing that keeps coming through to me, especially in some of the later posts, is the lack of response by MP to calls for violations.

During the 45/25 discussion it was pointed out by myself and a number of others that perhaps MP forces need to be expanded and a couple of ideas on how to fund the expansion were presented.

Another item that someone posted during the 45/25 debate. I don't know what has come of it but I think it's a great idea. IIRC someone posted the Laconia paper was thinking about adding the Marine Patrol to their police call list. Publishing the calls that are logged into MP and how they were handled.

It might be interesting to see what they are doing and how many boats they have on the lake during peak periods. It would give us more information about whether they are underfunded and overworked, or just an agency that needs to get their act together.

foster · 05-29-2006, 12:57 PM

Have you ever passed a car that was doing the speed limit? have you ever slightly rolled a stop sign? should i call the cops on you when i see it, no i dont think so. maybe a little more Live and let live, unless a person is being hurt by another then i would step in. when the wind blows are you going to call the cops on mother nature? when its all over and the water goes down, go help your neighbors rebuild their dock and live your life.

KonaChick · 05-29-2006, 01:07 PM

[QUOTE=foster]Have you ever passed a car that was doing the speed limit? have you ever slightly rolled a stop sign? should i call the cops on you when i see it, no i dont think so. maybe a little more Live and let live, unless a person is being hurt by another then i would step in. when the wind blows are you going to call the cops on mother nature? when its all over and the water goes down, go help your neighbors rebuild their dock and live your life.[/QUO

No the police shouldn't be called I agree with you there. Now let's take it a step further. What if I was speeding by your home 25 times a day? What if you had kids who rode their bikes..walked to friends houses on that very same road I was speeding up and down on?? Would you call the police then? I bet you would. That's how I feel. You ride by my home at ungodly speeds and put my family or property in danger...I'm going to call the police.

HotDog · 05-29-2006, 01:46 PM

KonaChick,
i know what your saying but speeding by a house in a car is a lot different then speeding by your house on a boat, do you swim across the lake more then 60' away from your house? prob. not and if you are then you shouldn't, if someone comes closer to your house will swiming then you should call but, that aren't damaging anyone.

Tir Na Nog · 05-29-2006, 03:30 PM

I just got back to the Boston after a weekend up at the Lake. We did get out on the boat both Saturday and Sunday. We boat out of Wolfeboro. I saw very few boats following the No Wake rule. Nor did it seem to me that anyone at Goodhue hawkins was advising boaters of the rule. Saturday was a little windy and there were not as many boats out when we were at around 4, but even in Wolfeboro Bay the boats were popping right up to speed and pushing a wake as soon as they got away from the docks. On Sunday, there were may more boats out and even less compliance. We motored over to Alton Bay and as we came to the area of Echo Point (where I think it would be tough to keep 600 feet from either shore) we saw all of these boats coming out at headway speed and I thought at least there the word was out. A little further in the Bay I saw why. There was a MP boat cruising out. CLearly noncompliance was not just a lack of knowledge. I saw one boat passing all the others at headway speed, probably not even following the 150 foot rule as to other boats, and he immediately powered down when he saw the MP boat, which I had hoped would be pulling him over. There seems very limited enforcement of the rules. Has NH ever considered something similar to the Coast Guard Auxillary to help out on the lake? Auxillary volunteers have been very helpful to the Coasties with little expense as they are volunteers.

Dave R · 05-29-2006, 06:48 PM

Perhaps a silly question, but if folks are worried about their docks taking such a beating, why not just pull them out until the water goes down?

ApS · 05-29-2006, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tir Na Nog

I just got back to the Boston after a weekend up at the Lake. We did get out on the boat both Saturday and Sunday. We boat out of Wolfeboro. I saw very few boats following the No Wake rule. Nor did it seem to me that anyone at Goodhue hawkins was advising boaters of the rule. Saturday was a little windy and there were not as many boats out when we were at around 4, but even in Wolfeboro Bay the boats were popping right up to speed and pushing a wake as soon as they got away from the docks. On Sunday, there were may more boats out and even less compliance. We motored over to Alton Bay and as we came to the area of Echo Point (where I think it would be tough to keep 600 feet from either shore) we saw all of these boats coming out at headway speed and I thought at least there the word was out. A little further in the Bay I saw why. There was a MP boat cruising out. CLearly noncompliance was not just a lack of knowledge. I saw one boat passing all the others at headway speed, probably not even following the 150 foot rule as to other boats, and he immediately powered down when he saw the MP boat, which I had hoped would be pulling him over. There seems very limited enforcement of the rules. Has NH ever considered something similar to the Coast Guard Auxiliary to help out on the lake? Auxiliary volunteers have been very helpful to the Coasties with little expense as they are volunteers.

Except for Goodhue, which I didn't see, your observations match mine.

Sunday was somewhat windier than today and Saturday, and did a better job of "covering up the evidence". (Many boats could spread a big wake and go faster+ than headway). Today was calm with somewhat better compliance, but full of exhaust >>koff<< >>koff << fumes , like most calm weekend days.

It seems that the 600' rule was neglectful of those dock owners without a breakwater which, in my neighborhood, is about 95% (without breakwaters). Remember,
"The 600' Rule Was a Compromise of Competing Interests", which were tourism and...and...and...I forgot the other one.

There was a Marine Patrol Auxiliary but was disbanded, according to a 2002 letter written to the Granite State News following a hit&run fatality. The writer, from Tuftonbboro, appeared upset that the MP Auxiliary's work—restricted to a floating advisory role—went under-appreciated.

BTW: Today offered an opportunity to put out water-filled garbage cans on the "high" side of my dock that had developed from last week's heavy winds and high water. Thanks mostly to a boat towing a tube, the affected dock end-piling appears to have nearly "settled back in"!

(Now if the governor can just raise the lake about another 4 inches, I should be able to get it perfectly level).

Island Life · 05-29-2006, 07:41 PM

I keep my boat at Fay's and I didn't see any signs announcing the no-wake rule. If I hadn't read about it here, I wouldn't have known. Saw MP several times but they weren't enforcing the no-wake rule.

Three or four sections of different docks have washed up on my beach. Two of them look to be of standard size and I thought it might be a good idea to drop them off someplace where they can be claimed by people looking to replace the sections they've lost. Any ideas about where I could leave them?

Winni · 05-29-2006, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foster

mjp, it sounds to me that you might never be happy or content around people having a good time in ways that you do not approve of. so why don't you move to a nice secluded place with no one around ? you cant change other people by complaining, you can only change your own attitude.

I did move to a place like that almost 20 years ago, but then people like you showed up. Your avatar says it all...then there's mine...

KonaChick · 05-29-2006, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HotDog

KonaChick,
i know what your saying but speeding by a house in a car is a lot different then speeding by your house on a boat, do you swim across the lake more then 60' away from your house? prob. not and if you are then you shouldn't, if someone comes closer to your house will swiming then you should call but, that aren't damaging anyone.

Hotdog this is all in reference to our property being damaged by large wakes because of the high water.....I'm saying that the reference to sliding through a stop sign or someone passing me on the highway speeding isn't a good one because the large wakes rolling across my beach and dock due to boats not obeying the law ARE doing damage...it's NOT as trivial as the comparison of sliding through a stop sign or someone passing you on the highway over the speed limit. People just aren't getting it.

DRH · 05-29-2006, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave R

Perhaps a silly question, but if folks are worried about their docks taking such a beating, why not just pull them out until the water goes down?

A great many docks on the lake are permanent, installed either on pilings driven down into the lake bottom or on cribs which contain large rocks to secure the dock to the lake bottom. Only "seasonal" docks can be raised up out of the water.

Woodsy · 05-30-2006, 07:16 AM

Nobody seems to get that there are competing interests...

Bottom line is that 600' was a reasonable compromise. As I predicted, nobody is really happy with it. I really don't think that the word got out as well as it should have. That might have been somewhat intentional. We do need the tourist $$$ to help pay for all of the flood damage.

I did witness an MP boat stationed in Paugus Bay for most of the day Sat & Sun. He was pretty busy "informing" people of the NWZ. Paugus was pretty calm...

Woodsy

Dave R · 05-30-2006, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRH

A great many docks on the lake are permanent, installed either on pilings driven down into the lake bottom or on cribs which contain large rocks to secure the dock to the lake bottom. Only "seasonal" docks can be raised up out of the water.

I'd think any dock built to survive ice would have an easy time with water and would not be in danger. If not, perhaps a re-design is in order. I doubt this'll be the last flood.

This a great opportunity for folks to fix weaknesses in design and implementation. Seems to me, that would a better way to spend time than fretting about wakes. If folks really care about maintaining their property in it's current state, they should do what is necessary to prevent it from changing.

B R · 05-30-2006, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkjoshuatree

Wow.... I never knew it was up to certain people to decide what is foolish or not when it comes other people's hard earned vacation dollars.

Talk about arrogance.....

Gusman

Gusman, I hope you're not talking about me. It has nothing to do with arrogance. For those of you who know me, you know I don't have an arrogant bone in my body.

All I'm saying is that the Lakes Region has a lot to offer beside the lake itself.

This "the lake has a no wake zone...whaahhhh.....I'm gonna go to the Cape instead....whaahhhh....." is getting a little old.

Grow up.

Grow Up? I think you need to grow up a bit yourself.

Maybe it was a knee jerk reaction; but I'd been trying to find out the status of the lake all week, and all we got was "there's nothing wrong up here, come on up". I boat all the way down Paugus Bay. That makes going anywhere with at no wake a 2 hour trip, one way. Sorry, that's not boating to me (me i said, your opinion may differ).

I made one comment that we were going somewhere else, and you've decided to attack me. Maybe it was a little whiney, but I wasn't happy with how the information was getting out. I vented. I know that's something new to this site, sorry i offended/bothered you.

We go up every weekend and I consistently put 150 hours on my boat each year. We save those non boating days for bad weather weekends. No need to start that now (again, my opinion).

jkjoshuatree · 05-30-2006, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B R

Grow Up? I think you need to grow up a bit yourself.

Maybe it was a knee jerk reaction; but I'd been trying to find out the status of the lake all week, and all we got was "there's nothing wrong up here, come on up". I boat all the way down Paugus Bay. That makes going anywhere with at no wake a 2 hour trip, one way. Sorry, that's not boating to me (me i said, your opinion may differ).

I made one comment that we were going somewhere else, and you've decided to attack me. Maybe it was a little whiney, but I wasn't happy with how the information was getting out. I vented. I know that's something new to this site, sorry i offended/bothered you.

We go up every weekend and I consistently put 150 hours on my boat each year. We save those non boating days for bad weather weekends. No need to start that now (again, my opinion).

All you need to do is go back and look at my original post. It just talks about all of the other things Winnipesaukee and the Lakes Region has to offer besides actually being on the lake.

It benefits everyone when people are up there for a long holiday weekend.

When people say they're going to go somewhere else because they can't be "zipping" around the lake, I get a little defensive and for that I apologize.

I love being on the water as much as the next guy, but I'd rather be at Winni (NWZ or not) than any where else on earth. And I've been to some pretty amazing places.

Winni · 05-30-2006, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave R

I'd think any dock built to survive ice would have an easy time with water and would not be in danger. If not, perhaps a re-design is in order. I doubt this'll be the last flood.

Most people who have permanent docks have winter circulators. These are simply machines that keep the water moving, do no harm to the environment, and keep ice from forming around these docks in winter. Even these are no match for Mother Nature, however. Even the most sturdily built dock with multiple circulators cannot battle against ice floes. A few years back one of my neighbors, who has a very sturdy dock and circulators, stood there and watched a big chuck of ice during ice-out take away 1/2 his u-dock in seconds. That was over $5,000 in damage in a blink of an eye. There is simply nothing anyone can do when nature takes its course. So, I wish people would stop trying to blame shore owners and scold them for not having sturdy docks.

As for floods and waves... Like ice, we can't control or predict flooding. No one ever saw this perhaps-once-in-a-lifetime type of situation coming, not even the weathermen. We do the best we can with the money we have to keep our docks from letting go and causing public danger. No one could predict the kinds of beatings our docks would take last fall and now again this spring. But, the thing is, there are NO MACHINES that can stop wave action, and this CAN BE CONTROLLED by people, so it should have been.

So, please stop criticizing us and realize we are as much concerned about public safety and danger to wildlife as we are about our own property damage, maybe even more. A dock can be rebuilt, but a child getting hurt while tubing (yes, they did it in the fruit salad of debris right in front of our house on Sunday) or a loon nest with eggs destroyed just so someone can get an adrenaline rush, is unthinkable.

Hope this is the last time I have to reiterate this...

LIforrelaxin · 05-30-2006, 12:00 PM

MJP, very good post....you are right on with your comments.......

Now I am new here and trying not to blast people.....and of course at the momment can't even tell you who made the comment....but someone in this thread, posed the question of why not just take a seasonal dock out. Well for those that have never put a dock in or out let me just say....it is not that easy. I would have loved to have taken my dock out....as welll as my nieghbors (my aunt and uncles) but....I can't do it be myself....I have to get help to help me, which is usually not a problem....but to ask someone to give up thier weekend to help me.....and then be left to ask the same person to help me a few weeks later....come on...

For a situation that happens so seldom....people should just grow up....and realize that once or twice in thier lives they may not be able to what they want when they want..............

Kevin C · 05-30-2006, 07:28 PM

I have stayed off the lake for the last couple of weekends (which has been killing me as I have yet to be out on the lake this year) in an effort to respect the lakefront owners situation as well as the environmental impact, not to mention the floating debris around the lake. I found the following statement from Bizer about the lake:

The flow of water leaving Lake Winnipesaukee at the Lakeport Dam is measured in cubic feet per second. At near full blast, the damn can release 1.24 billion gallons of water per day, or about enough water to lower the level of Lake Winnipesaukee just one inch. -Bizer

Can anyone tell me what the status of the outflow is presently and what the estimate is for the lake to be at an acceptable level so that normal boating operations can resume? I know that the outflow from the lake has to be respectful of those downstream.

Mee-n-Mac · 05-30-2006, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin C

{snip} Can anyone tell me what the status of the outflow is presently and what the estimate is for the lake to be at an acceptable level so that normal boating operations can resume? I know that the outflow from the lake has to be respectful of those downstream.

The discharge rate for the Lakeport dam can be found here
http://www.des.state.nh.us/RTi_Home/...E=Lakeport+Dam

while the hour by hour lake level can be found here
http://www.des.state.nh.us/RTi_Home/...+Winnipesaukee

As to when the lake is low enough to be "normal" ... good question and I was just wondering that myself. Looking at Bizer's graph I'd say that when the lake drops about another 6" it would be in the range of normal levels. Kinda hard to argue for NWS at that point. Personally I'll be very happy when it drops 6". Anyone know what the level was when the NWZ was lifted in '98 ? I guess I could look it up ....

On another note LG had suggested an automatic NWZ anytime the lake was above 505' so perhaps another 0.2' might be sufficient ?

EDIT : ooops that's a 1/2 ft marking on Bizer's chart so make that 6" not 12".

Winni · 05-30-2006, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Bottom line is that 600' was a reasonable compromise.

Fact: This was not a compromise. Compromise was not possible in this issue. 150 ft., 600 ft., 800 ft...it doesn't matter. $ won; they were, in the end, all that mattered.

Physics 101: You put your finger in a bowl of water; stir it around, and the "waves" will hit the edge of the bowl. You DO NOT put your finger in the water; you DO NOT stir it around, and the waves (except those produced by nature itself) will NOT hit the edge of the bowl. (p.s. It doesn't matter where you put your finger in the bowl.)

You might want to reread your tag line.

Kevin C · 05-30-2006, 08:25 PM

Thanks Mee-n-Mac for the websites and your reply.....now bookmarked for future reference.

Winni · 05-30-2006, 08:33 PM

Have any of you noticed not one word has been said in these forums, at least that I've seen, about what this weekend is really about? It is especially important today, May 30th, the original "Memorial Day". We are all so busy arguing and protecting our own "beliefs" that no one has bothered to say a word about what we should really be worrying about...

...that no more soldiers must die or be injured. I lived through the Vietnam era and I lost people I went to school with. I watch the news every day. We are all missing the most important point here:

Thank you, with the greatest pride and sincerity, to all who are currently in uniform serving us and to those who have passed and served us.

Dave R · 05-31-2006, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJP

Most people who have permanent docks have winter circulators. These are simply machines that keep the water moving, do no harm to the environment, and keep ice from forming around these docks in winter. Even these are no match for Mother Nature, however. Even the most sturdily built dock with multiple circulators cannot battle against ice floes. A few years back one of my neighbors, who has a very sturdy dock and circulators, stood there and watched a big chuck of ice during ice-out take away 1/2 his u-dock in seconds. That was over $5,000 in damage in a blink of an eye. There is simply nothing anyone can do when nature takes its course. So, I wish people would stop trying to blame shore owners and scold them for not having sturdy docks.

As for floods and waves... Like ice, we can't control or predict flooding. No one ever saw this perhaps-once-in-a-lifetime type of situation coming, not even the weathermen. We do the best we can with the money we have to keep our docks from letting go and causing public danger. No one could predict the kinds of beatings our docks would take last fall and now again this spring. But, the thing is, there are NO MACHINES that can stop wave action, and this CAN BE CONTROLLED by people, so it should have been.

So, please stop criticizing us and realize we are as much concerned about public safety and danger to wildlife as we are about our own property damage, maybe even more. A dock can be rebuilt, but a child getting hurt while tubing (yes, they did it in the fruit salad of debris right in front of our house on Sunday) or a loon nest with eggs destroyed just so someone can get an adrenaline rush, is unthinkable.

Hope this is the last time I have to reiterate this...

You can roll your eyes at me all you want but if you continually sustain damage to you dock you really ought to consider making it removable. Same for your neighbor unless they have $5000 to throw away every few years. I spend a lot of time on another lake and every year we put the dock in and take the dock out. The dock has survived for 18 years and has plenty of life left. I doubt the 24'x6' main dock plus the 4'x8' extension cost more than $3000 to build, including the wheels on which it rolls (which make it easily removeable). It can be put in and taken out by one person and uses nothing but "off the shelf" hardware that's widely available around the lake. It's also modular and can be expanded in size with no added difficulty. I am not criticizing or scolding you, just trying to offer a suggestion.

I was not out there tubing in the debris or making wakes at your place this weekend.

If you are expecting people to behave themselves out of the goodness in their hearts, you are bound for disappointment. Most people are not very considerate. You can complain about people making wakes on this forum and call the MP forever and I can assure you the wakes and erosion will continue as always. Instead of complaining, I suggest doing something to help yourself. You are blessed with the luxury of living in one of the most beuatiful places on this earth, yet you come here looking for sympathy when you have to deal with some of the occasional downsides of lake living. I'll save my sympathy for folks that dealt with "real" flooding issues; folks in NH/MA whose homes were destroyed by the recent rains, folks who survived the recent tsunami, or the Hurricane survivors down south.

Dave R · 05-31-2006, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

MJP, very good post....you are right on with your comments.......

Now I am new here and trying not to blast people.....and of course at the momment can't even tell you who made the comment....but someone in this thread, posed the question of why not just take a seasonal dock out. Well for those that have never put a dock in or out let me just say....it is not that easy. I would have loved to have taken my dock out....as welll as my nieghbors (my aunt and uncles) but....I can't do it be myself....I have to get help to help me, which is usually not a problem....but to ask someone to give up thier weekend to help me.....and then be left to ask the same person to help me a few weeks later....come on...

For a situation that happens so seldom....people should just grow up....and realize that once or twice in thier lives they may not be able to what they want when they want..............

That was me that suggested taking the dock out. Just trying to be realistic. If you want to watch your property get wrecked for three days instead of doing something about it, it's certainly your prerogative. I honestly hope the damage was minimal. I didn't cause any of it, I wasn't there.

Winni · 05-31-2006, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave R

I was not out there tubing in the debris or making wakes at your place this weekend.

If you are expecting people to behave themselves out of the goodness in their hearts, you are bound for disappointment. Most people are not very considerate.
I'll save my sympathy

So, what is the point here?

I never accused you of tubing in front of my house...where did you get that idea from? Wow! Talk about mis-reading!

How naive do you think I am? I am so discouraged about people having "goodness in their hearts" I could throw up. Just look at what happened with HB162! But, that doesn't mean I'm going to stop trying to get people to understand the harm they do to nature and others. To stop would be to give up, and I'm betting you already figured out I'm not one to give up easily.

I never once asked for your or anyone else's sympathy. I asked for your, and everyone else's understanding and consideration of the situation and said over and over it was not just about personal property, but more importantly about public safety and the preservation of wildlife and the natural surroundings...or did you just conveniently choose to skip that part in my postings?

Joke's on you: I do not have a permanent dock! In fact, I never said in any of my postings that I did. My neighbors, who I was also concerned about, do. In fact, all we have and all that was bouncing around, was the deck at the water's edge we connect our removable dock to. We can't remove the extension; that part is permanent and could be easily replaced, though it could have been a hazard in the water had it let loose. What saved it was that our removable dock sections and all the metal poles it uses were piled on top of that section. The waves were so heavy, however, even with all that weight...and it is A LOT...the extension, which is well set in rocks and land, was still bouncing around.

Put your "sympathy" wherever you want. That doesn't make hurting others, including wildlife and people who aren't smart enough to stay off the Lake when there is an unusual situation like this, right. Who cares where you put your sympathy? I do care where you put your brain, however.

I'm so sick of this. I don't want to keep going around this. If people chose to be naive about reality then just go ahead and be so; I'm not foolish enough to think I can change everyone, but if I can just get even one person to stop and take a second look at the harm they might be doing at any time they choose to use the Lake, then I've accomplished something. Whether others judge my writing to be worthwhile or not, I really don't care. If I'm negatively judged, so what; getting kudos is not why I write. If you actually care about the world, then, well, "Thanks". If you don't, just remember that old phrase, "What goes around, comes around."

Furthermore, if you do care about New Hampshire, then do something; don't just talk. I suggest joining the Forest Society, the NH Lakes Association, WinnFABS, anything that actually makes a difference. Yes, I do feel sorry for the hurricane victims and people all over the world who suffer, but I live here, so I'm trying to do something about here.

Misty Blue · 05-31-2006, 09:29 AM

Here is a trick that I use.

When the Lake is high and waves threaten the decking on my dock I pull the canoe on to the dock and fill it and some stragically placed trash cans with water. They hold the dock down and are easy to empty when the Lake returns to normal.

I do this for my out of state neighbors as well, except for the guy four doors down who doesn't like my dog. He crossed a line!

Island Girl · 05-31-2006, 09:37 AM

Below are some threads from past years on the old forum re: 1998 and 1994.

If I read correctly, the No-Wake in 1998 was lifted on July 11 which according to Bizer's chart was about 4.75. (Please correct me if I am wrong.)

The lake will drop 1.3 inches per day at 2550 outflow, also according to Bizer. It looks like it is dropping nicely, now at 5.14. (My dock is probably not underwater anymore!) Flow at 8 am this morning was 2486.

If I do the math correctly (I have never been known for that) we need .39 less to get to 4.75... approximately 5 inches, about 4 days.. I have not accounted for the inflow from the watershed. I believe that .08 is one inch of lake level.(Again correct my math. I won't be offended)

Thanks Bizer for the daily chart update (and all that you do)... it is most helpful.

Links to statistics are on the Wave and Weather Watch page at www.rattlesnakecam.com/watch.htm.

IG

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforu...mes;read=63006
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforu...mes;read=12126
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforu...mes;read=12133
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforu...mes;read=12171
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforu...ames;read=8041
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/oldforu...ames;read=8709

Islander2 · 05-31-2006, 10:49 AM

All this does not take into consideration the 3 inches, and possibly up to 5 inches, as predicted by WMUR, of rain predicted between now and Sunday morning. Let hope we don't get that much.

Weirs guy · 05-31-2006, 11:33 AM

I may have missed it somewhere here, but is there any news on changing to a lake wide NWZ? If not I’d realy like to push for one, because either my opinion of 600’ is different from most peoples, or the MP’s realy aren’t interested in enforcing the rule, but either way it did not work.

KonaChick · 05-31-2006, 01:38 PM

Dave R your rationale doesn't make sense to me. The reason why my husband and I are able to afford this "luxury" is because we have worked hard and made some inelligent business decesions. I won't even go into the hours, days, years that my husband spent building up his business. This wasn't handed to us on a silver platter. Of course we want to protect our assets and more importantly the asset of Lake Winnipesaukee itself. You make it seem trivial that we as waterfront homeowners want to make sure our beloved land and the land surrounding our precious Lake Winnipesaukee is protected. THIS IS OUR HOME!!! You're portraying us as rich bluebloods who are complaining that the "commonfolk" are ruining our martini time. IT JUST AIN'T SO!!!

jrc · 05-31-2006, 02:11 PM

Konachick,
I don't think Dave R, I, or anyone said that you or the other lake front owners shouldn't be able to do everything in your power to protect your investment, whether you earned it or inherited it. That power includes petitioning the government to make the whole lake a no wake zone and cajoling boat operators to voluntarily not make a wake. You of course, have every right to do those things.

I just don't think that was the only thing or the best thing the lake owners could do to prevent property damage from this event and future events.

Dave R · 05-31-2006, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KonaChick

Dave R your rationale doesn't make sense to me. The reason why my husband and I are able to afford this "luxury" is because we have worked hard and made some inelligent business decesions. I won't even go into the hours, days, years that my husband spent building up his business. This wasn't handed to us on a silver platter. Of course we want to protect our assets and more importantly the asset of Lake Winnipesaukee itself. You make it seem trivial that we as waterfront homeowners want to make sure our beloved land and the land surrounding our precious Lake Winnipesaukee is protected. THIS IS OUR HOME!!! You're portraying us as rich bluebloods who are complaining that the "commonfolk" are ruining our martini time. IT JUST AIN'T SO!!!

I am certain I never stated or inferred that lake front land owners are "rich blue bloods" etc. I am not jealous of land owners, I am happy for those that choose this lifestyle and have worked hard for it AND those that did not have to work for it. I have also always respected the rights folks have as landowners. To state, as I did, that someone is "blessed with the luxury of living in one of the most beautiful parts of the planet" does not mean I'm jealous or feel this person is a snob. I thought it sounded pretty nice, actually. That said, I suppose if you are not very religious, you could reasonably translate "blessed" into something less friendly like "entitled", but that is not at all what I meant.

Dave R · 05-31-2006, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJP

So, what is the point here?

I never accused you of tubing in front of my house...where did you get that idea from? Wow! Talk about mis-reading!

How naive do you think I am? I am so discouraged about people having "goodness in their hearts" I could throw up. Just look at what happened with HB162! But, that doesn't mean I'm going to stop trying to get people to understand the harm they do to nature and others. To stop would be to give up, and I'm betting you already figured out I'm not one to give up easily.

I never once asked for your or anyone else's sympathy. I asked for your, and everyone else's understanding and consideration of the situation and said over and over it was not just about personal property, but more importantly about public safety and the preservation of wildlife and the natural surroundings...or did you just conveniently choose to skip that part in my postings?

Joke's on you: I do not have a permanent dock! In fact, I never said in any of my postings that I did. My neighbors, who I was also concerned about, do. In fact, all we have and all that was bouncing around, was the deck at the water's edge we connect our removable dock to. We can't remove the extension; that part is permanent and could be easily replaced, though it could have been a hazard in the water had it let loose. What saved it was that our removable dock sections and all the metal poles it uses were piled on top of that section. The waves were so heavy, however, even with all that weight...and it is A LOT...the extension, which is well set in rocks and land, was still bouncing around.

Put your "sympathy" wherever you want. That doesn't make hurting others, including wildlife and people who aren't smart enough to stay off the Lake when there is an unusual situation like this, right. Who cares where you put your sympathy? I do care where you put your brain, however.

I'm so sick of this. I don't want to keep going around this. If people chose to be naive about reality then just go ahead and be so; I'm not foolish enough to think I can change everyone, but if I can just get even one person to stop and take a second look at the harm they might be doing at any time they choose to use the Lake, then I've accomplished something. Whether others judge my writing to be worthwhile or not, I really don't care. If I'm negatively judged, so what; getting kudos is not why I write. If you actually care about the world, then, well, "Thanks". If you don't, just remember that old phrase, "What goes around, comes around."

Furthermore, if you do care about New Hampshire, then do something; don't just talk. I suggest joining the Forest Society, the NH Lakes Association, WinnFABS, anything that actually makes a difference. Yes, I do feel sorry for the hurricane victims and people all over the world who suffer, but I live here, so I'm trying to do something about here.

The sole point of my posts was to point out the absurdity of whining on the internet instead of protecting one's property. Posting on here about how inconsiderate people are, how greedy the politicians are, and how unresponsive the MP is, does absolutely nothing to help preserve anyone's property or the health of the lake. I THINK A LAKEWIDE NWZ is a good idea right now. But it did not happen so I'm trying to be realistic and offer a solution.

Tell me more about what you are trying to do here. I see lots of empty words and little action. As a lake front land owner, you have vastly more power to stop erosion than I do. What have you done?

Joke's on me huh? I don't think smashed up docks are funny. Maybe irresponsible, but not funny.

Perhaps you missed the news, WinnFABS actually failed to make a difference. HB162 did not pass, but I'm not really sure what that failed bill has to do with this discussion. As far as I know, there have been no high speed accidents during the flooding.

I never felt you were accusing me of making wakes or tubing in front of your house. Just pointing out that you need not condsider me the same type of person that would do that just because you disagree with my thoughts on what constitutes reasonable actions to take to prevent erosion. You have my understanding and consideration. I am not part of the problem.

Perhaps nothing can be done to help during this flood. For those that suffer damage now, I ask: What are your plans to prevent the same type of damage 7 or so years from now when the next flood happens? Whining 7 years from now will have the same effect then as it has now.

KonaChick · 05-31-2006, 05:41 PM

Dave R sorry but I think that's exactly what you were implying. Having our docks and land destroyed isn't an occassional "downside" to lake living. When you say that I think of the things that truly are an occassional downside to owning on the big lake...traffic coming up on Fridays, guests that stay too long, mice in the house, cleaning the beach up, ignorant boaters. Theses are all examples of the occassional downside we experience up at the lake. Having our docks destroyed, erosion of our beaches, wildlife nests on our property destroyed because of ignorant boaters who refuse to follow the law are more than a "downside", they are an outrage. We don't need your sympathy we need compliance of the law and some common sense both of which were in short supply this holiday weekend.

Winni · 05-31-2006, 07:20 PM

Thank you, KonaChick. As for DaveR, I am just giving up. He will never get it so it's not worth any more of my effort. Have a nice life, Dave, just leave the rest of us alone. Getting you to understand is a fruitless endeavor.

Moultonborolifeguard · 05-31-2006, 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJP

Most people who have permanent docks have winter circulators. These are simply machines that keep the water moving, do no harm to the environment, and keep ice from forming around these docks in winter. Even these are no match for Mother Nature, however. Even the most sturdily built dock with multiple circulators cannot battle against ice floes. A few years back one of my neighbors, who has a very sturdy dock and circulators, stood there and watched a big chuck of ice during ice-out take away 1/2 his u-dock in seconds. That was over $5,000 in damage in a blink of an eye. There is simply nothing anyone can do when nature takes its course. So, I wish people would stop trying to blame shore owners and scold them for not having sturdy docks.

As for floods and waves... Like ice, we can't control or predict flooding. No one ever saw this perhaps-once-in-a-lifetime type of situation coming, not even the weathermen. We do the best we can with the money we have to keep our docks from letting go and causing public danger. No one could predict the kinds of beatings our docks would take last fall and now again this spring. But, the thing is, there are NO MACHINES that can stop wave action, and this CAN BE CONTROLLED by people, so it should have been.

So, please stop criticizing us and realize we are as much concerned about public safety and danger to wildlife as we are about our own property damage, maybe even more. A dock can be rebuilt, but a child getting hurt while tubing (yes, they did it in the fruit salad of debris right in front of our house on Sunday) or a loon nest with eggs destroyed just so someone can get an adrenaline rush, is unthinkable.

Hope this is the last time I have to reiterate this...

Your actually wrong about the docks with the circulators. My dock doesn't have any circulator near it during the winter. It uses a machine to stop wave action. Its called a break water. It just gets iced up completely every year. In the last 7 years we've had one 2x6 break because of the ice, and we are on the broads. Also I would maintain that peoples children have a lot better chance of getting hurt tubing from falling off going to fast, hitting bouys or other objects during normal conditions than debris caused by the high water. If your really worried about the danger than maybe we should just ban all water activities all together according to you just to be safe. Also those PWCs that were bothing you so much put out little to no wake. They almost certainly put out less wake than a bigger boat out at 600 feet. I would know I own and use one. I virtually garuntee, that you hate them when they are over 150' from shore during any normal summer if they are in front of your house. Instead of haivng the government spend more of my tax money trying to control people via MP why don't you just relax. The water level is plummeting rapidly now and in a few days with a little wind the water will be much lower and much less debris free. O well to bad looks like there'll be no NWZ this summer.

Dave R · 06-01-2006, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KonaChick

Dave R sorry but I think that's exactly what you were implying. Having our docks and land destroyed isn't an occassional "downside" to lake living. When you say that I think of the things that truly are an occassional downside to owning on the big lake...traffic coming up on Fridays, guests that stay too long, mice in the house, cleaning the beach up, ignorant boaters. Theses are all examples of the occassional downside we experience up at the lake. Having our docks destroyed, erosion of our beaches, wildlife nests on our property destroyed because of ignorant boaters who refuse to follow the law are more than a "downside", they are an outrage. We don't need your sympathy we need compliance of the law and some common sense both of which were in short supply this holiday weekend.

I think you may have taken a well-deserved sarcastic response to MJP as an attack on all land owners by me. It was not. Don't flatter yourself, you are not envied as much as you think.

Lets put my "occasional downside" comment back in perspective. The context in which it was written was thus: Compared to folks losing homes, loved ones, and lives to hurricanes, floods and tsunamis, your erosion and dock problems are indeed just an occasional downside of choosing to live next to water. I know it probably seems like the end of the world when your dock gets busted up, but it's nothing that cannot be repaired and things could be vastly worse. If you were truly responsible, you would have already been prepared for the high water and the dock would be just fine.

If you truly cared about wildlife on the lake, you'd NEVER own a house on the lake. That land of yours was stolen from those poor furry little animals who can no longer call it home and are probably very, very sad every time they think about it. Especially the cute ones becuase somehow, I doubt snapping turtles feel sadness. A true nature lover would turn the place into a human-free animal sanctuary. Please, let us know how that turns out.

If in this context, you still think your situation is an "outrage", give FEMA a call. Maybe they will declare your property a distaster area and bail you out.

05-25-2006, 03:32 PM	#1
Great Idea Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 38 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Results!!!!! No Wake I just received this email from Director Barrett's office. I spoke earlier with Director Flynn's office and he read a letter I had emailed in. They said action was forth coming........ It feels good to know that our state officials do listen!!! Thanks to all who championed the cause for NO WAKE. Director Barrett has asked that I respond to your recent e-mail regarding Lake Winnipesaukee. Please be advised that the Department of Safety has just issued a press release announcing the adoption of an emergency rule as follows: Saf-C 402.001 Emergency Restriction. Notwithstanding any rule to the contrary, until further notice, not person shall operate a vessel at a speed greater than headway speed within 600 feet from shoreline upon the waters of Silver Lake in the towns of Tilton and Belmont, Lake Winnipesaukee, Lake Winnisquam and Lake Opechee.

05-25-2006, 03:47 PM	#3
B R Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 140 Thanks: 0 Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post	get the message out!! so people can start cancelling their weekend plans and make plans to go elsewhere. i just cancelled mine. __________________ "You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know"

05-25-2006, 03:58 PM	#4
HotDog Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 40 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	thats fine 600 ft is fine don't be cancelling your plans!!!!!!!! __________________ live today like you wont live tomorrow

05-25-2006, 06:25 PM	#10
TomC Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Lakes Region Posts: 547 Thanks: 9 Thanked 29 Times in 20 Posts	is the 600 ft "no wake" exclusion.. ..what everyone meant by "no wake lake-wide"? Was this what happened in the earlier "no wake" periods (i wasn't around the lake in 84, and i don't recall the 98 incident very well...) 600 ft instead of 150 ft doesn't seem to be much of a "decision"

05-25-2006, 07:54 PM	#12
SJF Junior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 3 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Canceled Yep we also just canceled our plans. That is 5 more people that won't be able to spend their money in the lakes region. I hope this doesn't affect the economy in the area to badly. There are a lot of local businesses that count on these holiday weekends. Happy Memorial Day and see you in a few weeks!

05-25-2006, 03:34 PM	#2
Dave R Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 2,974 Thanks: 246 Thanked 736 Times in 438 Posts	600 feet is better than 150 but maybe not enough... Has the water dropped any or is it still full+13"?

05-25-2006, 04:21 PM	#5
mcdude Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Rock Haven Lake - West Newfield, ME Posts: 5,361 Thanks: 374 Thanked 1,044 Times in 490 Posts	Kayakers and Canoers....now is the time to actually go out on the BIG lake and enjoy!

05-25-2006, 08:21 PM	#14
Coolbreeze Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 332 Thanks: 0 Thanked 51 Times in 26 Posts	You are a fool if you cancell your holiday lake plans this weekend all because you can't go faster than headway speed! I know a boat is a big part of the lake, but common! I love the opportunity to get on that lake at any time under any circumstances,except lightning ofcoarse. As the previous poster put it, this is probably the safest time and rare opportunity to use a row boat or canoe on the lake and really enjoy and appreciate the true beauty without getting run over. Plus... think about how quiet it will be. Like being back in theold days. I will gladly take your place if you feel like trading! Relax and enjoy it even if it isn't what you are use to or planned on. When this "crisis" passes, you will look back on it and say "man, remember how quiet the lake was that holiday weekend, that sure was nice". Have a happy holiday.

05-25-2006, 08:30 PM	#15
MAXUM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Kuna ID Posts: 2,755 Thanks: 246 Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts	Well this will make for a nice quiet weekend on the lake.

05-25-2006, 08:34 PM	#16
Quilt Lady Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: West Alton, NH Posts: 169 Thanks: 0 Thanked 25 Times in 11 Posts	I remember '98 . . . The "No Wake" was for the entire lake, with no exceptions. It was actually a very pleasant time on the water. Our sailboat was the fastest thing on the water. You could talk to other boaters as you went past. The fishing was great. Those who are cancelling their reservations are going to miss out on some "most excellent" time on the lake. When you slow down, you can see so much more of the lake, poke around places you've never been and get a real feel for the peace and beauty of the lake that we all cherish. It's only for a short time until the dam operators can restore the lake to its normal level. I, for one, plan to enjoy the slower speed. No need for sour grapes. When life hands you lemons, make lemonade! __________________ QL (Doing my best to encourage Global Warming ... one quilt at a time!)

05-25-2006, 08:57 PM	#17
Airwaves Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: I'm right here! Posts: 1,153 Thanks: 9 Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts	No Wake? How about No Boating! Just FYI, Here is what we are dealing with "downstream" of the lake. Putting the boats in? Not happening any time soon! Even though the TV cameras are gone, the Merrimack River is still *OVER* flood stage at the Lowell Motor Boat Club. Our Commodore heard that Winni is going to drop the lake by two feet just after Memorial Day, that will mean water at the LMBC, still above flood stage, will increase again. We still can't get our docks into the water much less launch boats. So, complain about No Wake? Come on down and help us complain about No Boating!

05-25-2006, 09:42 PM	#18
Kona Bay Girl Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Middlesex County, MA Posts: 160 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Do the Mount, Doris E., and Sophie C. still have cruising rights around the lake? If so, it's 10 bucks (on the Doris) for an hour of lake time and with gas the way it is, it seems like a pretty good deal. I'm coming up this weekend; in fact I'm leaving at 6:30 AM for 3 whole days of awesomeness. __________________ Yo soy un casco.

05-26-2006, 05:41 AM	#19
Merrymeeting Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Merrymeeting Lake, New Durham Posts: 2,217 Thanks: 299 Thanked 795 Times in 365 Posts	I find it interesting that they limited it to just a select few lakes. Though I was happy to discover this morning that Merrymeeting is down 4-6" since last weekend and seems to be dropping fast now. This is good news for Winni too as once we're done releasing, your inflow will slow too.

05-26-2006, 06:20 AM	#20
Woodsy Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Weirs Beach Posts: 1,949 Thanks: 80 Thanked 969 Times in 432 Posts	They basically limited the NWZ restriction to the headwaters of the Merrimack River. I doubt they are going to drop Lake Winni 2' as Airwaves Commodore heard... they will drop the lake to just below full... I knew the restriction would come as soon as it would be difficult for the tourists to cancel thier plans. I am surprised that they compromised on 600'. Woodsy __________________ The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.

05-26-2006, 07:21 AM	#22
ITD Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonboro, NH Posts: 2,860 Thanks: 461 Thanked 666 Times in 366 Posts	I didn't know boat wakes only traveled 500 feet. Sounds like bureaucrat science to me.

05-26-2006, 07:33 AM	#23
GusMan Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 123 Thanks: 0 Thanked 42 Times in 24 Posts	Wow.... I never knew it was up to certain people to decide what is foolish or not when it comes other people's hard earned vacation dollars. Talk about arrogance..... Gusman

05-26-2006, 07:56 AM	#25
KonaChick Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 518 Thanks: 19 Thanked 62 Times in 15 Posts	Someone should call Mike Wallace..i smell a conspiracy! Wait..i think he's retired and on the lake boating (headway speed 600' from shore of course)!!

05-26-2006, 08:26 AM	#26
Woodsy Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Weirs Beach Posts: 1,949 Thanks: 80 Thanked 969 Times in 432 Posts	We have a bunch of competing interests, so it is a compromise... NH had a very lackluster winter tourist season due to lack of snow. Then all of this flood damage. Where is the money supposed to come from to pay for the flood damage and make up the lost revenue? Tourists & daytrippers! 600' will dissipate alot of the energy from the wakes of smaller boats... the bigger cabin cruisers have the potential to do some damage. Woodsy __________________ The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.

05-26-2006, 09:32 AM	#27
Lake Lady 6 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 102 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	B R I agree with you that the State could have imposed the ban earlier in the week so that those that wished to change their plans would have had more time to do so. The problems were here as early as 10 days ago. We visit friends on the Cape and the offshore boating is great and the place to be if speed is your thing. Of course there isn't much to see out on the ocean and wide open but to each his own. When we first came to Lake Winnipesaukee we would stay in motels and tow our boat. We spent at least 8 hours a day, weather permitting, on the lake cruising. We knew every nook and cranny, what was for sale, where they were building, etc. Since the mid 80's we have owned a place on the water and it never ceases to amaze me the majority of large boats (not cabin cruisers) always go by at a high rate of speed - they certainly are not appreciating any of the mountain views, etc. Maybe the answer is the ocean. There is a lot of ocean shoreline in New England. Enjoy your weekend on the Cape.

05-26-2006, 09:56 AM	#28
playinghooky Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Alton Bay Posts: 61 Thanks: 7 Thanked 11 Times in 4 Posts	How far is 600 feet? For me it's hard to judge distance especially over water. Most people have trouble judging 150 feet no less 600 feet. So I went on to Google Earth and did some measurements. For example Alton Bay ranged from about 1300 feet wide to 3,000 feet wide further north. It's about 1950 feet wide across from Echo Point to the west side. What this means is that you could go full speed anywhere down Alton Bay as long as you stayed out in the middle (except around Sandy Point). Sandy Point is only around 850 feet across. I'm not suggesting you do this but it just gives you and idea of how far 600 feet really is. It really shouldn't hamper anybodies boating too much for the weekend.

05-26-2006, 11:18 AM	#29
Island-Ho Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 176 Thanks: 19 Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts	Cop-out What a cop out by the powers that be. 600 feet is no better than the normal 150 feet as far as wake effect on docks and shorelines. I plan to be at the lake, and will certainly comply with the 600 foot rule and more. I need my boat to get to my island property, but once there I will enjoy the lake from non-motorized vessels. I had no problem keeping to headway speed last time this was imposed, even for my 2 mile ride. Just think, you can even talk to your passengers without shouting. I can't believe people are actually changing their plans because they have to slow down within 600 feet of shore instead of 150 feet, but thank you anyway. The lake should be a little less hectic than normal this weekend.

05-26-2006, 11:29 AM	#30
gtxrider Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Piscataway, NJ Posts: 1,030 Thanks: 2 Thanked 46 Times in 24 Posts	Closed? From what I am reading the lake is not closed there are speed restrictions. Go out and enjoy a nice leisurely cruise see the sites. Some of us don't have the chance this weekend to be at the lake. How about some cheese with the whine?

05-26-2006, 02:40 PM	#31
Lake Lady 6 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 102 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Is it Working???? The NWZ rule is in effect officially 600 feet from shore. Unfortunately it is difficult for most people to visualize the distance from shore and most do not care. I have been working outside all day and have observed about 2 out of 10 boats observing the NWZ. The boats that have been coming from the West Alton Marina area and heading to the west side of Rattlesnake have been among the worst offenders. Only one boat was going at headway speed. Have the marinas posted the official notice?? Perhaps the boaters are aware of the NWZ rule and choose to ignore it - they should stand on shore and see the effect as the wave increases as it rolls in. You can't legislate common sense, courtesy or concern for others - there will always be a Capt. Bonehead on the water.

05-26-2006, 03:18 PM	#32
John A. Birdsall Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Norwich, CT Posts: 599 Thanks: 27 Thanked 51 Times in 35 Posts	lake near NWZ I will also not be putting my boat in this weekend, but that has not changed my plans I leave for the State in one hour. I think that a speed limit has been placed on the lake. Never mind 25 or 45, It seems odd that this happens but it is something we all can live with, it won't be long. I think people will find it difficult to judge the 600' rule, and then also perhaps have to apply the 150' rule. Needless to say I hope that this Memorial Day will not cause anyone to have additional memorials to do, So Drive safe, drive responsibly either on land or on water. God Bless America!

05-26-2006, 09:25 PM	#34
Aquadeziac Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Concord NH Posts: 239 Thanks: 19 Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts	Lets see what happens Tuesday. Everyone will be home again, and then they can make the NWZ lake-wide. The merchants will have full pockets. There will be that much more unnecessary property damage done. But the all-mighty dollar will still rule. Seems to me that if these people have to lay out more and more money for property damage that could have been avoided, thats that much less revenue for the crying shopkeepers to rake in over a longer amount of time than just a three day weekend. Disposable income now becomes necessary income. Real tunnel vision, wouldn't you say? I don't recall this much whining in 1998 when the lakewide NWZ was in effect over the Fourth of July holiday. __________________ "He who dies with the most toys wins"

05-27-2006, 05:17 AM	#35
Belmont Resident Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Belmont NH but prefer Jackman Maine Posts: 1,857 Thanks: 491 Thanked 409 Times in 251 Posts	instead of complaining Since many are so concerned why not take a proactive approach? Call the marinas and ask if they have signs posted letting boaters know about the rule. Or better yet print some out and post them yourself, I'll bet the marinas will not mind. I found out only by mistake and I live here. __________________ "better to have a short life that is full of what you like doing, then a long life spent in a miserable way.."

05-27-2006, 05:36 AM	#36
Grant Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Pennsyltuckey, Tuftonboro, Moultonborough Posts: 1,485 Thanks: 337 Thanked 212 Times in 116 Posts	Well, you can mandate "now wake," but that doesn't mean people will comply. And the 600 feet does nothing. A big "belongs-in-the-ocean" boat came blowing by our place last evening, probably going 40-50 MPH, and a good 500-800 feet out. The resulting wake was a good as if he'd been 200 feet off shore. __________________ "When I die, please don't let my wife sell my dive gear for what I told her I paid for it."

05-27-2006, 06:27 AM	#37
jkjoshuatree Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Bear Island Posts: 642 Thanks: 349 Thanked 145 Times in 77 Posts	Wow.... I never knew it was up to certain people to decide what is foolish or not when it comes other people's hard earned vacation dollars. Talk about arrogance..... Gusman Gusman, I hope you're not talking about me. It has nothing to do with arrogance. For those of you who know me, you know I don't have an arrogant bone in my body. All I'm saying is that the Lakes Region has a lot to offer beside the lake itself. This "the lake has a no wake zone...whaahhhh.....I'm gonna go to the Cape instead....whaahhhh....." is getting a little old. Grow up. __________________ Dream out loud.

05-27-2006, 09:47 AM	#39
SAMIAM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 2,836 Thanks: 326 Thanked 1,626 Times in 562 Posts	Aquadesiac...that was a pretty rude and thoughtless remark..."crying shopkeepers" indeed.In case you haven't noticed,there is very little industry in the lakes region.Tourism is the very engine that drives the economy. Those of us in business got rained out two weeks in a row.We badly need a successfull holiday weekend,especially after a winter with no snow. I don't think anyone is totally happy with the 600' rule,but it shows a little compromise on both sides. The "almighty" dollar,as you call it,is what paves the roads,keeps schools open,provides fire and police service.Look at the bright side....at least you won't have to rake your beach.

05-27-2006, 10:37 AM	#40
NFFL Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 1 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Very well said MJP!

05-27-2006, 11:34 AM	#41
Lakegeezer Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Moultonboro, NH Posts: 1,657 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 342 Thanked 618 Times in 278 Posts	Saturday at noon - most boat complying The rule is sort of working up north of Moultonboro bay. I'm in an area where safe passage is less than 600', so everyone passing by should be leaving no wake. Lots of big boats out, and all but a few are going slow until they hit the big part of the bay. The bass boats and the midsize cruisers (23'-28') are the worst scofflaws today. Many bass boats are going by slow, but at maximum wake speed. Don't they get it? The midsize boats are the ones that don't seem to care at all, and just fly by with the family on board. When blasted with an airhorn, they just wave. I'd guess 80% compliance overall. The shoreline is taking a beating when the captain boneheads go by, but its not continuous. Better than last weekend, and much better it would be with no rule at all. No power boating for me today. I'm going out shopping, to show the local businesses that no-wake doesn't mean no money. __________________ -lg

05-27-2006, 12:19 PM	#42
Aside the Point Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 2 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Look at the pictures They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Everyone boating should check the Web-cams. Watch boats pass, white wakes curling, reload the image and see the effect on the water surface. Then go to the Gallery and view the images of 'Houses.' Many of the older camps, built close to the water, must be nearly floating off of foundations. Let's watch our wakes!

05-27-2006, 06:07 PM	#44
GusMan Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 123 Thanks: 0 Thanked 42 Times in 24 Posts	jkjoshuatree, Yes, my note was in reference to your claim that anyone who altered their vacation plans due to the nowake restriction on winnie was "foolish". That is an arrogant statement whether you meant it or not. To decide that you know what's best for anyone other than yourself is just plain silly. Furthermore, you imply that changing ones plans is a case of "whining" about the no wake zone.... not necessarily. I'm fairly confident that most of the people who heard about the nowake zone and chose to go elsewhere know that the lake has much to offer. I'm not looking for an argument..... I never whined, nor commented about the no wake zone... I simply turned left onto route 104 West (instead of East) and travelled over to Newfound and had a glorious day cruising (or bombing) around on an almost deserted lake and managed to land a few nice smallies to boot. For MY purposes... it was a much better option than my original plan of heading to winnie for the day. Pretty simple, huh?? I truly hope all property owners survive these conditions with minimal damage... Gusman Last edited by GusMan; 05-28-2006 at 02:49 PM.

05-27-2006, 07:31 PM	#45
ApS Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro Posts: 5,788 Thanks: 2,085 Thanked 742 Times in 532 Posts	The Dock-Rocking Coefficient² Boats here were so "all over the map" with respect to distance to shore, there was no point in determining a percentage of No-Wake compliance. Since most of my day was doing carpentry on the dock, a perpetrator-based rating system was in order—"A" being the best on the lake: 1) Outboards (All, irrespective of speed) should rate a B+ in dock-rocking. 2) Pontoon boats rate an "A" 3) Jet-Skis aren't in the running—Okay, an "A" 4) Ski-boats and wake-boats get a "D" 5) Remaining inboards: "D-" An airhorn was used twice pre-emptively on two light cruisers, with 50% effectiveness. (One slowed to headway—one "didn't hear".) A NW wind piped up at about 3:20PM: That wind, combining now with the boat wakes, repeatedly crashed the dock and pegged the dock-rocker meter. (The surface of a large water-filled garbage can). Some very large wakes appeared "out of nowhere". One funny encounter earlier this morning was two inboards heading towards one another at ¾-throttle -- about 200' offshore. When they came within 600' of one another, they slowed to "headway speed". When clear, they took off again. Talk about "Not Clear on the Concept"! All in all? Not too bad—with two more days to go.

05-27-2006, 09:27 PM	#48
PaulS Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 55 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	For what it's worth I saw a letter from the State of NH posted at 2 different marinas (I on Winnisquam, the other on Winnipesaukee). The marine patrol was also out in force "educating" those that weren't aware of the new rule. Paugus Bay was definitely quieter than usual, so the 600' rule is at least be helping somewhat. There is still alot of debris in the water, which is a good reason to go slow even if you aren't worried about the property owners and shoreline.