Boating Safety on NH Water Bodies

[sunset on the dock]

This from yesterday's facebook...could the governor have signed yesterday? There's nothing on his website under media releases.

Dale Gillibrand Congratulations to all true lake-lovers! The speed limit is now permanent law, protecting this beautiful lake for generations!
Yesterday at 3:33pm · Comment · Like · Flag

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

could the governor have signed yesterday?

I can't imagine he'd sign until he gets a chance to meet with the president of "Safe Boaters" to make sure the law is really needed. Surely he's going to give a lot of thought and weight to what our lakes "safe boaters" think

[DEJ]

I hope that is true.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

This from yesterday's facebook...could the governor have signed yesterday? There's nothing on his website under media releases.

Dale Gillibrand Congratulations to all true lake-lovers! The speed limit is now permanent law, protecting this beautiful lake for generations!
Yesterday at 3:33pm · Comment · Like · Flag

This thread is about boating safety.

Please save the talk about the SL for when/if the threads are unlocked, as it has no relevance here.


Thanks.

Originally Posted by Ryan

This thread is about boating safety.

Ryan, I disagree. This thread is an infomercial for "Safe (sic) Boaters of NH" (which is a GFBL group hiding under a "safety" moniker) disguised as a thread about boating safety.
It's ironic that you use the very moniker/link in your post, so that your post says just what the others in your group say throughout this thread; 1) "This thread is about safe boating and not about opposition to the SL" and 2) "By the way, while were discussing boating safety, please visit this "safe boating " link that is actually an anti-SL site and make a donation to fight the SL". You can't have it both ways. Once you used the ridiculous tactic of trying to hide your group's intent by calling it "Safe Boaters", and started using every post as a recruitment, you can't now tell us to shut up about the SL.
Please look around the Boating threads over the past weeks. You'll notice the continual and growing anti-SL comments and innuendo that prevails. One from outside reading this would mistakenly think that the good people of the region are a bunch of go-fast cowboys, when in fact opinion of local residents is hugely supportive of the SL, as our legislature saw.
I stay away from this forum as much as I can. but will continue to join back in whenever you guys drift back into making it about SL-bashing...even when you do that subliminally or indirectly. If you don't want SL supporters weighing in, take the links to SBONH out of your footers and stop using every topic as a chance to drop some complaint about the SL.
People in some NC biker bar don't like it? What does a statement like that have to do with boating safety on Lake Winnipesaukee?

By the way, I know for a fact that choosing the name "Safe Boaters" was very damaging to your cause. People as smart as (most of) our legislators have a tendency to react negatively to such intelligence-insulting tricks. Did you guys really think they were going to see that name and say "Oh, 'Safe Boaters of NH'. This must be the group representing boaters who favor safety. The SL supporters must oppose boating safety."?

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Ryan

This thread is about boating safety.

Please save the talk about the SL for when/if the threads are unlocked, as it has no relevance here.


Thanks.

You are absolutely spot on Ryan. As always, it is what it is. There always will be some strong sentiments one way or another. There always seems to be a rather consistent tone though.

1) The safe passage rule

2) Boater education

3) MP support and their budget



If the thread continues to discuss those topics, and some that are closely-related, I doubt you'll have to deal with those that should be on ignore anyway.

I also think the idea regarding handing out and/or discussing the boating rules is a great idea. If the booklets are available, those that are interested could use a small part of their time on the water to do this.

Winni has someone on this board that has to be on the water more than anyone I've ever heard of. This would be an ideal time to enlist his support in this project, really.

I'm really, really not trying to make anything more of that comment than what it is. So rude remarks need not appear, please

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by elchase

Did you guys really think they were going to see that name and say "Oh, 'Safe Boaters of NH'. This must be the group representing boaters who favor safety. The SL supporters must oppose boating safety."?

Whenever the collective "We" mention supporting the MP and trying to help out with the budget, we hear crickets from you El. Forget about the one issue we disagree on, and at least make an effort to join in when the other multitude of safety issues comes up. I would think your entire group would support some way of spotlighting the budget problems the MP is having. It directly impacts you.

As for your last sentence? I can't really answer that one. Could be a Freudian slip.

[BroadHopper]

Guess the next time I visit the marina bar full of doctors, lawyers, professional folks what you call them. Especially the NASCAR folks that brings in millions of dollars to the local economy.

If it will satisfy certain folks egos, I will tell the NASCAR folks they are not welcome in the Lakes Region.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Guess the next time I visit the marina bar full of doctors, lawyers, professional folks what you call them. Especially the NASCAR folks that brings in millions of dollars to the local economy.

In memory of the recently deceased Gary Coleman..."What you talkin' 'bout".

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Forget about the one issue we disagree on, and at least make an effort to join in when the other multitude of safety issues comes up. I would think your entire group would support some way of spotlighting the budget problems the MP is having. It directly impacts you.

Steve,
We disagree on a lot more than one issue. And thanks, but I'll decide which deserves my time and my money and you can decide which deserve yours.
Being from another state, maybe you don't mind seeing more of the NH taxpayers' money thrown at a problem, but I feel our MP get way more funding than they need and that if the personnel of the department were properly managed, they would have plenty of people and money to do their job. But like we are seeing with other state agencies recently, when the answer to every problem has been to raise taxes and throw more money at it, glaring inefficiencies and inadequacies just keep getting covered up and never solved.
It's time to start looking at the MP and figuring out not how we can get them more money, but why they have not been able to their jobs with the plenty of money they have been getting. Remember, this is an agency that basically works four months a year and pays people to do what most people pay big money to do...cruise around Lake Winnipesaukee in a boat. So no, I will not help you argue for more money for them. The problems on Winnipesaukee do not cry out for more money. If you think they deserve more money, make a personal donation.
I am on Lake Winnipesaukee more than most and I see four consistent safety problems; Failure to yield, passing too close while going too fast, BWI, and speeding...in no particular order. Slow boats down and the four of these goes away and the other three become more of a nuisance and less of a danger. While I agree the intent behind the safe-passage rule was good, enforcement is not practical and the law is a joke. I simply do not mind a boat going 20 MPH passing 75 feet away from me. I don't need him slowing to headway speed. But a boat going 90 MPH 155 feet away is still very uncomfortable.
And you don't slow people down by saying "use your own judgment". You slow them down by putting a reasonable limit on speed, then by giving violators cause to obey it. If you are running the MP, you don't tell the go-fast crowd "don't worry about the speed limit, we're not going to enforce it anyway". Yet this is exactly what go-fasters on this forum have reported. Then you say we should give this department more of my hard-earned tax dollars? No way.
We may be from different sides of the political aisle, but I'm very conservative and simply don't buy the notion that more taxes and bigger budgets will solve a problem. Sorry.
Sometimes when you hear crickets, its because someone doesn't agree with you.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

In memory of the recently deceased Gary Coleman..."What you talkin' 'bout".

Refering to ELChase quote: "People in some NC biker bar don't like it? What does a statement like that have to do with boating safety on Lake Winnipesaukee?"

These folks come up here and spend thousands of dollars. Helping the local economy.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Oh great. That gives me solace knowing this hot topic is being discussed in such high intellectual venues as Lake Norman bars...NOT! I can just imagine them discussing their proposed Republican sweep in the fall elections somehow overturning recent Lake Winni legislation (but ignoring the fact that said legislation enjoyed bipartisan support in both houses).
And speaking of legislation, for those who may have missed it, I strongly urge you to read a letter to the editor in Tuesday's Laconia Daily Sun http://www.laconiadailysun.com for a well written and to the point interpretation of the issues at hand.

With all due respect, you know what he is talking about as he is responding to you!

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by elchase

Ryan, I disagree. This thread is an infomercial for "Safe (sic) Boaters of NH" (which is a GFBL group hiding under a "safety" moniker) disguised as a thread about boating safety.

EL, suppose for a minute that every boat follows the 150 ft rule and obeys no-wake zones. If just these two rules are followed then I say the lake is way safer than any other lake I've been on.

Trying to derail any effort to get that message out about the safe passage rule gives you no credibility.

Even if you disagree with a group, if they are sending a message that should be supported by any boating organization (even WinnFabs), you should bite your tongue because 'calling them out' when they are doing something your organization wants is a rather dumb stance to take........

Or, are you suggesting that we now remove the safe passage rule? Even you stated that you can't have it both ways.

[rockythedog]

The Marine Patrol only works 4 months of the year, gets to go for joy rides all summer, and gets payed year round??? El if you've got a problem with the management of the Dept. of Safety then go direct your attention there. The year round employees work very hard with what they have to keep the waters of New Hampshire safe. Insulting their dedication is a real low blow. Why don't you get somebody you approve of appointed as Director. Now that would take some real sack.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by elchase

Steve,
We disagree on a lot more than one issue. And thanks, but I'll decide which deserves my time and my money and you can decide which deserve yours.
Being from another state, maybe you don't mind seeing more of the NH taxpayers' money thrown at a problem, but I feel our MP get way more funding than they need and that if the personnel of the department were properly managed, they would have plenty of people and money to do their job. But like we are seeing with other state agencies recently, when the answer to every problem has been to raise taxes and throw more money at it, glaring inefficiencies and inadequacies just keep getting covered up and never solved.
It's time to start looking at the MP and figuring out not how we can get them more money, but why they have not been able to their jobs with the plenty of money they have been getting. Remember, this is an agency that basically works four months a year and pays people to do what most people pay big money to do...cruise around Lake Winnipesaukee in a boat. So no, I will not help you argue for more money for them. The problems on Winnipesaukee do not cry out for more money. If you think they deserve more money, make a personal donation.
I am on Lake Winnipesaukee more than most and I see four consistent safety problems; Failure to yield, passing too close while going too fast, BWI, and speeding...in no particular order. Slow boats down and the four of these goes away and the other three become more of a nuisance and less of a danger. While I agree the intent behind the safe-passage rule was good, enforcement is not practical and the law is a joke. I simply do not mind a boat going 20 MPH passing 75 feet away from me. I don't need him slowing to headway speed. But a boat going 90 MPH 155 feet away is still very uncomfortable.
And you don't slow people down by saying "use your own judgment". You slow them down by putting a reasonable limit on speed, then by giving violators cause to obey it. If you are running the MP, you don't tell the go-fast crowd "don't worry about the speed limit, we're not going to enforce it anyway". Yet this is exactly what go-fasters on this forum have reported. Then you say we should give this department more of my hard-earned tax dollars? No way.
We may be from different sides of the political aisle, but I'm very conservative and simply don't buy the notion that more taxes and bigger budgets will solve a problem. Sorry.
Sometimes when you hear crickets, its because someone doesn't agree with you.

Good starting point El, we don't disagree as much as you think. We had many threads stating much of what you think are problems. Boats going too close, too fast, failure to yield. I know I personally posted some thoughts concerning the MP and their lack of focus to obvious problems. Many disagreed, in fact I think you might have (?) disagreed as well on my NWZ speeding problems and going too close posts, because you were agenda-driven then.

But as a fairly conservative guy, and not a fan of bigger government and higher taxes, I could see the wisdom for raising boat registration fees after staying so low for decades. Their fund was raided, negating that, because state government was in the hole. While being more moderate depending on the topic, I have no use for tax and spend government models. So no, we might not be on different sides of the aisle, not sure.

I think many problems could be reduced to nuisances if boneheads were specifically targeted. Maybe a simplistic view, but worth a try. I have repeatedly stated this in many past posts, but some thought I was unfairly bashing the MP. Regardless, I think they need more funds, you do not. The utter irony is that you support harsher laws and rules, less funding for the MP, yet agree mostly with what WE say are the problems on Winni, and most lakes and waterways.

At any rate, we do actually agree on most points, including the enforcement targets and the problems. Like any group, it's great to work together on what most everyone wants, rather than fight about one or two areas where there is no agreement. In the end, problems solved are problems solved. Once done, it leaves more time to focus on areas of disagreement, and see if they really are problems anymore.

Wow, almost back to the infamous Captain Bonehead thread again.

Thanks for the post El, it was a good one. In fact, A very good one.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by elchase

Steve,

Sometimes when you hear crickets, its because someone doesn't agree with you.

I heard crickets because you hadn't made this post El. Appreciate the follow-up, and I agree with many of your sentiments. Let's start from that point.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by elchase

Ryan, I disagree. This thread is an infomercial for "Safe (sic) Boaters of NH" (which is a GFBL group hiding under a "safety" moniker) disguised as a thread about boating safety.

Sorry, it was about safety on the lake - until you came back.

I'm a member of SBONH because I personally feel that there are issues on the lake that, if enforced, will make it a safer place for my family and friends.

I personally disagree with the 'law that must not be mentioned'.

Lastly, I do not own a GFBL. Doesn't seem to fit into that 'cowboy' brush with which you'd like to paint each of us - huh?

Originally Posted by Ryan

it was about safety on the lake - until you came back.

Wrong again. It was about safety until 05-28-2010, at 06:05 PM. Then it became a SL bash. I didn't join in until 06-10-2010 at 04:19 PM.

[gtagrip]

[QUOTE=elchase;130049]Steve,
And thanks, but I'll decide which deserves my time and my money and you can decide which deserve yours.

I think this says it all!

[Kracken]

This thread was started to discuss boating safety on New Hampshire water bodies. It is not here to discuss the current speed limit law, opinions of the law or articles about the law. As long as it is a law I will follow it as I believe most people will.

I became greatly concerned with the boating laws about 3 years ago. We were traveling through the graveyard in my old boat (a 20 foot bow rider). We were about half way through the channel when a 30+ foot cruiser entered the channel. We were headed towards each other at no-wake and all was fine. Suddenly, when the cruiser was only 3 boat lengths from our bow the Captain he decided to open her up. The cruiser passed us at no more than 15 feet throwing an absurd wake that through my four year old son across the boat. Fortunately a friend was able to break his fall and he was unhurt.

The captain of the cruiser was an idiot and his actions could have caused serious injury. I believe he did what he did because he was simply unaware of the boating laws in NH. As mentioned by another member, that type of operation is legal in some other states. The question is how do you limit such behavior on our lake? Short of giving an I.Q. test to all operators, education and enforcement are the best alternatives.

As previously stated, the Governor has elected to take some of the funds collected from boater’s registration to help balance the budget. This action should infuriate all boaters. While I understand it is necessary to balance the budget, it should not be at the expense of boater’s safety.

[VtSteve]

No Kracken, whether he knew about a law or not, his actions were incredibly arrogant and reckless. The only plausible other explanation, is he was not paying attention and didn't see you. Doubtful, but possible.

I would put the cruiser's captain in the Careless and Negligent department. Just think of the possibilities if he had headed straight towards you and did the same

Another case that I use to buttress my claim that the MP should provide for "floating" patrols (no silly pun intended). Have a couple of MP boats, unmarked if possible, that do not have the assigned drudgery of pestering people for boarding, rafting, whatever. Their focus is on boaters like your cruiser story, NWZ violators (real fast), dangerous tubers and the like. I know they do this from time to time, but not the same as a moving craft covering lots of water throughout the day.

Maybe El could chime in here and offer more suggestions as to how best handle these ongoing problems. I simply don't know another way.

[BroadHopper]

I had a great afternoon boating. Except for three bonehead moves. One person actually pass me through the Weirs Channel. He was throwing a wake but not a big one. Another person cruise the Eagle Island and Governors Island no wake zone on plane! A third person traveled from the Alton bandstand to Parker's Marine on plane. I'm sure that is still a no wake zone. I was out for 8 hours and have not seen an MP boat. All of these boats are typical 18' to 20' bowriders or day cruisers. Hopefully this is not the sign of the times.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I had a great afternoon boating. Except for three bonehead moves. One person actually pass me through the Weirs Channel. He was throwing a wake but not a big one. Another person cruise the Eagle Island and Governors Island no wake zone on plane! A third person traveled from the Alton bandstand to Parker's Marine on plane. I'm sure that is still a no wake zone. I was out for 8 hours and have not seen an MP boat. All of these boats are typical 18' to 20' bowriders or day cruisers. Hopefully this is not the sign of the times.

They should hang a sign on each and every no wake sign:

"If you are on Plain you are a Bonehead"

"Call 1-800-get boating education"

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I had a great afternoon boating. Except for three bonehead moves. One person actually pass me through the Weirs Channel. He was throwing a wake but not a big one. Another person cruise the Eagle Island and Governors Island no wake zone on plane! A third person traveled from the Alton bandstand to Parker's Marine on plane. I'm sure that is still a no wake zone. I was out for 8 hours and have not seen an MP boat. All of these boats are typical 18' to 20' bowriders or day cruisers. Hopefully this is not the sign of the times.

I can see how getting passed in Weirs channel would be a problem; I don't think I'd like the potential problems that would create, but the other two infractions would have made me smile.