Tubing in Channels/Passageways

[thinkxingu]

I've noticed a ton of people taking tubes through channels and otherwise thin passageways this summer--saw two people going through the thin no-wake near Whaleback just yesterday. Isn't this both a legal and courtesy faux-pas? A week ago, one tube being pulled swung almost directly in front of us and needed to be pulled in by someone on the boat.

Thoughts?

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

[FWP]

I've noticed a ton of people taking tubes through channels and otherwise thin passageways this summer--saw two people going through the thin no-wake near Whaleback just yesterday. Isn't this both a legal and courtesy faux-pas? A week ago, one tube being pulled swung almost directly in front of us and needed to be pulled in by someone on the boat.

Thoughts?

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

tottaly Illegal, I see It often at the west Alton Channel

:D

[ursa minor]

It may not be illegal but it sure displays a lack of imagination for the possible consequences. I wouldn't want to put anyone, especially young children at risk of getting hit if they should fall off the tube and not be seen. Unfortunately, I don't think a lot of people think things through. We saw a boat anchored in the middle of the channel near the Barber's Pole this past Sunday afternoon with at least 4 people swimming nearby. Wouldn't have been my first choice of anchoring spots...

[salty dog]

I've noticed it also. We were following a boat towing a tube in the narrow part of Alton channel just after Sandy Point and a rider fell off.:eek: Pretty dangerous in traffic, plus then, I slowed down forcing others behind me to also. Honestly, I wonder sometimes how much thinking goes on here. Another thing I've noticed often is boaters pulling tubers, heading towards us, will suddenly deviate from their course and swing around forcing me to change my course or even come off plane because sometimes you can't always tell the line the tube will take. Super observant is the word of the day.

[thinkxingu]

tottaly Illegal, I see It often at the west Alton Channel

:D
The 150' rule, yes?

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

[Dave R]

We saw a boat anchored in the middle of the channel near the Barber's Pole this past Sunday afternoon with at least 4 people swimming nearby. Wouldn't have been my first choice of anchoring spots...

I suspect what you saw was done on purpose specifically to slow boats down, I cannot imagine anyone was dumb enough to anchor there without ulterior motives.

[ursa minor]

You would think, but it wasn't a boat from anywhere local that I recognized. They seemed completely oblivious to where they were and the surrounding boat traffic. I'm afraid someone may have been testing Darwin's theory's.

[Doobs41378]

The 150' rule, yes?

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

Isn't the 150' rule while on plane? I mean you are within 10 ft of boats in the channel. None the less I agree that it is not very bright to be doing this.

[8gv]

The 150' rule, yes?

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

No wake within 150' of xyz doesn't mean no passage within 150' of xyz.

[8gv]

It could get interesting if the person being towed has an issue and a boat following is faced with the choice of hitting rocks or the person.

[Phantom]

Unless there is some quirk in the NH RSA's that I do not know about ---when you say pulling a tube in a Channel I am also presuming the boat is at no wake speed .. thus - although not bright by any stretch of the imagination -- is legal. It is no different (technically) than having a boat in tow.

Thus the 150' rule does not apply (at headway speed)



.

[ursa minor]

I see people pulling kids on tubes at speed all the time going through narrow areas such as the Barber's Pole channel and the passage between Little Bear and Long Island near Point Sarah. They're often in the center or to the left side of the channel as well, little to no imagination or consideration of what's going on around them in my (biased) opinion. (Love it when they turn into your course and you see everyone in the boat, driver included looking backwards at the tubers.) I've seen kids still on tubes behind boats attempting to dock in Wolfeboro. What could happen, right?

[ITD]

It could get interesting if the person being towed has an issue and a boat following is faced with the choice of hitting rocks or the person.


That's a no brainer, hit the rocks.

[rick35]

...Unfortunately, I don't think a lot of people think things through...

Isn't that the truth! Its amazing how many people are oblivious to what they're doing and I don't just mean boating. I tried to teach my kids to think of the next action when they were young. They get it as adults so I will say my efforts paid off.

[8gv]

That's a no brainer, hit the rocks.

Yup, it's the right thing to do.

Now the boat is damaged due to the situation created by the towing.

What happens next is what will be interesting.

[DBreskin]

We saw a boat anchored in the middle of the channel near the Barber's Pole this past Sunday afternoon with at least 4 people swimming nearby.

Wikipedia defines a channel as "the dredged and marked lane of safe travel which a cognizant governmental entity guarantees to have a minimum depth across its specified minimum width to all vessels transiting a body of water".

I recognize this is a Wikipedia definition and may not be accurate, but I don't think the Barber's Pole passage qualifies as a channel since it is neither dredged nor does it have a marked lane. The Graveyard might be considered a channel since it is marked, but I don't think it is dredged.

Regardless, I think it's foolish to anchor in a place that obstructs traffic.

[ursa minor]

Agreed, "narrow area" is probably a better choice of words for this area. I grew up right there and we always referred to it as "the channel" in localese. Graveyard, Six Pack and obviously the Weirs channel are better examples.

As to the anchored boat, my thought was that it was like parking in one of the lanes on a busy road to have a family picnic.

[noreast]

That's a no brainer, hit the rocks.

It is a no brainer, but, You could have a boat full of kids as well, Makes the act a hell of a lot harder.

[webmaster]

I remember that in my driver's ed class way back in 1969 the instructor asked this question:

"If you were in a situation where you had a choice of hitting a person, a dog or a tree which one would you choose?"

Many said the tree. His correct answer was the dog.

[Newbiesaukee]

The correct answer is not always the right answer.

In this hypothetical situation if I were the only passenger/driver I would like to think I would hit the tree. Interesting philosophical question.

My computer betrayed me yesterday and did not put tree as I had intended. Sorry.

[noreast]

If I had enough time to chose from the 3, I'd stop.

[TiltonBB]

I remember that in my driver's ed class way back in 1969 the instructor asked this question:

"If you were in a situation where you had a choice of hitting a person, a dog or a tree which one would you choose?"

Many said the tree. His correct answer was the dog.

If you get a choice between a tree and a telephone pole, take the pole. They are old, dead, and they will break off. The tree? Not so much!

[SAMIAM]

Just curious....wondering how a channel is defined as opposed to a narrow bay that happens to be a no wake zone.

[ITD]

I think there are areas that are obvious to long time boaters as busy constricted areas, not real a good idea to stop and swim or load tubers, that might not be obvious to someone up for a week and not familiar with the lake.

If you stop in an area for whatever reason and a parade of boats is passing closely on both sides of you or worse, just one side, it's probably a good idea to find a better spot.

[Barney Bear]

While not a narrow passage, we were enjoying a sunset cruise headed south between Bear Island and the mainland last evening. Our enjoyment was briefly interrupted twice by boats overtaking us at plane and not more than 100 feet away. Fortunately, our guests enjoy rock and roll.

[Hillcountry]

While not a narrow passage, we were enjoying a sunset cruise headed south between Bear Island and the mainland last evening. Our enjoyment was briefly interrupted twice by boats overtaking us at plane and not more than 100 feet away. Fortunately, our guests enjoy rock and roll.

This happens too often to be counted on any given day we are on the lake.
Giant wakes, passing less than 150' on plane, flying through NWZ's, tubers being pulled in choke points...you name it.
I don't get why these simple, common sense rules can't be observed??
Also, more often than not, the pilot is staring you down, seemingly, daring you to say/do something.

[Dave R]

While not a narrow passage, we were enjoying a sunset cruise headed south between Bear Island and the mainland last evening. Our enjoyment was briefly interrupted twice by boats overtaking us at plane and not more than 100 feet away. Fortunately, our guests enjoy rock and roll.

Not condoning what happened, but let's say they were 152' feet away and therefore legal, would the wake really be that much smaller? The described situation is where the 150 foot law makes little difference to the experience.

[DBreskin]

Just curious....wondering how a channel is defined as opposed to a narrow bay that happens to be a no wake zone.

See post #16 above.

[Barney Bear]

The message suggested in my above post [#25] did not mention a legal passing distance. The boat pilots could have altered their course to pass at a greater distance, or altered their speed to reduce the effect of their wake on the boat being passed.

[Kamper]

The only thing you're supposed to do in a channel is transit. Human nature being what it is, expect anything.

[Dave R]

The message suggested in my above post [#25] did not mention a legal passing distance. The boat pilots could have altered their course to pass at a greater distance, or altered their speed to reduce the effect of their wake on the boat being passed.

I agree, but my point was that the wake difference between 80 feet away and 150 feet away is negligible. I don't think the 150' law was meant to reduce wakes, it's more of a safety measure to prevent collisions.

FWIW, if I was in control of the overtaking boat, I would have done so at 300+ feet (if possible) and if passing outside of 300 feet was not possible, I would have sped up (if possible) to reduce my wake size and passed outside of 150 feet. I use 300 feet because that's the scale I prefer on my chart plotter and I am quite experienced at judging it. The scale on my plotter is right next to my boat icon, so I routinely see what 300 feet from shore or other "landmarks" looks like.