Thanks for confirming my point that I can not operate my boat at less than 25mph safely..which is what I said and Boattest.com said. I have a stock prop and stock trim tabs, but thanks for the advice anyway.

I am not instigating any arguements I am defending my Right to Boat on the Lake against the Inflamatory comments you have made.

I am not trying to silence anybody, I just wanted to point out that you are a Go Fast Boat Hater and are not interested in any Compromise only your own Agenda that Speed Limits are Great and anyone who disagrees with you is Evil.

I admit to breaking the 45mph speed limit often when it is safe to do so and I have said that in several of my posts. I will continue to do so as well and will continue to be a Respectful member of the Winnipesaukee Boating Community.


I dont believe nor have I ever posted that anyone should be able to go as fast or do whatever they want on the lake. Going 55mph anywhere when there is alot of traffic is not Acceptable or safe; however if I am all alone out there why cant I go 55-60mph.

Is my boat really creating that much more of a wake/hazard going 55mph vs 45mph?

onlywinni.... will you pay for the props I will need to try to get your boat to plane and handle between 20 - 25 mph.... look, I believe and hold to the fact that there is a comprimise out there.... but you have to be realistic.... Just like I called Woodsy out when he said pace boats kept the speed over the Donzi poker run to 45 mph or less, I am going to call you out here.... nope as currently set up I bet you boat doesn't plane well and struggles at 20 -25 mph.... but you are also pitched for speed, aren't you?

The following link is for a test of a 30 outlaw.... they claimed planning speed 19 mph....

http://features.boats.com/boat-conte...aja-30-outlaw/

people can debate that their performance boats don't plane at slower speeds, but if you have been around boats long enough you realize that this is because they prop for the high end.... which hurts the low end.... the best prop for most people is the one that get them out of the whole quickly .... but for someone going for speed, a high end prop is what the need, and they don't produce the torque need to maintain a plane out low rpm, or even get the boat out of the water quickly......

If you want to argue for or against speed limits that is fine.... but don't try and pull the wool over people eyes with poor information...

I understand all the information.... I understand how to get boats to perform the way I want them, I love to both scream accross the water, and also take a nice sail... and this is a big dam lake, we should all be able to enjoy it......

Very well said onlywinni.... However, you are preaching on deaf ears.. Might as well let him rant and the rest of us work on the compromise which was the purpose of the thread in the first place. As you pointed out Inflamatory comments get you no where on here.

If bear islander is willing to compromise, then obviously there is room for negotiation. It shows many, even the most staunch supporters and opposers, have a willingness to work together. This mutual respect on the lake is what makes Winni one of the best places on Earth..

Don't get dragged down into the mud.... Not worth the time or blood pressure. :D It is very clear what some peoples motives are and it will be recognized as such.

By the way, any good pics of your 26? Would love to see her.

Take care.

So I said I cant operate my boat safely at less than 25mph and the Boattest.com tests confirms that... and I am pulling the wool over someones eyes with poor information????????


I agree 100% that the lake is big and we can all enjoy it.

I think he was referring not to you but to another poster

Ummm
 

Ummm,

I didn't realize that the “opposers” were negotiating terms with the supporters on this forum.

I certainly was not aware that the supporters had the right to be judge and jury here. I am not picking on the supporters, its just as of right now the supporters have the law on their side.

Isn’t the purpose of this forum for all BOATERS to discuss their view points?

Just a thought….

Maybe if every member, opposers, supporters, and people just sitting on the fence could give a speed limit they believe is fair. If you say 45/25 that is fine, if you say unlimited…that’s fine too, it’s just an opinion. Maybe we are not that far apart. If every member could give a number…not a reason, just a number ( I am looking right at you Mee-n-Mac).

I think it would be interesting to see where the boaters of Winnipesaukee stand.

I hear you loud and clear...

We will have to agree to disagree I guess.

All the photos are in the camera on the boat..when I remember to bring it home I can send you some...

Very Good Post... I believe that the threads original purpose was to discuss peoples views on their thoughts on a compromising law not the merits of the SL in general. There are TONS of threads going and from the past that people can go to for that.

Now that the limits have been in place, although no data has been published, we can discuss the effects and perhaps come to a compromise that "most" everyone can be happy with.

That being said.

Personally I would like UNLIMITED however "in the spirit of compromise"

55 mph daytime on the lake
Unlimited in the broads

35 night time entire lake

Now this is progress.... not that I expected less OCD has always seemed to get the idea of comprimise....

Now OCD, I am definately with you 35 at night I think is more reasonable then 25 which as some have indicated.... makes getting home slow... Hey I blast across the broads at 30 at night myself....

And yep for certain unlimited in the Broads is the only way to go.....

Now I am just curious what made 55 pop out??

As I have often said my perference is to restrict speed in specific area's so I am curious to understand the comprimise to 55, with the broads unlimited.....other then I would imagine the % of boats that can get above 55 are limited....

Planing Speed.
 

A 30' Outlaw can plane at 19 mph? WoW! That's pretty damn good. I bet the test was done on salt water where the water is heavier and the boat can get on plane easier. Also prop slip is less in salt water.

I have a difficult time getting on plane at 25! As a property owner this is not good and I have stressed many times, 25 at night will cause a lot of shore erosion. But the SL crowd simply don't care about anything but their own agenda! :(

I wanted to say it, but figured I would let the debate rest on planing speeds as it has nothing to do with the real issue, but thanks for bringing it up..;)


--------------------

Back on topic with a Compromise I would say day speed of 55mph would be acceptable and night of 25mph I am fine with.

I will say it again...55 during the day if the conditions warrant only.

I brought the 55 again in "the spirit of compromise". Living in the northern coves there are only a few spots that 55 mph is even possible (safely) Suissvale bay (for a short stint), Moultonboro Bay, and Melvin Bay. However I don't want to pretend to know what everyone else is experiencing. So I am trying to think what would be reasonable for me and for the Pro-SL crowd I thought 55mph would work... Hoping to show some of us are at least willing to sit down at the table...

I think the best part of the new law, like many others have stated, is the language itself. If one were to look solely at the data from the last 30 years, I doubt a speed limit would pop into (most people's) minds. You have the usual group that doesn't like the sound, blah blah. If We The People in the United States made laws based on people's personal likes and dislikes, the environment we live in today would be Nirvana by comparison.

Lots of discussions between rational people need to take place to even get an accurate gauge of the state of the lake itself. I feel it's way premature to be discussing speed limits and actual numbers when people can't seem to agree on what's right, and more importantly, what's wrong. There are a few people that have speed limit on the brain, and can't seem to discuss anything else. There have been legitimate gripes on both sides that need to be addressed. These issues cannot be discussed in civil fashion if trolls are being fed daily. There's been some bait laid lately, and many have picked up on it. You'll not be able to deal with whatever emotional hangups these folks have, so why bother?

The issues underlying the original law passed were supposedly safety. Since one side has proposed making these permanent because there won't be enough data, the alternative should be pretty obvious. People need to get together on this issue and try to ascertain the real environment on the water. There are many on this very thread that have stated their willingness to discuss specific areas, which I believe would have been part of the original law several years back if compromise had been agreed to then.


What's happening here now is a few vocal, and very proactive SL supporters have decided that it would be fun to irritate the people on board. If it gets bad enough, they surmise, Don will have to shut it down and the most visible forum will be silenced while they do their deeds behind the scenes. Similar to what they did last time. I prefer to let my opponents make total fools of themselves, it's far less stressful, and humorous.

Keep up the good work here people. Just ignore the people that are less than civil, and maybe you'll gain a much larger audience of supporters.

Is this true? Your 5000 pound boat is not safe unless you are going over 25? Is this really an argument you want to use for revoking a speed limit? Am I the only one on this forum who is dumbfounded by the logic that we should abolish our speed limit because some people want to ride around in two and a half ton boats that cannot be operated safely at speeds so "slow" as 25 MPH? Are you really telling us that we should feel safe out on the lake with boats that weigh 5000 pounds and cannot be operated safely at a speed below 25 MPH?
I suppose that headway speed for your boat is then 25 MPH and you should have no problem obeying the safe passage law at that speed. Have you even used that argument with the MP? "Officer, I need to go at least 26 for my boat to be safe out here. If I am only going 20 mph, I can't be responsible if I run over a few kayakers."
Imagine a trucker telling a State Trooper "Officer, this 10 ton rig cannot be driven safely at only 65mph, so I have to go faster. May I proceed?"
Oh my. We have some really twisted logic out there. And these are the same people who want to decide for themselves what speeds are prudent?

el, seriously take the blinders off. You are actually coming off a tad loony if you claim the lake is not overrun with knuckleheads. Actually add three more incidents TODAY! A MONDAY! I have absolutely no reason to embellish. Two incidents occurred within MINUTES of each other. One was a center console that drove me into a buoy. I was in my 13 foot whaler he was in a 20-21 foot Grady. I came off plane waved my arms in the air hoping he actually saw me! Minutes later 2 waverunners came around a corner and came within 20 feet of me and I immediately dropped the throttle and stopped. The past incidents I posted occurred in NUMEROUS areas of the lake. Most of them while I had 4 or more witnesses on board. Some were visitors who do not frequent the lake and they were a bit shocked by the craziness of the lake. I explained that there was a great new law in place. A "Speed Limit!" Most of my passengers laughed and said, "what the hell good would that do?" I made no comment and just smiled.

As for my credibility, I would never defend it to you. :rolleye2: Yours though? :rolleye2: Let's just say the research has begun. :laugh:


FYI: I took down the bow numbers of the Pontoon Boat and called it in. They thanked me politely. I'm sure he was reprimanded. :laugh:

El, there's a lot of boats that have trouble staying on plane at low speeds. Particularly, underpowered boats and smallish bowriders with loads. Props can be an effective aid. I put some Smart Tabs on my 22' and it gave me remarkable ability to plane at low speeds. A new SS Laser prop negated some of that ability, so now I can reasonably plane at around 20 mph or so. I'd much rather have that deep vee Baja doing 26 or more on plane than 20 or so off plane. I'm so sick of boat waves:(

Speaking of which, that's why people started the trend towards larger boats with vees long ago. At any rate, nice off topic.

Has anyone decided which part of the new law requires more enforcement activity yet?

I belive the proponents of the SL law claimed it would not cost any additional money to enforce. :laugh:

Yes, many did. Some were honest, and simply stated that it was a deterrent of sorts. There are many good people that supported the law for some reason or another, regardless of how late in the game they came out with their true feelings.

Most of us are pretty good people with good intentions here. Some are here to disrput things before the legislative process continues. This is a highly visible board, and they'd love to have the SL threads shut down again. Don't in an unenviable situation. But if an adult conversation cannot continue here, we could continue it elsewhere.

I will refrain from further troll responses, and try to keep my eye on the ball.

This is the last time I am going to say anything about Planing Speed, because it has nothing to do with this debate. I called you out on it, because you said all Performance Boaters drive around with trimmed up and bow up on purpose...so I was trying to explain that some of us have to until we are going in the 25mph range. You were the one that brought out the Boattest.com video trying to call me a liar and it just in fact proved my point.

When did I say that I can not go headway speed...instead of debating an issue that is stupid, why dont you debate the real issue here which is the speed limit. Of course you dont want to debate it, you just want to insult the entire Performance Boat Community and paint us all as Reckless...


Let me ask you a Serious Question. If you are sailing in the broads and I pass you 160' away at your precious 45mph speed limit you are ok with that? Based on those stats I believe I am complying with the law?

EL, As other have pointed out here you are loosing your logic......onlywinni, is not saying his boat isn't safe below 25 mph..... what he is indicating is that at 25 mph he is comfortably on plane, and feels he has good control of the boat with a quick nimble response that feels in control... as he back down from there the boats starts to back down off the plane and he gets into a region where the boat is bow high (reduced visibility) and probably sluggish to the response... until he backs far enough out of the throttle that the boat settles down in the water....

If you have any type of motor boating experience you understand this concept... appearently you don't.....there is a point with every speed boat, GFBL or just your ordinary run about, where the visibility is poor, your niether on plane or down in the water, and the boat is squirmish in its handling....For onlywinni this is the 20-25 mph range, for me it is around 15-16mph.... hull, load, prop selection, engine torque characteristics, and trim attitude all play a part in this....

In short I understand perfectly what onlywinni is getting at.... do I believe he could change the characteristics of how is boat handles, through prop selection, I sure do....
but his arguement is valid... your logic is aimed at a goal, and when you blurt out what comes to your mind to support that goal you loose your credibility.....

I have always believed that speed limits in certain area's might be need, but not for the whole lake.... but if I have to chose right now the people that make the most sense, are
Woodsy, onlywinni, OCD, and the host of others in opposition of the law.... while those like EL who support the legislation, seem to try and munipulate everything that is said to fit there agenda....

I will say it agian... this is a dam big lake, room for everyone......

I wonder if this idea would have any support.


Within 500 feet of other boats/land 45mph day speed limit and 25mph night

Over 500 feet away from other boats/land no speed limit during the day and 35mph at night?


I want everyone to be able to enjoy the lake. I respect all boaters on the lake.

I personally would never blast through the broads at 45mph anywhere near 150' away from a sail boat, guys fishing, etc because I dont feel it is sensible. However if I am over 500 feet away I dont see what harm I am causing going say 60mph vs 45mph.


--------
I want to apologize to everyone for getting so off topic debating nonsense, when I should have stayed focused on the real issue.


Mark
-------------

My thoughts.
 

I really feel the bulk of the law has merits. The only part is the arbitrary speed of 45/25. If it is arbitrary, how can it be enforced, proven in court?

Where did the 45/25 come from? Proponents says it works on Lake George NY. This is not Lake George NY. This is Lake Winnipesaukee! A huge body of water compared to Lake George. Lake George is bordered predominantly by state land. Lake Winnipesaukee is not. Lake George does not have the 150' rule. Winnipesaukee has. I could go on. There is no comparision. Lake Winnipesaukee is not better off with an arbitrary limit.

Why 45? Why not 35, 55, or even 65? It makes no sense it is only a number. Why 25? Why not 5, 15 or even 35? It's only a number. These numbers are not backed up with a fact like, less accident at 45 than other speeds. 25 mph is a bad speed. many boats can not operate on plane at that speed and results in more shore erosions. You will have boneheads that think they need to go 45/25 even if the conditions are dangerous.

Adding the USCG Rule 6 to the present law has merits. It will give the NHMP more teeth to justify the arrest in court. People tend to find loopholes in vague laws. 'reasonable and prudent' can be vague.

Adding fines with a high fee schedule has a lot of merits. Many folks can not afford to make a 'mistake'. If a fee schedule is added, it must support the NHMP and not go into the NH 'general funds'. The Marine Patrol is a fine organization and should not be short funded. It serves a valuable service in boating and water safety.

Another great idea / compromise... Keep the ideas coming. I really think if the legislators would be willing to sit down at the table and discuss this rather then looking at an all or nothing bill, we all can make out and there would be no longer a need to debate at all.

No need to apologize. Trolls at work just like last time...... And these arguments and tactics are beginning to sound and look very very familiar.... tick tock tick tock only time will tell :rolleye2:

Great thought! I'm thinking this was the original intent of the thread. I myself am guilty of being led off topic. I'm thinking your idea has some merit.

The more your speed increases the more distance required "by law." I am really liking this idea. I think a keep it simple rule would apply and it would read something like this (150 feet under 45 MPH 300 feet over 45 MPH) or something to that effect. As for night time I think a blanket 35 MPH Speed Limit could be put in plac. 25 MPH at night is too slow IMO.

My real feelings lean towards no limits at all but I'd give in to a compromise like this.

Most of us in the opposition agree with you but just showing that we are willing to discuss options shows we are serious about working together and willing to negotiate. Hopefully the people who make the actual decisions are open minded to do the same.

Other then one poster, I would like to hear from the pro-sl crowd if any of these suggestions are agreeable. I know even Bear Islander was a supporter or a compromised bill the first time around. Maybe he would care to chime in on this?

Onlywinni, This is the type of idea and thinking that needs to be fostered... this has some good merits to it.... I like the way it keeps the speed wide open when your out in the open....

As for getting off topic, don't worry about it... it shows the true colors of other people.... you had a stance you defended, and made sure you point was understood..... unfortaunatly some people will just never understand......

Here is the problems as I see them, and a possible way of dealing with them...

THE NHMP is resource limited.... their area of responsibility is the whole state of NH, not just Lake Winnipesaukee. Unlike most state agencies who are General Fund dependant, the NHMP get thier funding through the General Navigation Fund (Boat Registrations) and federal grants. Due to the slow economy over the last 2 years, boat registrations are markedly down putting a big dent in the NHMP budget. So as with all state agencies, they are asked to do more (enforce a speed limit for example) with less resources. Yet the problems (Capt. Bonehead) still remain! To date the NHMP has not written ANY speeding tickets, thus the tickets have not yet been challenged in court. (Speeding Ticket = Summons to Appear).

So what is the best use of NHMP resources? You have to enforce all of the existing rules...

I propose the ELIMINATION of the daytime speeding restriction with the caveat of USCG Rule 6. We dont have many accidents during the day because of the almost unlimited visibility (measured in MILES) that Lake Winnipesaukee affords. None of the accidents that do occur can be attributed to excessive speed (in this case speeds greater than speed limit of 45 MPH). I do realize that 10MPH can be excessive speed depending on conditions thus the Rule 6 caveat!

If you only have certain speeds in certain bays it tends to quickly become and enforcement nightmare, especially given limited resources.

The elimination of the daytime limit allows the NHMP to better utilize thier limited resources by using more of the junior (temporary summer = less expensive) officers during the daylight hours when the lake is busiest and Capt. Bonehead is out and about in force. More officers on the water "flying the flag" in the busiest areas of the lake will result in much calmer and more civilized boating behavior by EVERYBODY! I see this as a win/win for everybody.

I propose a STATEWIDE nightime limit of 30MPH with the caveat of Rule 6. I think 25 is too low a number and has adversely affected businesses and people. The limit of 30 gives you leeway to 30-35 MPH. Plenty fast for night trips to dinner and fireworks on the far side of the lake, yet slow enough to allow for safety. The NHMP will be able to utilize thier most senior and well trained officers (radar certified). This is the shift where your going to find the drunken boaters and traditionally when the worst (fatal) accidents occur. You want your best guys on a DWI stop so as to avoid any problems that could jeopardize the case in court.

I like the idea of a greater distance rule (Faster MPH = Greater distance from other boats), but enforceability would be a nightmare. People already disagree on how far 150' is. It would open up another can of worms.

Woodsy

compromise?
 

Interesting idea, It definitely has some merit. Certainly a rule like that would improve safety and give the MP the ability to stop unsafe operation. It seems like the debate is only one sided. I have seen many ideas and proposals from the people against the speed limit but almost no ideas from the other side. The opposers seem to be reaching out the other side to open true dialog.

We can argue or we can talk. Arguing is much more entertaining but talking may be more constructive.

A couple of things I am questioning here. I would like to discuss these because maybe I am (and others) are misinformed.

1. I keep hearing 45/25 was a compromise. Is this true? It seems like a number that was sort of pulled out of the air, maybe I am wrong, please correct me if I am.
2. It has been stated many times that 95% of the boats on this lake can’t do 45mph. I find that hard to believe. It seems to me any small block on a boat less than 21 feet should be faster than 45.

I think the MP has all they need to stop people for unsafe boating as it is. If there aren't many citations being written for violations, then I am to assume they are not occurring? Obviously, if they don't see the violations, there's nothing they can do about it.

Boat traffic is way down this year everywhere. The weather conditions have made every scarce nice day a zoo. There are some that think the SL is all they need, and everything's fine. The utter irony here is that most people that oppose the SL "numbers", are the ones that say additional enforcement is needed for laws that were on the books before. Since the new law gives the MP greater ability to stop people for violations, I can only believe that they are severely understaffed now. It's already August, and the season winds down in a month or so.

Most NH residents would find that statement a little hard to swallow. Here is a woman who rallied the anti SL crowd touting safety as her organization's purpose. She collected a great deal of money to fight proposed SL legislation.She made a comfortable living hawking boats able to go considerably faster than 45 MPH. Now it seems clear that alcohol was involved( and even if it hadn't been, reasonable and prudent behavior seems not to have been exercised that night). The story made national headlines. It is a tragic and sad story of how 2 lives were ruined.So here on this forum, one compromise mentioned by Woodsy was 30 MPH at night ("which would give you leeway for 35 MPH"). This forum is rife with advice on how to get away with breaking the speed limit, posts bragging about how the SL hasn't slowed them down, etc. It just seems a bit hypocritical to me. And in just 2 months her trial will begin, just at a time when the Sl debate/legislative process will be getting underway as well. Kind of a sad juxtaposition. It seems like 45 MPH was the compromise and I can't imagine that in a few years all the other lakes won't follow suit.

I didn't want to repeat the entire post but there's some common sense and a compromise I could live with! I could even live with a daytime limit of 60mph but 45mph is just too low.

And Woodsy, to go with your signature, "You can't legislate common sense!" :)

Now this is why I like Woodsy, everytime I think I understand the man he throws something out there.... mandatory state wide speed limit at night....In some sense I see this as a good thing.... However brings me to a question....

Do people think it makes more sense to legislate a particular body of water or the whole state?

And Woodsy does bring up a good point, enforcability... I thought onlywinni, had a good idea... and I still think it has merit.... However Woodsy has a good point... enforcability becomes a real issue with a law like that....

On another note, I will say again..... I am seeing the "GFBL" boaters bring a lot to the comprimise table at this point.... and not seeing much in a comprimise tone from the SL lovers right now..... kind of disappionting if you ask me.... one side seems to be willing to sit down at the table but the other, not so much......

Well Sunset, there certainly was irony in the accident given the obvious circumstances. More than one irony in fact. Regardless of what the marina sold, it wasn't what she was piloting. Regardless of the numerical value of the speed limit that passed was, it wouldn't have been appropriate for the conditions that night.

The utter irony of all, is that "most" speed limit proponents have stated this from the beginning, particularly concerning the aforementioned accident. So while I can sympathize with your feelings, I can't equate to the logic used.

If you have accidents involving alcohol, bad conditions or the like, asking for speed limits seems to be a stretch of common sense. Why don't they adopt them everywhere? Maybe they should in some places, and in others, maybe they see no problem. Perhaps you can point out which rules of navigation were apparently not followed properly in last year's accident. You could go back to the next oldest accident and do the same.

Once that's done, perhaps you can relate all of the violations of the 150' rule, NWZ rules, and whatever else has been brought up, to numerical values of speed.

Look, I'm not stupid, I realize why the SL crowd did what they did. But even the environmentally savvy crowd realizes they made a huge mistake promoting bottled water, and has changed their minds. Same with ethanol. Deal with the problems, not what you want everyone to Think is the problem.

You may find my statement hard to swallow, but it's been proven to be true time after time. Virtually no SL supporter has participated in any discussions related to safety, PWC hitting a moored boat, none of that. I find it extremely hard to swallow that you're pointing to hypocrisy, yet you have no posts in any of the safety-related forums I can find. Until proven different, I find that the most rabid supporters of the SL itself rarely, if ever mention safety on the water, or how to promote it.

That sir, is hwy you're not taken seriously in any boating debate.

Elements of Compromise
 

To have a compromise, you have to have an agreement between at least two parties. A one-sided discussion can never result in a compromise, all by itself.

I think we have heard some reasonable ideas regarding modification of the present two year law, but these ideas are only from one side. The group supporting the current situation has been silent, except for one person who offered no novel thinking, but clearly supported staying with what is now the temporary law.

As far as how we got to 45/25, there was no compromise at all. One side was against the law and the other supported it. There were some good people on the pro side that attempted to reach a common ground on the first proposal a few years ago. That proposal failed, but that failure, in effect, got us to were we are today.

Looking at the history of speed limit proposals over the last four years, I believe it would be great to have a open and constructive dialog based upon facts with at least the pro SL and the SL opponents and possibly a third group, the safety-minded group, together with some members of the NH legislature.

My interest has always been boating safety. After a long and deep review of the issues, I became an opponent of the current law, as it is written. I think it is too restrictive regarding what I have seen was, and in many cases continues to be, safe operation of performance boats.

For the record, I have never owned a performance boat, nor do I ever intend to own one. I have never even been in one while under way. I am very happy with my 47 MPH max bow-rider. But, the lake has enough room for all and the current law restricts the rights of the few that have the means and desire to own and safely operate these performance boats.

I hope this post, meant only to be constructive, is not interpreted as trolling by anyone. The only trolling I do is on the lake for salmon and lake trout. I admit I am not very good at that, but I enjoy it.

Please, let's hear from the pro-SL side and let's work together to engineer something that is fair to all and improves safety at the same time.

R2B

Sorry... Not to go off topic.. But once OCD is up and running, I think we can remedy at least this part of your post.. Look me up.. I am always happy to take people for rides.:D

PS. Great post, carry on!

I think Legislating Winni as a particular body of water is appropriate based on its size. I have boated on Ossippee before and would never condone a 60+ speed limit on a lake that size.

re. Enforceability...I think the MPs could figure out 500' pretty easy...Dont they have a radar that can tell them that now?

I would love to hear any Compromises from the SL supporters. 45mph is just too slow for certain conditions with certain boats.

I will give you a quick example, last Saturday there was a gentleman and his wife in a Powerquest..I followed him from West Alton to near the Weirs. I was only limping along around 35-40 because it was kind of choppy and the wife told me to relax :(...anyway the Powerquest was giving it all she had...I think it was a dual motor beast....he would drop the hammer and had to be in the 60s at least, but as soon as another boat came anywhere near him-I would estimate within 700' of him he backed right down to the 30 range)

Even my wife who is a SL Supporter :confused: (the real funny part is the Baja is her toy-I just get to drive it and clean it for her!!!) She said, I guess if you speed like the Powerquest and are considerate of others there really is not a problem...

Onlywinni,

What a post.... I only hope you and wife can stay on talking terms about this issue.... and well.... at least she lets you drive it.... but I think you need to work on the comprimise about cleaning it!!!!!!:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Also onlywinni shows a good example here of a considerate boater.... Cudo's to the guy in the powerquest if he is listening.... Once again a sign that there are many considerate boaters out there... its the few idiots that make it bad for those of us that have been around for a while.....

When my wife runs the Outlaw I am always telling her to go faster :devil: and when I am running it she is usually telling me to go slower :mad: (I know she secretly wants me to get caught skipping across the broads at 55mph one day-just so she can say I told you so!!!)

I am slowly convincing her that 45mph is to slow and she is a tough sell, so I still have some hope of a Compromise with my fellow boaters....

I think the 30 or 35 mph at night idea is fine. The 500 foot daytime limit is to low in my opinion, I would think 1,000ft or 1/4 mile is a better idea. However if people can't figure out what 150ft is how can the figure out even larger distances. It has alway seemed to me a better idea to just specify one or more places where unlimited speed is allowed. That way the MP will have a better chance of enforcement.

I predict the opposition is going to talk all these ideas to death and not present the legislature with a unified alternative to 45/25. Then you will lose. I hope they get their act together and come up with a viable alternative, but I don't see it happening.

And the extreme ideas like no daytime limit or Rule 6 are NEVER GOING TO FLY. They didn't work in the last debate and they will not work now. They don't meet my definition of a compromise.

I believe BI is correct in all his assessments here.

Great post, thanks!

R2B