new speed limit public hearing Sept 25

[fatlazyless]

I don't have the article in front of me but as best I can remember from reading today's Laconia Daily Sun earlier today, a public hearing for a boat speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee will be held on Monday Sept 25, at 7pm, at the Meredith Community Center which is on Route 3, aprox one mile north of the big intersection.

To paraphrase, WinnFabs has successfully completed the petition requirement to have the NH Dept of Safety, Secretary Richard Flynn, and the NH Marine Patrol to consider whether or not a boat speed limit on Winnipesaukee is needed. Petitions from the water front border towns of Wolfeboro, Alton, Gilford, Laconia, Meredith, Center Harbor, Moultonborough, and Tuftonboro with at least 25 waterfront property owners for each separate town were collected and submitted to the Dept of Safety. Public hearing(s) are part of the decision process as spelled out in the applicable New Hampshire rsa.

The speed limits bill which was passed by the NH House and defeated in the NH Senate in a close vote last March was for the entire state. This petition is for Lake Winnipesaukee, only.

I can remember Senator Gallus(R) from the north country saying how he did not know of any performance boats in his district and that this was pretty much a Winnipesaukee issue when he cast his vote against a state wide speed limit.

This petition method was used successfully by Squam Lake in aprox 1990 to set up their 40 mph day-20 mph night speed limit which is still the law.

So, whether you are for or against a Winni speed limit, the hearing is next Monday Sept 25 at 7pm at the new and luxurious Meredith Community Center.

If some rich performance boater wants to pay my newly revised and increased, December, $4000., six month property tax bill, I will be happy to withdraw my name from the Meredith petition! My vote is definately for sale! Live Free of Die, or something or other and let's not forget our NH advantage, low property taxes.......what?!

[Weirs guy]

I just heard a news report on a local radio station about a petition being presented to the NH safety director(?) to impose a speed limit on Winni? Something about the director of safety can impose a speed limit in the name of public safety, but there needs to be a public hearing first, which is scheduled for Monday in Meredith?

The local papers haven’t got anything yet, anyone else hear anything about this?

[EllyPoinster]

Here's the story in the Union Leader:

http://unionleader.com/article.aspx?...8-8944f71fbcb5

[Phantom]

GREAT !!

Here we go again ............................

[Woodsy]

Yup... Game on! Again!

As Wile E. Coyote once said.... back to the old drawing board!
Woodsy

[codeman671]

I think that we can plan on this being pushed again and again until it does pass. And then pushed and pushed again until it is repealed. Get ready for a long ride! Hopefully at more than 45mph...

[GWC...]

Interestingly, the NH Union Leader has two mentions of the situation in today's online version, the one previously mentioned and this: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...MPLATE=DEFAULT

Sadly, the Laconia Citizen has yet to mention the issue in its online version.

http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...8-8944f71fbcb5
The state Department of Safety has scheduled a public hearing on the petition on

Monday at 10 a.m.

at the Meredith Community Center

This is the day, time, and place, for those interested in speaking, pro or con, not here.

[Dave R]

Funny how the same folks that praised the democratic process (without fully understanding it...) when HB162 passed in the House of Representatives now wish to circumvent the democratic process entirely by having one person mandate a speed limit. Hopefully common sense will prevail again.

I wish folks that oppose the speed limit would stop using the "it's unenforceable" argument. It reflects poorly on those of us that know a speed limit is easily enforceable using technology the MP already possesses, but is just unnecessary and foolish. "Unnecessary and foolish" is a far better argument, in my opinion.

[Lakegeezer]

There were two drownings within four hours of each other this summer due to people choosing to swim in high winds. If safety is the issue, swimming has proven to be most dangerous activity on the lake, yet I don't see that issue being addressed.

The Union Leader article got it right. This is about fear, not safety. I hope the NH department of safety realizes that its mandate is to promote safety, and not reduce hysterical, yet passionate, fear. Freedom of the general public is under attack again by a small political action committee. They may eventually win, but hopefully it won't be this time. It requires public reaction to defend its freedom. Hopefully, safe boaters will react yet again.

[Pepper]

Originally Posted by GWC...

...Sadly, the Laconia Citizen has yet to mention the issue in its online version...

Au Contraire, here's a link ...

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...191/-1/CITIZEN

Now that this issue has surfaced once again, I sincerely hope that the discussions which follow on this forum will not cause me to stop clicking on the "Boating Forum" link again! Please, folks, keep your discussions lively, but for heaven's sake keep it civil!!!

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by Dave R

Funny how the same folks that praised the democratic process (without fully understanding it...) when HB162 passed in the House of Representatives now wish to circumvent the democratic process entirely by having one person mandate a speed limit. Hopefully common sense will prevail again.

I wish folks that oppose the speed limit would stop using the "it's unenforceable" argument. It reflects poorly on those of us that know a speed limit is easily enforceable using technology the MP already possesses, but is just unnecessary and foolish. "Unnecessary and foolish" is a far better argument, in my opinion.

Calling something "unnecessary and foolish" is subjective and really not a good argument for getting laws passed or not.

[Woodsy]

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin

This debate it seems will never end.... Both sides are firmly entrenched in thier beliefs. The up side is that all of the statistics point to Lake Winnipesaukee being a VERY safe body of water to recreate in. The accident rate is down yet again for this year...

I wonder how much money Rusty lost because many Hi-Performance boaters no longer patronize his restaurants?

Woodsy

[lake4life]

When can we elect officials who will represent the interests of those who want a lake where non-powered craft can feel safe, but think speeding laws are draconian enough already?

I can see that people don't want high-performance boats, triple V8 boats going 90 mph in the bay. However, I don't think a unilateral speed limit is the right idea. Are lake speeding offenses going to go on your regular drivers license? So are you going to pay more money for your car insurance just because you went 50 mph on your seadoo in the broads?

Every person who runs for state office should have to submit an essay editorial to the newspaper describing what he/she thinks Live Free Or Die means. I would endorse a candidate who thinks it entails favoring creative solutions to problems rather than passing more laws and creating a police-state. NH has always been great place that bucks the trend of laws that manage every facet of our daily lives. IMHO, it would be a tragedy to change this.

Here we go again!

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

Calling something "unnecessary and foolish" is subjective and really not a good argument for getting laws passed or not.

hence the in my post. Just trying to keep it light and fun.

[SAMIAM]

Clearly,the "greenies" do not respect the democratic process....but there is a reason for that.They are smarter than the rest of us.
If they had their way the lake would be restricted to sailboats,canoe's and kayaks.I don't own a go fast boat but they are a HUGE part of the lakes region economy.

[Orion]

Let's forego all the lengthy, bloated discussions on this topic and just post the links to the prior discussions so whoever is interested can just read it all there all over again. I doubt there are any new positions or arguments to be made anyway.

[Airwaves]

As I mentioned at the beginning of the year, I have been keeping track of the boating accidents in NH for 2006 that have gotten the attention of media.

I have the list in my computer at work but to the best of my recollection none of them were caused by speed. I will forward the list to my home computer tonight and if anyone would like a copy you can PM me.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Pepper

Au Contraire, here's a link ...
http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...191/-1/CITIZEN

Au Contraire, please check the time of my post and the time of their update, which included your link.

It states:

Last updated: 12:00 pm

The upside is, the info is posted and you supplied a link.

Thanks

P.S.- Love your lobster sub...

P.P.S.- Day, Time, and Place for this debate:


Monday at 10 a.m.

at the Meredith Community Center

[RI Swamp Yankee]

Originally Posted by Pepper

... Now that this issue has surfaced once again, I sincerely hope that the discussions which follow on this forum will not cause me to stop clicking on the "Boating Forum" link again! ....

Would it be prudent to ask Don for a new "forum" now so spirited discussion can have it's own home, much like the last one did?

[John A. Birdsall]

to give credit where it is due should be done. This year at least in Alton Bay area I have seen a lot of activity with the MP involved. While they ticketed people,(of which all the tickets I do not fully agree with)(hmmm)they were out doing their job.

How can they tell how fast you are going when they judge 150' to be the length of three football fields. I do not think that radar will be effective on the lake as motions of waves, movement of boats. Beans, in Fl they have trees going 150mph and not moving.

Maybe they should find a formula for HP and size of boat with hull design and limit it that way.

While I agree that parts of the lake need speed limits, I do not think the whole lake does. I think the main part of the Broads should be left alone let people have their fun their. But other areas a max speed should be fair, that will protect the property and help everyone enjoy safe boating even the MP

[DoTheMath]

It is obvious that feelings on this subject get heated, I for one can't believe some of the incidents I experienced this past summer on the lake! Let's just get to some of the highlights... A family of about 6 in a 22' bowrider, towing a kid on a tube (he was roughly 12 yrs old), in circles and "s-turns" and everyone in the boat was looking here, there, and everywhere BUT at the kid on the tube, who was watching him you ask!? The guy DRIVING the boat - I had to gas it and swerve to get out of HIS way, he finally saw me and never even thought twice about it. Heading into the channel one early Friday afternoon, just started to come off plane, and what comes right up beside me plowing along, a really sweet 24'-ish Cobalt, about 40' away, pretty boat - dope behind the wheel. A beautiful, sunny Thursday afternoon out with my wife and 17 mo old, over by Jolly Isl. (heading toward Mark Isl.) and coming straight at me from about 300 yds. away was a 40'+ Regal cruiser - you know, three bed's, two bath's and swim platform the size of a tennis court. I would guess he was pushing along at about 12-14 mph, and if you ever saw Caddyshack and the scene where Rodney grabs the wheel of his sportfish and wreaks havoc in the marina - well, you just about got it then... I kid you not, in the 37 years I have been on this lake (and I'm only 38) I have NEVER seen a larger wake than what this guy was producing!!! Not behind the Mount, the Doris or Sophie or any other boat - it was insane!! I literally came off plane and just rolled over it. I can only imagine by the time that hit the surrounding islands, people must have had water in their back yard. I could recant dozens of stories just from this past summer of what I would consider stupid, careless and at times slightly scary acts that I had witnessed and NOT ONE involved excessive speed or a performance boat of any kind.

As everyone here likes to call them, "GFBL's" and associated speeds are NOT the problem out on the water folks, it simply boils down to better boater education - and a whole lot of common sense. The former seems to be never learned or quickly forgotten and the latter, seems to be left on the dock with the boat cover... I don't get where the feeling, notion, whatever comes from that if we "slow down the lake" we will make it a much happier and safer place!? If you choose to drive a SeaRay that does 40mph because that is what fits your budget and boating needs, great! If someone else chooses to drive a 38' Cigarette (or similar) because that fits their boating style and budget, great! It's a big lake last time I checked, 'bout 44,000 acres +/- and that's a LOT of water for everyone to share, regardless of what I choose to do it in. Last I checked, the state motto was "Live Free or Die" - boater education and common sense need to be prevalent and need to prevail here. Speed limits will not solve the challenges on the lake any more than imposing any other speculative restrictions will. Having a son of my own now and a house on the lake, I have as much a vested interest in making the lake safer - for everyone - as any other boater, and speed limits are not the solution.

my .02.

[GWC...]

In the interest of saving a lot of bandwidth, some interesting opining from the past:

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=1709

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...6340#post16340

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...6292#post16292

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...6216#post16216

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...5948#post15948

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...5894#post15894

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...5338#post15338

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...5125#post15125

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...4915#post14915

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...5396#post15396

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...5846#post15846

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...5157#post15157

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...4971#post14971

[Weirs guy]

Anyone else find it odd this came up after the summer?

[jrc]

It came up after the summer for the same reason it's being held on a Monday morning. The promoters want to make it harder for opposition to attend.

BTW fatlazyless, soliciting to sell your vote is a felony.

[playinghooky]

Maybe this ruling will put an end to the speed limit issue!
This is from the International Boat Industry website.

http://www.ibinews.com/ibinews/newsd...23ibinews.html

US federal judge declares boating illegal in all US navigable waters

By IBI Magazine

In a rather bizarre ruling that has marine industry officials worried, Judge Robert G. James of the United States District Court, Western Division of Louisiana, has said that it is criminal trespass for the American boating public to boat, fish, or hunt on the Mississippi River and other navigable waters in the US.

In the case of Normal Parm v. Sheriff Mark Shumate, James ruled that federal law grants exclusive and private control over the waters of the river, outside the main shipping channel, to riparian landowners. The shallows of the navigable waters are no longer open to the public. That, in effect, makes boating illegal across most of the country.

"Even though this action seems like a horrible pre-April fools joke, it is very serious," said Phil Keeter, MRAA president, in a statement. "Because essentially all the waters and waterways of our country are considered navigable in the US law, this ruling declares recreational boating, water skiing, fishing, waterfowl hunting, and fishing tournaments to be illegal and the public subject to jail sentences for recreating with their families."

Last month, James rejected the findings of the Magistrate judge who found earlier that the American public had the right under federal law and Louisiana law to navigate, boat, fish, and hunt on the waters of the Mississippi river up to the normal high water line of the river. Judge James Kirk relied on the long established federal principles of navigation that recognized the public navigational rights "…entitles the public to the reasonable use of navigable waters for all legitimate purposes of travel or transportation, for boating, sailing for pleasure, as well as for carrying persons or property for hire, and in any kind of watercraft the use of which is consistent with others also enjoying the right possessed in common."

"MRAA is working with the Coast Guard, state boating law administrators, and NMMA to fight this onerous ruling," said Glen Mazzella, MRAA chairman, in the statement.

(14 September 2006)

[fatlazyless]

Ok ok, JRC, not wanting to commit a felony and then have to hire an incredibly expensive defense attorney I hereby withdraw my offer to remove my name from the Meredith petition in exchange for $4000.

By the way, is there any chance you could post a link to the statute which makes my former sales offer a felony?

You know, between the crummy weather, and the high gas prices,I would say that the number of performance boats was down maybe 75% from summer 2005 to summer 2006. There were so few performance boats zooming by, fast &/or noisy, that they sort of became an attractive novelty, almost like some type of modern art in motion, or something.

Hey look, look at that, there goes one of them there big fast cigarette boats.......what-a-ride....wweeeeeooooooooooooo!

[Rinkerfam]

DoTheMath and lake4life,
I couldn't agree with you more. Educate as opposed to legislate!
Enough said!!

[Pepper]

Originally Posted by RI Swamp Yankee

Would it be prudent to ask Don for a new "forum" now so spirited discussion can have it's own home, much like the last one did?

I think this would be wonderful, so all those wishing to opine may do so, and may bloviate as they wish!

[mcdude]

Originally Posted by Pepper

bloviate

????????

[Pepper]

Originally Posted by mcdude

????????

From Encarta:

blo·vi·ate [ blo vee àyt ] (past and past participle blo·vi·at·ed, present participle blo·vi·at·ing, 3rd person present singular blo·vi·ates)

intransitive verb

Definition:

speak bombastically: to speak at length in a pompous self-aggrandizing way ( slang )

[Mid-19th century. Mock Latin alteration of blow]

blo·vi·a·tion [ blo vee áysh'n ] noun


A favorite term of Bill O'Reilly, and just one of those words whose sound, as it rolls off your tongue, is fun.

[Skipper of the Sea Que]

It made sense to me to think of vomit, as in
Regurgitation: in this case from drinking too much V8.

In reality, Webster says:
Main Entry: blo·vi·ate
Pronunciation: 'blO-vE-"At
Function: intransitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -at·ed; -at·ing
Etymology: perhaps irregular form...
: to speak or write verbosely and windily

Nice vocabulary Pepper. And I agree with you. A seperate speed forum would be fine with me.

[Pepper]

Originally Posted by Skipper of the Sea Que

...
: to speak or write verbosely and windily

Kinda like me when I'm writing about teeny-weeny-blinky lights in the night ...

[mcdude]

thanks Pepper....it wasn't listed in my American Heritage Desk Dictionary!

[gtxrider]

Originally Posted by Pepper

I think this would be wonderful, so all those wishing to opine may do so, and may bloviate as they wish!

It seems you watch Fox News...

[jrc]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Ok ok, JRC, not wanting to commit a felony ....By the way, is there any chance you could post a link to the statute which makes my former sales offer a felony?

According ot my reading of the attached link, you already commited the felony. For a voter to merely solicit to sell your vote is a felony.

640:2 Bribery in Official and Political Matters. –
I. A person is guilty of a class B felony if:
(a) He promises, offers, or gives any pecuniary benefit to another with the purpose of influencing the other's action, decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, nomination, or other exercise of discretion as a public servant, party official, or voter; or
(b) Being a public servant, party official, candidate for electoral office, or voter, he solicits, accepts or agrees to accept any pecuniary benefit from another knowing or believing the other's purpose to be as described in subparagraph I(a), or fails to report to a law enforcement officer that he has been offered or promised a pecuniary benefit in violation of subparagraph I(a).


http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/.../640/640-2.htm

[RI Swamp Yankee]

I thought Bloviate was when I drank too much water ......


... oh, thats BLOAT ...

[SIKSUKR]

Can't wait to see what is said in this round of the bloviate-a-thon!

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Pepper

From Encarta:

blo·vi·ate [ blo vee àyt ] (past and past participle blo·vi·at·ed, present participle blo·vi·at·ing, 3rd person present singular blo·vi·ates)
intransitive verb
Definition:
speak bombastically: to speak at length in a pompous self-aggrandizing way ( slang )
[Mid-19th century. Mock Latin alteration of blow]
blo·vi·a·tion [ blo vee áysh'n ] noun

A favorite term of Bill O'Reilly, and just one of those words whose sound, as it rolls off your tongue, is fun.

Well thanks maam fer providin the meanun of that fancy wurd. I wuz tryn to figur it out my self and I guessing I'm done purtty gud, all things considerin. I thought Blo, hmmm, as in to blow hard or spew out a lot of gas. V as in sumthin shaped like a V or crack, like mebbe a plumber person might show when bendin over. Ate as in sumthing you eated earlier in the day, this might be wherein the gas comes frum. So to bloviate is what a bloviater does and a bloviater is a blow hard who talks out of his a.., hmmm, "crack". Then I seen it wuz "bombastically" whichin I figured meant to drop a bomb, so I new I wuz on the right path. How'd I do ?

ps - NOTE: No apostrophes were mangled during the writtin of this here post !

[ITD]

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

Well thanks maam fer providin the meanun of that fancy wurd. I wuz tryn to figur it out my self and I guessing I'm done purtty gud, all things considerin. I thought Blo, hmmm, as in to blow hard or spew out a lot of gas. V as in sumthin shaped like a V or crack, like mebbe a plumber person might show when bendin over. Ate as in sumthing you eated earlier in the day, this might be wherein the gas comes frum. So to bloviate is what a bloviater does and a bloviater is a blow hard who talks out of his a.., hmmm, "crack". Then I seen it wuz "bombastically" whichin I figured meant to drop a bomb, so I new I wuz on the right path. How'd I do ?

ps - NOTE: No apostrophes were mangled during the writtin of this here post !

Hmmmm, in that case maybe we should change the name of the Flatulator to the "Bloviator", that way the intended target would not know what he was in for until it was too late.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Orion

Let's forego all the lengthy, bloated discussions on this topic and just post the links to the prior discussions so whoever is interested can just read it all there all over again. I doubt there are any new positions or arguments to be made anyway.

Just this month, there was "an incident"—using my best Concord lawyer legalese—on protected lake waters that can be expected to boost supporter's ranks. Actually, the implications may prove huge.

I'd suggest a second "Final Statement" thread to close out the year—and further discussion—of this high-octane debate.

[fatlazyless]

Hey jcr, if like you say, I've already created a felony then maybe I should be expecting the sheriff's dept to come haul me away to jail. Hopefully, I'll get sentenced to the State Prison in Laconia because it has a good view of Paugus Bay! New Hampshire is the most terrific place to live. Go to prison here and you end up incarcerated on waterfront property.....what a very nice state!

From today's Laconia Daily Sun, an interesting letter to the editor sent in by B.B. of Gilford.

"Both Flynn, Barrett should be at speed limit hearing"

"To the editor:
It seems as though the boating speed limit hearing Sept 25, 10 a.m., should be attended by both Commissioner Flynn, who will make the decision about speed limits on the big lake, and Director Barrett, who doesn't have an opinion about speed limits but is very vociferous about them, to make the majority of N.H. voters understand why speed laws can't be enforced when no other law enforcement agency, in this state or others, has a problem.
Maybe they can also tell us why, when there is no speed law in effect, they keep telling us there is no data relating to accidents related to speed in New Hampshire. They may also be able to explain why they feel a speed limit wouldn't make lake Winnipesaukee a much safer place for ourselves and our families, even the tourists and weekenders would like to hear an answer to that.
Please attend the hearing Sept. 25, 10 a.m, at the Meredith Community Center. We might all learn something, like we are going to continue this effort until a speed limit is put in place."

B.B.
Gilford

[Airwaves]

APS
Just this month, there was "an incident"—using my best Concord lawyer legalese—on protected lake waters that can be expected to boost supporter's ranks. Actually, the implications may prove huge.

If it's the incident I think you're referring to, it didn't happen on Winni (or even in NH) and Winni is the body of water the speed limit folks are focused on so it really isn't relevant.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

From today's Laconia Daily Sun, an interesting letter to the editor sent in by B.B. of Gilford.

"To the editor:


We might all learn something, like we are going to continue this effort until a speed limit is put in place."

B.B.
Gilford

After reading that closing statement, maybe "unecessary and foolish" is a pretty good argument after all...

[jrc]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Hey jcr, if like you say, I've already created a felony then maybe I should be expecting the sheriff's dept to come haul me away to jail...

Well, you know I'm not a lawyer or even a law enforcement officer, so my opinion isn't enough to put you in jail. Besides, I'm sure the "I was just kidding" defense would be accepted in this case. If you want to test the legality of selling your vote, I suggest you place an add in the Citizen and see what happens.

[Airwaves]

So did anyone go and want to offer a summary or recap? Is there another public hearing scheduled or a date set for a decision?

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

So did anyone go and want to offer a summary or recap? Is there another public hearing scheduled or a date set for a decision?

This is the report as filed by WMUR-TV. They claim that speakers were about evenly split on the issue. I am sure there will be much more in tomorrow's Union Leader & the Foster's/Citizen papers.

Skip

[Airwaves]

From WMUR:
The commissioner of the Department of Safety will decide whether the petition should move forward, and lawmakers will have the final say.

Is that accurate?

I thought the speed limit folks chose going this route in order to bypass the legislative process (which they lost once) and that the commissioner has the final yay or nay decision.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Skip

I am sure there will be much more in tomorrow's Union Leader & the Foster's/Citizen papers.

Skip

Here's the NH Union Leader's article:

http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...5-364e0b83f4b7

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

If it's the incident I think you're referring to, it didn't happen on Winni (or even in NH) and Winni is the body of water the speed limit folks are focused on so it really isn't relevant.

Equivalent-size lake with no speed limit. Was there a boating forum that didn't carry "the incident" country-wide? (Maybe world-wide?)

Now I'm reading that Commissioner Flynn (with four more years left on his appointment by the governor), needs to reach the S/L decision. That's one way to define "non-starter".

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

Is that accurate?

I thought the speed limit folks chose going this route in order to bypass the legislative process (which they lost once) and that the commissioner has the final yay or nay decision.

Under the procedures for establishing Administrative Rules, the submitting agency (in this case the Commissioner's Office) after holding the required public comment period, submits the proposed rule for adoption. During a 45/60 day window following this submission a ten member legislative committee (made up of five members of the House & five from the Senate) can move to modify or kill the proposed rule. If they do so it starts a whole new subset series of actions.

If the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules takes no action during the allowed review process then the rule becomes law for a certain window of time, depending on the type of rule invoked.

You can read and learn about the entire process here.

Skip

[Lakegeezer]

Make your opinion known - by October 1.

Office of Safety Commissioner
C/O Richard Flynn
James H. Hayes Safety Building
33 Hazen Drive, Concord, N.H. 03305

[Woodsy]

I was there...

It was the same arguments and horror stories heard last year. The sponsors of the petition had no new info other than thier horror stories and the requisite Lake George comparisons... They did bring up some of the boat accidents on other lakes, however none of those lakes have a 150' Safe Passage law. The opponents of the petition (myself included) presented the simple fact that while boat registrations are up yet again, accidents are down. Out of the 102,000 registered boats in the state there was only one speed related accident... the Bass boat that flipped over on Ossipee Lake.

To paraphrase Ben Franklin... those that would give up liberty for safety deserve neither....

Woodsy

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Make your opinion known - by October 1.

Office of Safety Commissioner
C/O Richard Flynn
James H. Hayes Safety Building
33 Hazen Drive, Concord, N.H. 03305

Since this is an electronic forum, perhaps the following info is in order:

Originally Posted by Laconia Citizen Online Tuesday, September 26, 2006 By GEOFF CUNNINGHAM Jr. Staff Writer

Those unable to attend Monday's hearing can submit their testimony by mail, fax or e-mail by Oct. 2.

Items may be e-mailed to safety-hearingssafety.state.nh.us or mailed to the department at State of New Hampshire Department of Safety Bureau of Hearings at 33 Hazen Drive, Concord NH 03305.

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...208/-1/CITIZEN

[jrc]

Don't you need an @ in an email address.

Maybe it's:

safety-hearings@safety.state.nh.us

[Airwaves]

APS, Equivilant sized lake with no speed limit or not it isn't relevant since the speed limit folks are now focused ONLY on Winnipesaukee and are claiming Winni is frightening and dangerous.

There is nothing backing up their argument except their own fear, wish to eliminate a class of boat from the lake and desire to turn back the clock to the days when the classic wooden boat was king.

Unless I misunderstand the following rule, the Commissioner of Public Safety already regulates the types of activities that you bring up and can deny the permit and/or require the folks to take special precaution.

Section 270-D:4
1. 270-D:4 Permit for Water Events. – Any person who undertakes any of the following activities on the public waters of the state shall first obtain a permit from the commissioner, subject to such conditions as he shall establish by rule:
I. Sponsor a water event, including but not limited to, a carnival or exhibition.
II. Place a water ski jump.
III. Tow a kit glider or parasail.
IV. Tow more than 2 skiers.
Source. 1990, 171:1, eff. June 26, 1990.

As my tracking of boating accidents in NH have shown, there have been no accidents on Winnipesaukee this year related to speed.

For anyone who might not know what we are writing about. The was an accident that left 5 people dead during a Poker Run on an Oklahoma lake over Labor Day weekend.

The link to the AP story via Boston dot Com is here:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...ake_killing_5/

Skip: Does the administrative rule give a time frame for the commissioner to make his recommendation to the legislative committee?

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

...Skip: Does the administrative rule give a time frame for the commissioner to make his recommendation to the legislative committee?...

This is where the whole process becomes very complicated. Using this particular process you are basically allowing Department Heads with a handful of the members of the Legislature to enact and enforce rules that have the full effect of law. The law wisely forces the individuals involved in this process to tread very carefully!

There is much latitude to allow the entity making the proposal to extend the public hearing deadline, add additional public hearings and add additional time to the public comment process. In addition, if the members of the JLCAR so choose, they can hold additional public hearing and public comment periods while ammending the proposed rule!

In a nutshell, if the Commissioner does choose to go forward with a proposal the final adoption could stretch out in excess of six months.

If the Commissioner chooses not to go forward with a proposal I would suspect we would know those intentions within 30 to 60 days.

Like any piece of legislation that works it way through the halls of Concord, the process can become very complicated and highly convoluted with time.

I suspect the good folks in the local media covering this current proposal will keep us abreast of the situation as it develops!

Skip

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by jrc

Don't you need an @ in an email address.

Maybe it's:

safety-hearings@safety.state.nh.us

How true, how true...

So much for quoting the Media...

From the Bureau of Hearings' web page regarding contact info:

mailto:safety-hearings@safety.state.nh.us

http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/h...contactus.html

P.S.- Thanks for correcting the error in my post.

[Rayhunt]

Here we go again.. Ive lived on Winni for 40 years ! I think we can all agree that there are some problem areas on the weekends.. Lets have a speed limit in these areas, perhaps more expanded no wake zones like we have had the past couple years.. From where im sitting the biggest problem is lack of education.. To me anyone who does not know the right of way laws or know who the stand on or stand down boat is doesnt belong out there ..and there are plenty of them ! How about a 10,000 LB limit .. the big cruisers are the worst wave makers and law breakers ..Too big to slow down or give way ..WRONG !
I have to laugh when I go out in the boat after labor day.. There is noone out there !
I would also suggest that the non voting proponents worry about making laws at home , not were they visit for 20 days each year !

[fatlazyless]

The real issue? Kayaks

Here we go again. Another attempt at a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee.

Reducing the speed on the lake instead of enforcing the laws already in place will not make a difference. There have been no accidents on Lake Winniesaukee attributed solely to high speed.

If safety is the real concern, how about banning canoes and kayaks that are blue, gray, or any color that is hard to see on the water? Why not stiffer penalties for violations such as the night we were in Alton Bay and a fleet of no fewer than six six kayaks were paddling well after dark with no lights of any kind? We could not even see them in the picture we took with a flash camera.

How about mandatory training and use of preservers in all self-propelled vesses. There have been far more deaths in these type of craft than in high-speed performance boats in New Hampshire.

A speed limit is a panacea that will have no real positive effects. The speed limit is a smokescreen attempt to turn Lake Winnipesaukee into a private playground for the exclusive few that own waterfront property. Winnipesaukee is a public lake and should be accessible to everyone who wishes to enjoy it. Current laws are more than adequate to maintain and promote safety on the lake. What is needed is adequate funding of the Marine Patrol to enforce the existing laws.

C.C. Concord

[Cal]

The way I see it is , it's a smoke screen to rid the lake of a certain type of boat and nothing more. If these proponents were SO concerned with safety the would have a "headway" speed limit for nights. I've been out at night (without a moon) when you couldn't see diddley squat past the bow light and 25 mph would be rediculous. I see their misguided logic as an end run around the fact that they simply can't post signs at all boat ramps...

NO PERFORMANCE BOATS

Correct me if I'm wrong

[Bear Islander]

You are wrong, consider yourself corrected.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

You are wrong, consider yourself corrected.

Then why oh why is the night time speed limit SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO high when you could be operating in near ZERO visbility....HUH?

Oh , I got it. The sign is wrong , it should be...

NO PERFORMANCE BOATS ON OUR LAKE

[Bear Islander]

The visibility might be zero, but it also could be a full moon. Speed limits are the MAXIMUM.

The maximum speed on rt95 is 65 MPH. In a snow storm that would be way to fast. Most people understand this principle.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

The visibility might be zero, but it also could be a full moon. Speed limits are the MAXIMUM. In a snow storm that would be way to fast. Most people understand this principle.

The same applies to one's speed on the Lake. It's called common sense.

It's also a Law (RSA).

Laws (RSAs)
Chapter 270
Section 270:29-a Careless and Negligent Operation of Boats.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/...0/270-29-a.htm

Unfortunately, a few do not understand this principle and are pushing for a speed limit on the Lake.

I remember a fisherman telling me of almost being run over by the Mount in a fog during daylight hours and then there was the court situation involving the Sophie C and a woman boater and the 150 rule - the Sophie C lost.

If the Lake is so unsafe, how did the steamboaters, J-boaters, and rowers ever have their events on the Lake without incident, recently?

[Cal]

Well the next time I'm on the lake in a snow storm I'll keep it well under 65
I just can't "Bear " it anymore.

As Forrest Gump said many times "That's all I've got to say about that"

[Airwaves]

GWC: I remember a fisherman telling me of almost being run over by the Mount in a fog during daylight hours

I've wondered about this for a while (say 40 years!) When there is fog on the lake I have never heard the Mount or any other commercial vessel (or any vessel) sounding fog horns. A long blast
(5 seconds) of your regular horn once every two minutes if I recall without looking it up. (Edit; I looked it up, rule 35)

I do recall the owner of a boat dealership telling me the story of how he was almost run down in the fog by a classic wooden boat near Sandy Point in Alton Bay years ago. He said he knew were he was going but this boat just apeared out of the fog. Neither was sounding a horn!

GWC: then there was the court situation involving the Sophie C and a woman boater and the 150 rule - the Sophie C lost.

Speed limit issues?, I doubt it. Rules issue, yep!

[Airwaves]

If it were left to me, a non voting taxpayer that I am told should mind my own business even though I pay more taxes than most year round residents for my 20 days. (To tell you the truth it was only 10 days this year!)

I would make only two changes to the following rule that already exists, the changes would be elimiate the word "Power" and change misdemeanor to felony!

Any objections?

Section 270:29-a
270:29-a Careless and Negligent Operation of Boats. – Any person who shall operate a power boat upon any waters of the state in a careless and negligent manner or so that the lives and safety of the public are endangered shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
Source. 1981, 353:12, eff. Aug. 22, 1981.

If those changes were made then folks arrested this past spring for drunk boating in a canoe, that endangered the lives of several folks not to mention the people who rescued them, would be charged with a felony instead of just handed a ticket, as would that bonehead kid who took his mother's boat and ran it onto Eagle Island in addition to BWI!

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

"...APS, Equivilant sized lake with no speed limit or not it isn't relevant since the speed limit folks are now focused ONLY on Winnipesaukee and are claiming Winni is frightening and dangerous..."

Why isn't a closing speed of 330 miles per hour a possibility on Lake Winnipesaukee?

[John A. Birdsall]

Airwaves, I totally agree with you. a person in any boat, of any type could be a danger to others when and if they do something stupid.

Our country is always adding laws, but seems that they fail to enforce the laws that are on the books already. And until they enforce the laws, the education given will not matter. People seem to push themselves into situations that the know are illegal until they get caught.

Speed limits on the lake are already their for those that care to use "common sense" How do you educate common sense? The Marine Patrol has done better I think this year then in the past but more is needed and the 150' rule is the best example of lack of common sense. Coarse the MP needs to be educated on what is 150' and what is not. (3 football fields is a tad more than 150')

I have said it before, limit speeds in the bays, and let the broads do what they want.

[Rayhunt]

I have never heard any of the proponents acknowlege the idea of localized speed limits at all. The only thing they will settle for is a blanket speed limit on the entire lake. Why is that ? Its obvious to anyone who uses the lake on a regular basis or goes beyond their own general area that a lakewide speed limit is overkill.
I would also question why a non voting taxpayer who only visits the area 10 days a year would want to impose laws on people who LIVE and WORK here. Thereby raising everyones taxes to pay for this legislation ?
Im curious how many of the proponents are full time residents ?

[Paugus Bay Resident]

Results of Union Leader poll

http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...5-aa1fa4c37b07

[Rayhunt]

"Recreational boating is supposed to be enjoyable," said speed limit supporter Frank Marino. "When people are scared, there is no enjoyment and they are being denied the recreational experience that Lake Winnipesaukee is supposed to be offering to all of NH's citizens."

Heres another Mass resident claiming to speak for all of New Hampshires residents..
Why not recreate on a lake in MA with a speed limit if its so bad here ?

[Airwaves]

Apparently the public comment period ended at the close of the business day this past Monday. According to the Laconia Citizen the hearings officer says it will take "a while" to go through all the comments.

Link to article below, requires free registration:

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...73258848242456

APS wrote: Why isn't a closing speed of 330 miles per hour a possibility on Lake Winnipesaukee?

I guess I must have missed the official estimate of speed, last I read it was still under investigation and I don't believe it was a head-on collision of two boats doing 165 miles an hour. One victim's racer was equipped with engines capabile of that, but no one has said he was doing even close to that speed. So now you want to limit engine size as well as impose a speed limit?

Rayhunt wrote: I would also question why a non voting taxpayer who only visits the area 10 days a year would want to impose laws on people who LIVE and WORK here. Thereby raising everyones taxes to pay for this legislation ?

If you are talking about me, since the nonvoting taxpayer is my signature and I wrote that I was only at the lake 10 days this year, then you have to re-read my posts. I oppose a speed limit. There are sufficient laws on the books already if MP chooses to enforce them.
edit to correct spelling!

[Rayhunt]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

If you are talking about me, since the nonvoting taxpayer is my signature and I wrote that I was only at the lake 10 days this year, then you have to re-read my posts. I oppose a speed limit. There are sifficient laws on the books already if MP chooses to enforce them.

My appolagies

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by Rayhunt

I have never heard any of the proponents acknowlege the idea of localized speed limits at all. The only thing they will settle for is a blanket speed limit on the entire lake. Why is that ? Its obvious to anyone who uses the lake on a regular basis or goes beyond their own general area that a lakewide speed limit is overkill.

That is why some of us that look for the comprimise sent a letter to the state. There are some areas where the speed limit makes sense, and we all know where they are. And my firm belief is that those areas should have a speed restriction with a heathy fine. But the rest of the lake should be open...Just like driving a car there are multiple speed zones....so why not on the water.... makes sense to me... so I let the state know how I felt and I hope others did too.....

[Airwaves]

I went looking for the winnfab website. It's always good to know who the opponents are, and now and again they might be right!

However after a google search, and doing a winnfab.com and .org search, I couldn't find them

Do they still exist? Are they behind the latest speed limit attempt or did they slide into the dark and removed themselves?

I am sure some folks on the forum will know the answer to this question

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

...I went looking for the winnfab website...
Do they still exist? ...

WINNFABS.COM

[SAMIAM]

Another setback for the speed limit folks.Meredith News headline this week......"RADAR GUNS HAVE TOUGH TIME CLOCKING SOME WATERCRAFT"....Jeesh...
one thing after another.

[Phantom]

I really hate the thought of getting the Forum blood pressure rising again and getting a series of rehashed (HB162) threads .............

But ...........

Has anyone heard what's happening ....... quiet scares me!!

And finally, yes I'm against any form of "Daylight" speed limits for those curious.

[John A. Birdsall]

I hear that they are gonna do a trial run on boat speed limit. But they are going to use 40 MPH daytime and 20 MPH night time. This will in fact limit the type of boating people on the Big lake are use to. They are going to start this trial on Jan 24 2007 and end it on March 31 2007. That should keep you LBGF off the lake for a little while.

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by John A. Birdsall

That should keep you LBGF off the lake for a little while.

Your Sarcasm is noted John --- For the record, I have a 24ft Family boat (bowrider) and 3 lovely grand-daughters (all under 4) who love to ride with Grandpa!!

[gtxrider]

Originally Posted by John A. Birdsall

I hear that they are gonna do a trial run on boat speed limit. But they are going to use 40 MPH daytime and 20 MPH night time. This will in fact limit the type of boating people on the Big lake are use to. They are going to start this trial on Jan 24 2007 and end it on March 31 2007. That should keep you LBGF off the lake for a little while.

I want to see a boat to 40mph in January! This may slow down the bed races and cause trouble for the planes landing and taking off in AltonBay in February.

[Phantom]

Perhaps I'm just having an "off day"

But ......

It amazes me how a thread (a simple question) can get off topic so quickly. Perhaps they have nothing better to do? Pick up a phone and call a distant relative or something ............ geeeeeesh

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Yankee

That's pretty funny John!

However, It does bring up a question to my mind that if a speed limit is imposed, will it also pertain to snowmobiles, ATVs, and cars? And what about planes landing and taking off of the ice?

Good question....we did cover this in another thread, but it was awhile back.

It only applies to boats (watercraft).

Skip

[webmaster]

Originally Posted by Yankee

And what about planes landing and taking off of the ice?

This was covered before:

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=2708

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=2718

Remember the "Search" function of the forum.

[fatlazyless]

In today's Nov 1 Laconia Citizen, page A9 has a 12 paragraph article titled 'Boat speed limits a big issue for Heald.'

A few paragraphs...

"MEREDITH- Bruce Heald is known as an author, a professor, and for the past two years, a Representative for the state legislature. The Meredith Republican is running for another term in the Belknap County District 3 seat with boat speed limits, lake preservation, and fair educational funding his primary concerns."

another paragraph(s) further down...

"After living for 41 years on Lake Winnipesaukee, Heald is mostly concerned about the "protection of my community of the Lakes Region, of the White Moutains" both from a residential standpoint and for the impact on the region's tourist business.

His special area of concern is the speed of boats. Heald said he worked as a purser on the MS Mount Washington and saw the dangerously high speeds many boats, especially large boats, were capable of. He now strongly supports increased law enforcement of boat speeding on the lake, through the bill creating boat speed limts earlier this year was defeated.

I want to see this come back, Heald said. We passed this through the legislature, but the senate killed it.

Heald supports tighter law enforcement of not only boat speeds, but also lake preservation and wildlife protection, including dealing with pollution such as sewage discharge.

Live free or die: I absolutely agree with that, he said. We have too many laws; many of those laws are being abused.

He also said loon preservation is very near and dear to my heart.

[Airwaves]

Live free or die: I absolutely agree with that, he said. We have too many laws; many of those laws are being abused.

Too many laws so let's pass another one? Huh?

[tis]

Exactly what I thought when I read that, too, Airwaves!

[Cal]

Typical politician

[SAMIAM]

If Bruce Heald wants to represent us,he should abide by the decision that has been already passed rather than be an advocate fro a new law that suits his personal agenda

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

If Bruce Heald wants to represent us,he should abide by the decision that has been already passed rather than be an advocate for a new law that suits his personal agenda

Then he'd be representing the State Senate in that case...

On the brighter side:

I think he has every right to push an agenda (that's kinda the point of the NH House) and it's good that he's up front about it prior to the election. It takes passionate people to get laws passed and we like to have lots and lots of passionate people in our house. If this is what people really want, they will vote for him; if not, oh well.

If he is voted in and his ideas prove to be popular, but bad; the Senate is there to prevent them from becoming law. This process worked perfectly, once already, with HB162.

The best part about the whole system is that reps make pretty much no money ($200 a year, I think) to do this kind of work. We don't have to pay them to push their own agendas, like we do at the national level.

NH is pretty unique in that we have 400 Represenatives, which makes our State House of Representatives the world's third largest English speaking Parliamentary body. This does, of course, really pare down the true power of each Representative, since there's so many; but that's why we can easily tolerate (perhaps encourage) passion at this level of government.

Be thankful. We live in a remarkably unique state where our people are far better represented than perhaps anywhere else in the world.

[Pine Island Guy]

every elected official has a personal agenda from the President on down... if their agenda happens to agree with our own, we think they are brilliant and doing the best thing for the country (or city or state) and we vote for them... if we don't agree with them, we vote for the other guy!

Bruce is certainly a well respected historian of the Lake and has done much to ensure the Lake remains a treasured place. In his view he is helping to continue to make the Lake enjoyed by all with his agenda. I agree with Dave R that he is being up-front about it and defending it (a rare thing in politics these days)!

Now his constituents can decide for themselves if they support him or not and then vote their conscience…

PIG

p.s. on a side note Verizon is supposed to restore phone service to the island today, so hopefully the Pine Island Cams (east and south) should be back up shortly!

[SAMIAM]

Actually,Dave and Pine Island guy make a good point.I will agree that our like ot dislike of certain politicians depends on whose ox is being gored.

[Airwaves]

Dave R wrote:

I think he has every right to push an agenda (that's kinda the point of the NH House) and it's good that he's up front about it prior to the election.

I certainly don't question his passion or his right to bring up an issue and propose laws. I am questioning is his logic...

Live free or die: I absolutely agree with that, he said. We have too many laws;

As he proposes yet another law!

[fatlazyless]

Excuse me while I say what must be obvious to everyone. With Democrat candidates winning new found majorities in the New Hampshire state senate, house, & governor's council what effect will this have on a proposed Winnipesaukee speed limit becoming a new law? Pretty darned likely, I think.

Let's wait and see what Dept of Safety Secretary Flynn has to say about the Winnipesaukee-only speed limit petition which is currently awaiting his decision.

[SIKSUKR]

You beat me to it FLL.Expect the speed limit to pass now.How does it feel to be politically part of Massachussetts?It was only a matter of time with all the Dems moving here from south of our border.What's funny is they were moving here to escape the ways of Mass for the ways of NH.Start saving your money cuz the economy will likely be headed south.

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Excuse me while I say what must be obvious to everyone. With Democrat candidates winning new found majorities in the New Hampshire state senate, house, & governor's council what effect will this have on a proposed Winnipesaukee speed limit becoming a new law? Pretty darned likely, I think.

Let's wait and see what Dept of Safety Secretary Flynn has to say about the Winnipesaukee-only speed limit petition which is currently awaiting his decision.

I agree. Here comes the legislated "safety" rules to replace personal responsibility. Speed limits will come quick, followed by requiring motorcycle riders to wear helmets. Will hunting be banned too? Then come the taxes. Bye-bye to what makes NH unique.

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Let's wait and see what Dept of Safety Secretary Flynn has to say about the Winnipesaukee-only speed limit petition which is currently awaiting his decision.

Secretary?

http://www.state.nh.us/safety/commissioner/index.html

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Excuse me while I say what must be obvious to everyone. With Democrat candidates winning new found majorities in the New Hampshire state senate, house, & governor's council what effect will this have on a proposed Winnipesaukee speed limit becoming a new law? Pretty darned likely, I think.

Let's wait and see what Dept of Safety Secretary Flynn has to say about the Winnipesaukee-only speed limit petition which is currently awaiting his decision.

Certainly more likely than it was before, but perhaps not a whole lot. If the newly elected Senators vote on party lines (and 5 out of the 24 incumbents did not vote the party line on HB162 so it's really impossible to predict (for instance: Bruce Heald, a huge proponent of speed limits, is a Republican) but lets have a little fun...), it's presently 11 against the speed limit and 12 for it. I have no results for Disctrict 21. If Estabrook wins (did she even run again???), it goes 11 against and 13 for, if she loses, it goes 12 and 12.


With any luck, common sense will again prevail. I have little faith though.

[4Fun]

It appears one of the few Republicans who survived is the bonehead who started it all, James Pilliod.