Homeowner didn't like fisherman getting close to property

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

45-mph has been the Lake Winnipesaukee limit since July, 2008, and before that, it was totally no speed limit.

Getting hit and sliced up by a fast, powerful boat going 45-mph while out in the open water of Winnipesaukee on a kayak is always a concern, so's I use a kayak paddle with white blades that probably shows up good, on a both a sunny or cloudy day.

What do you think ..... do the white kayak blades show up good from a distance while going 45-mph?

Here is an image of a SUP individual who was shown on Chronicle about the Dive & Shipley's. Is he/she dressed properly so someone going 45 plus could see him/her?

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by Rusty

Here is an image of a SUP individual who was shown on Chronicle about the Dive & Shipley's. Is he/she dressed properly so someone going 45 plus could see him/her?

Does it really matter? The more interesting question is why anyone would spend gobs of money on a fundamentally unstable platform to stand on then attempt to balance + paddle themselves around on it? LMAO.... HELLO??? you all look really stupid out there on those silly things!!!!

Since so many dumb people buy those things I think I'm going to steal FLL's idea and start selling color coordinated noodle belts to match and come up with some catchy name for it and sell it as a must have accessory item.

[Rattlesnake Gal]

The land owner is in the wrong and should have stopped after she asked you to be careful of her boat.

I totally enjoy fishermen/fisherwomen coming by our place on Rattlesnake Island. Especially when they catch a biggie! I don’t fish, but I love seeing anglers enjoying the lake. Many of the boats that come by probably don’t realize that I consider them friends.

[JEEPONLY]

Once, as I was pulling out of Hunter's IGA, all of a sudden a truck came in against the direction arrows, and almost hit me. I gave a toot to show my annoyance, but then the truck driver rolled down his window and shouted "Do you want me to come over there and kick your ass right now?"

Was that you ConcernedAngler?

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by JEEPONLY

Once, as I was pulling out of Hunter's IGA, all of a sudden a truck came in against the direction arrows, and almost hit me. I gave a toot to show my annoyance, but then the truck driver rolled down his window and shouted "Do you want me to come over there and kick your ass right now?"

Was that you ConcernedAngler?

I doubt it was "ConcernedAngler", he has a big fat gut on him..so says FLL anyway.

[fatlazyless]

Originally Posted by Rusty

Here is an image of a SUP individual who was shown on Chronicle about the Dive & Shipley's. Is he/she dressed properly so someone going 45 plus could see him/her?

No, not a high visibility outfit, and she would be cruis'n for a bruis'n shar'n the big water with the motorboat traffic. One has to be smart about sup'n and not push your luck too much, especially in congested, speedy spots and busy weekends.

There are lots of locations where motorboats do not expect to have a sup present. There are lots of locations, usually close to shore, where motorboats do not go very much.

Sup-ers should wear a hi-visibility pfd, a hi-visibility hat (white), and have a loud whistle attached to pfd, ready to use.

Wearing a low visibility outfit and expecting motorboats to see you, while in their territory is a very dumb position ..... and may result in a collision.
.........

The six foot long sup paddles always seem to be black, so's painting it white and adding a contrasting stripe with bright red or orange 2" tape is smart.The paddle seems to be an item that gets seen due to its movement.

Also, the visiblity of the sup board itself is something to consider, and a contrasting white/orange, white/red, white/blue, white/yellow, or white/anything would give the 11'x32" board extra visibility.

Cheapest high quality, quik-dri, sun protectant, short sleeve and long sleeve tee shirts for wearing under a pfd are the Hane's from Walmart.com in many different colors....... about $8.50ea.

[Onshore]

The gentleman in the video infers that if a marina is contained within a dug-in inlet or basin it is private and boating within it can be restricted. I do not believe this to be correct. Let me state up front that I am not an attorney. I base this on opinion documents from the NH Dept. of Justice I have read, final reports on public water access from previous legislative committees and some relevant case law. in the case of a dredge inlet the owners may claim they retain ownership of the submerged bed but the waters that flow in remain public. Consider that almost all, if not all, riverbeds in NH are privately owned but the waters are public and navigation cannot be obstructed. I believe there is also a NH Supreme Court case from the early 1900's that established that even if an entity owned all of the land around a great pond they cannot restrict access. It remains a public water. I will see if I can track that case down. If I can find it, I will post a link to it for those who are curious.

[Top-Water]

Originally Posted by shore things

The gentleman in the video infers that if a marina is contained within a dug-in inlet or basin it is private and boating within it can be restricted. I do not believe this to be correct. Let me state up front that I am not an attorney. I base this on opinion documents from the NH Dept. of Justice I have read, final reports on public water access from previous legislative committees and some relevant case law. in the case of a dredge inlet the owners may claim they retain ownership of the submerged bed but the waters that flow in remain public. Consider that almost all, if not all, riverbeds in NH are privately owned but the waters are public and navigation cannot be obstructed. I believe there is also a NH Supreme Court case from the early 1900's that established that even if an entity owned all of the land around a great pond they cannot restrict access. It remains a public water. I will see if I can track that case down. If I can find it, I will post a link to it for those who are curious.

I do not think that statement is correct either, but could not find anything that could or would indicate it one way or another. I would seriously doubt the state would give up any of its rights under any circumstances through the permitting process, and if by chance any of it was done without a permit they could make them restore it back.

Thank you for that post. Very thankful you replied.

Some thing else he mentioned that was not true either but not in these exact words was that if you own land, lets say for example 100 acres that has a 10 acre pond in the middle of it, that pond is owned by the state and in simple terms means that anyone who wants to use it can. Again all of this in very simple terms. If there is no public access to the example pond above, the state can come in and create one. I personally am in this situation, however the land is in current use and we allow people to access the land. That allows people to get to the pond. (Being in current use takes it off of any priority list for Fish & Game to forcefully obtain public access) As a side note to this even though we own the land around the pond entirely and technically the pond itself. I and and anyone else have to have a valid fishing licence to fish in that pond.

Its kinda the same thing if you have a lakefront home you think you own the land but you really don't in some ways. The State is the one who controls what happens at the waters edge and 250 feet ???? inward. Same is kinda true again in simple terms for a non lake front home and the first 10 or 15 feet in from the street. If the town wants to put a side walk in in front of your home, they can and more or less get to make the rules what can happen on that sidewalk.

I doubt the state gave up any rights with regard to this. If you find something please share it.

[Onshore]

Originally Posted by Top-Water

I do not think that statement is correct either, but could not find anything that could or would indicate it one way or another. I would seriously doubt the state would give up any of its rights under any circumstances through the permitting process, and if by chance any of it was done without a permit they could make them restore it back.

Thank you for that post. Very thankful you replied.

Some thing else he mentioned that was not true either but not in these exact words was that if you own land, lets say for example 100 acres that has a 10 acre pond in the middle of it, that pond is owned by the state and in simple terms means that anyone who wants to use it can. Again all of this in very simple terms. If there is no public access to the example pond above, the state can come in and create one. I personally am in this situation, however the land is in current use and we allow people to access the land. That allows people to get to the pond. (Being in current use takes it off of any priority list for Fish & Game to forcefully obtain public access) As a side note to this even though we own the land around the pond entirely and technically the pond itself. I and and anyone else have to have a valid fishing licence to fish in that pond.

Its kinda the same thing if you have a lakefront home you think you own the land but you really don't in some ways. The State is the one who controls what happens at the waters edge and 250 feet ???? inward. Same is kinda true again in simple terms for a non lake front home and the first 10 or 15 feet in from the street. If the town wants to put a side walk in in front of your home, they can and more or less get to make the rules what can happen on that sidewalk.

I doubt the state gave up any rights with regard to this. If you find something please share it.

I found some information on the case pertaining to great ponds surrounded by privately held lands. The case was first heard as Percy Summer Club V. Welch and State v. Welch in the NH Supreme Court in 1889. They were still fighting it out and waiting for a US Circuit Court Decision in April of 1906. Private message me with an email address and I'll send you a copy of a NY Times article from April 4, 1906 that talks about the case.

[Top-Water]

Thanks (sending) PM

[ConcernedAngler]

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/...207/207-57.htm

Per Executive Director Normandeau of NH Fish and Game “there are no private/off-limit areas of Lake Winnipesaukee other than seasonal restriction ( Winnipesaukee is a salmon lake, so some restrictions apply). Boats, docks, tethered floats, etc... are private and personally owned, however, the water is public. Any individual damaging these are responsible for the damage, but fishermen can fish fish them and be within their legal rights. Anyone harrassing, threatening or interfering with fishermen will be in violation of NH Title XVIII 207:57 and can be cited.”

[fatlazyless]

Definitely something to repeat and repeat and repeat, commit to memory, while zipping from hot spot to hot spot in your bass boat at 45-mph.

So's, what was that second sentence again ?..... ka-boom-a-boom-boom!

You know, for $5 you can go to the Meredith McDonald's and get two filet-o-fish which are Alaskan pollock, caught in the Bering Sea off Alaska, a real fish that wasn't tossed back!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filet-O-Fish .... plus a large courtesy cup of water ..... drawn from nearby Lake Waukewan ..... cheers!

[ApS]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

No, not a high visibility outfit, and she would be cruis'n for a bruis'n shar'n the big water with the motorboat traffic. One has to be smart about sup'n and not push your luck too much, especially in congested, speedy spots and busy weekends. There are lots of locations where motorboats do not expect to have a sup present. There are lots of locations, usually close to shore, where motorboats do not go very much. Sup-ers should wear a hi-visibility pfd, a hi-visibility hat (white), and have a loud whistle attached to pfd, ready to use. Wearing a low visibility outfit and expecting motorboats to see you, while in their territory is a very dumb position ..... and may result in a collision.....The six foot long sup paddles always seem to be black, so's painting it white and adding a contrasting stripe with bright red or orange 2" tape is smart.The paddle seems to be an item that gets seen due to its movement. Also, the visiblity of the sup board itself is something to consider, and a contrasting white/orange, white/red, white/blue, white/yellow, or white/anything would give the 11'x32" board extra visibility. Cheapest high quality, quik-dri, sun protectant, short sleeve and long sleeve tee shirts for wearing under a pfd are the Hane's from Walmart.com in many different colors....... about $8.50ea.

I bought one of the best whistles on the market, and made my ears ring when trying it out. However, I don't expect to have anyone hear it—even people on shore!

Having recently altered an inept noisy-speedboat law to an even noisier one, NH's required whistle is an anachronism within a changed lake.

Originally Posted by Rusty

Here is an image of a SUP individual who was shown on Chronicle about the Dive & Shipley's. Is he/she dressed properly so someone going 45 plus could see him/her?

I need to clean my screen to see how many "watercraft" are boating out there!

After launching one of my non-motored watercraft, I'd also need 5 minutes to "collide" with them...